Results 1 to 20 of 35
-
06-18-2006, 08:20 PM #1
160 thermo vs 180 thermo vs stock?
I swapped out the stock thermostat in my Z28 for a 160. Now, I'm getting a thermo for the WS6. I thought the stock was 210 but the guy at autozone said it was 187?? Anyways, they couldn't get me a 160 so I went w/ a 180. I liked how my 160 ran cool in the summer. It sucked in winter, though... took a while to blow warm air. I didn't have to reprogram the fan to gain the benefits. Since I run highway most of the time, I was almost always at 160, and only went up a little when aggressively driving in city traffic. I'm hoping the 180 will be cool enough to notice better air charge and warm enough to not suck in the winter. Anyone have thoughts on this?
THEN: 98 Z28 A4 2.73 FRA STB SFCs LCA Relocators Lowering Springs DAPHR SLP Bilsteins Descr. MAF EGRCut-off Lid Eradispeeds - Daily Driver includ. 3 yrs on the German Autobahn!
NOW: '02 WS6 M6 LOTB BMR STB, SLP bolt-in SFCs, !spare/jack, SLP lid, Battery Relocation
-
06-18-2006, 08:27 PM #2
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Thornton, CO
- Posts
- 23,773
Red Tint Jewelcoat- 2008 Trailblazer SS
I went with the 160.
Just needed the computer programmed to kick the fans on at 160 degrees.2008 Trailblazer SS
Yank PTB3600, Kooks 1 7/8" LT's, 4" intake, E-fans, Magnaflow, Sonnax kit, tranny cooler, tune.
Lowered, HID's, tinted.
1999 Pontiac Trans Am WS.6 #1747 SOLD
531.1 RWHP 481.3 FT/Pounds all motor.
-
06-18-2006, 08:52 PM #3Originally Posted by Mr. Luos
-
06-18-2006, 08:52 PM #4
i run the 170* with modded housing for a bypass from vinci. i have the fans on a SLP like switch. keeps it around 170 in the traffic.
Cold Air Intake, Muffler Delete, Vinci High Performance Dual Valve Springs, Hardened Pushrods, Yella Terra 1.85 Rockers, Some Hydropdipped Stuff, Strut Tower Brace, Some SS Badges, boost/vacuum gauge, fuel pressure gauge, some checkered stripes, drilled/slotted rotors, ZL1addons Stealth wickerbill, Ruxifey LED side markers
-
06-18-2006, 08:58 PM #5Originally Posted by Raven98Z28
Ultimately, in summer conditions, switching to a 160 degree thermostat will do absolutely nothing (it only adds to the warm up time), without resetting the stock fan setting to trigger much earlier...
-
06-19-2006, 10:06 AM #6
Hi Raven,
you got the right thermostate, the 160 is only for heavy modified engines.
In your daily driver you will use a loty of your fuel energy to warm up the block all the time, with exessive fuel consumption as one of the downsides.
DoC
-
06-19-2006, 11:01 AM #7
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Jacksonville, FL
- Posts
- 2,723
My '01 came with a 180 according to the owners manual, was stamped 86*C on the inside - which I believe is 187.
Last edited by 2001NBMZ28; 06-19-2006 at 11:05 AM.
-
06-19-2006, 05:49 PM #8
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- North Carolina foothills
- Age
- 37
- Posts
- 17
Black- 2001 camaro
fan
It really screws up you fuel curves manually turning the fan(s) on and off
-
06-23-2006, 08:36 PM #9
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Burlington, NC
- Posts
- 202
Black- 2000 Camaro SS
The stock thermostat is 187 degrees. I think that is way to high to run and engine, so I installed a 160 degree thermostat shortly after i purchased my car years ago. It runs a bit cooler in tha summer and is still warm enough in the winter.
JEB
-
06-24-2006, 05:43 PM #10
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- England but from TX
- Posts
- 803
Light Pewter Metallic- 2K Camaro Z28
Its good to reset the fan settings when you do 160-180 stat. I'm getting mine reset with delete of AIR/EGR/O2 rear codes for 75 bucks.
-
06-25-2006, 08:40 AM #11
I beg to differ. My 160F thermostat keeps the car at a steady 185F (vs 198F) while driving in the worst of summer conditions. I've only moved the fan settings by 20F, so they don't come into play unless the car is not moving in traffic or starting up after a heat soak.
This seems antithetical to me. Given Newton's Law of Cooling (which, can also be applied to heating), we know the rate has nothing to do with the absolute temperature, but rather the differential between the object (undergoing heating or cooling) and the temperature of the ambient surroundings. Given two vehicles, one with a 160F thermostat and one with a 187F thermostat, both begin warming from the same initial temperature, their rates of warming will be identical. Granted, the 160F thermo opens sooner to mitigate the final temperature, but the same process takes place for the 187F as well. However, since I have a lower end point with the 160F, the effective warm up time is shorter, not longer. Unless, of course, a new physics has been discovered.
