It's not at all clear to me that even on a race engine, the 160 is better. Heat=power, look it up. The temperature of the flame in the combustion chamber is going to be the same, no matter what thermostat (themostat?) is used. By using a lower coolant temp, you are pulling more heat out of the engine into the coolant. More heat into the coolant=more heat "lost" to thermal inefficiency, less available to drive the pistons, turn the crank, move the car. The goal would be to keep as much heat as possible in the cylinder- that's why race engines use expensive high temp coatings on the combustion chambers and piston faces. If the temp gets too high, causing detonation, then it's time for more fuel, or less timing, or less boost. Somewhere, there is an "optimum" at which the combination of boost and heat loss makes the most power possible for a given fuel/cam/head combination. But I don't think that 160 was handed down on a stone from the Buick gods- it may be that magic temp, but that is not as clear to me as it seems to be to some others.
180 VS 160 degree thermostat
- Thread starter turbojkt
- Start date
Welcome!
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
Originally posted by bruce
Yes, I have.
Well golly gee, a themostat is cheaper then a Thermostat?.
You brought up under hood temps, the most effective way is with heat management of the exhuast system.
Like so many things, cheap is only a short term answer. Thermal warp is just way too cheap of answer, IMO.
Let’s talk about the "effectiveness" of some suggestions.
Thermal coat the headers and exhaust system. There is a section on the headers of my personal car that we had to sand blast the thermal coating off to do some repair. Now i have an uncoated section and a coated section side by side in the same header. This is a perfect way of measuring the effectiveness of the coating. Using an infrared pyrometer you can measure the temp of both sections. The result? Not one degree difference.
Now let's look at the "cheap" thermal "warp". You probably mean wrap... Measuring the outside of the bare tube we get 428 deg. Measure the outside of the wrapped section you get 193. You can almost touch it without burning yourself
Getting back to the wrapped down pipe. You are probably all right leaving that on there. Most DPs are made of 304 stainless which will handle the temp after the turbo fine. There is a significant difference in temperature before and after the turbo. If you are concerned with lowering under hood temps as much as possible then this is one of the most effective ways.
You can be BSed into thinking one way or another. If a 180 T-stat makes the engine so much more efficient then why stop there. 195 t stat must be better than the 180 or better yet a 205 T-stat.
For all of those reading this post try it for yourself. Header coatings are purely cosmetic. Nothing makes the headers look this good and the coating last pretty long. Don’t do it expecting big under hood temp reductions.
With the stock setup your trans cooler is in the radiator. The coolest your tranny can be is the same temp as your cooling system temp. Maybe hotter is better for the trans too.....
If thermal cycling or higher temperatures do not reduce the life span of rubber hoses then why do the waste gate hoses always go bad first? Why does a vacuum hose under the hood last as long as one on the shelf?
Efficiency is getting the most energy out of a given amount of fuel not necessarily getting the highest performance.
novaderrik
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 12, 2004
- Messages
- 8,076
i would think that the best way to lower the underhood tempswould be to get the hot air the hell out of the engine bay. is that not why the GNX had those cool vents on the fenders?
as for ceramic coatings on exhaust pieces, i have zero experience with that on a turbo Regal, but i had a 71 Nova with a 400 hp 355, and when it had Jet Hot ceramic coated headers, it stayed pretty cool under the hood. i even had a couple of sparkplug wires fall against the hot headers and not get all burnt up. after those headers got all bent up (don't ask- i'm still pissed about that- and it was 4 years ago), i put some regular non coated headers on it, and it got HOT under the hood, and the one time a plug wire bumped a header tube while i was playing under the hood, it was toasted in a matter of seconds. i don't see why coatings on a TR would work by different laws of physics. exhaust heat is, after all, still exhaust heat.
as for ceramic coatings on exhaust pieces, i have zero experience with that on a turbo Regal, but i had a 71 Nova with a 400 hp 355, and when it had Jet Hot ceramic coated headers, it stayed pretty cool under the hood. i even had a couple of sparkplug wires fall against the hot headers and not get all burnt up. after those headers got all bent up (don't ask- i'm still pissed about that- and it was 4 years ago), i put some regular non coated headers on it, and it got HOT under the hood, and the one time a plug wire bumped a header tube while i was playing under the hood, it was toasted in a matter of seconds. i don't see why coatings on a