-
06-25-2006, 08:57 AM #12
This is also a curious statement. I have experienced no downside in fuel economy by going to a lower thermostat. By what mechanism would the 13F change in operating temperature affect fuel mileage? Given the temperature of combustion, the difference in the "cooling" rate is a measly 0.5%. I think the primary benefit of keeping the valve seats cooler and, therefore, the mixture cooler entering the cylinder to mitigate detonation far outweigh any imagined detriment.
-
06-25-2006, 04:05 PM #13Originally Posted by Fran D
Originally Posted by Fran D
Originally Posted by Fran D
-
06-26-2006, 06:08 AM #14
There is no limitation on the usage of the quotation utility that I know of, so I will continue to use it at my discretion.
Understood, but still not an argument with which I agree. I have stated that under cruise, my car maintains 185F (as opposed to 198F) without the intercession of the fans. The contention that absolutely nothing happens without re-setting the PCM fan settings is rendered non sequitur.
To be quite frank, Newton wouldn't have given a rat's ass about Closed or Open Loop. The physics would not change. I'm at a loss to understand what any of the above has to do with the rate of heating (or, cooling). Regardless, I am in Closed Loop when the coolant temperature is ~93F, which has not been changed from the factory setting. I am in no danger of slipping out of Closed Loop with my 160F thermostat.
Well, if you wish to base the core of an argument on the proper interpretation of an implied inference...well, then fine.
But, as previously stated, Closed Loop occurs well before any of the set point temperatures, for any of the thermostats we are discussing, are reached. Therefore, by that clear inference, Closed Loop would occur at approximately the same time (and, certainly, well within the design tolerance of any of these thermostats as to make any temporal difference unresolvable).
I will agree that a 187F thermostat will reach 187F faster than a 160F thermostat (just as one may agree that 9 is less than 10). So what? Why would one care how long it would take a 160F thermostat to reach 187F? Perhaps this is another case of an improperly interpreted inference. Let's try this. Given two thermostats. 160F and 187F, with the design goal that the former allow one to operate at 160F while the latter allows one to operate at 187F. They both start heating at the same time. Who gets to their set point first?
-
06-26-2006, 07:09 AM #15Originally Posted by Fran D
In fact, to quote part of you're arguement; "I've only moved the fan settings by 20F", this is exactly what I'm referring to. This is what would be needed to realize the benefit of a 160 degree thermostat. Keeping the fan settings at the 215 'stock' trigger point would be a complete waste of one's time.
Originally Posted by Fran D
Running a stock thermostat, with the fan settings bumped down to 195-200, is more than adequate for most LS1's. Running a 160 degree thermostat, with the fan settings bumped down to 185-190, is ideal. However, running a 160 degree thermostat, without touching the factory fan settings, would be a complete waste (which is why most aftermarket companies advise you to do so)...
Originally Posted by Fran DLast edited by Street Lethal; 06-26-2006 at 07:29 AM.
-
06-26-2006, 07:13 AM #16
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- Research Triangle Park, NC
- Age
- 46
- Posts
- 1,811
Pewter- '99 Z28 M6
OK Mr. PhD, we all know you are intelligent by now, so please lay off the "sequitor" crap, damn, you got me running for a dictionary over here.
200 degrees Fahrenheit is the temperature at which fuel is consumed most efficiently (thus less pollutants initially) in an internal combustion engine, and that is where most engines from the factory will have normal operating temperatures. I still got the stock thermostat in mine, and it runs like a champ. I would hate to change something that would give me a dismal amount of benefits for a whole lot of headaches in return.
-
06-26-2006, 07:26 AM #17Originally Posted by Roastem
Originally Posted by Roastem
-
06-26-2006, 07:33 AM #18
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- Research Triangle Park, NC
- Age
- 46
- Posts
- 1,811
Pewter- '99 Z28 M6
Well, Dr. Fran can mentally masturbate like a motherf*cker.
If I was as good at regular masturbation as he was at mental, I wouldn't need a woman at all!
No offense Dr. Fran!
-
06-26-2006, 07:56 AM #19
Sorry, for some reason the editing tools are not functioning properly within my browser at the moment. I'll reply later when they are.
-
06-26-2006, 08:02 AM #20
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- Research Triangle Park, NC
- Age
- 46
- Posts
- 1,811
Pewter- '99 Z28 M6
Man, don't get mad now, I was just giving you a little ribbing.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
160 thermo
By jakez28 in forum Camaro / SSReplies: 2Last Post: 07-11-2010, 12:10 PM -
160 degree thermo.? is it worth it?
By 2fast4u_99 in forum General HelpReplies: 7Last Post: 09-22-2007, 03:01 PM -
need thermo help to understand ping
By predator in forum Almost Anything GoesReplies: 4Last Post: 08-02-2007, 06:21 AM -
Thermo Quiet Pads FS
By rdtce in forum Parts For Sale / TradeReplies: 8Last Post: 06-18-2007, 08:08 PM -
160 thermo
By jcot72 in forum General HelpReplies: 31Last Post: 11-25-2005, 02:32 AM
Bookmarks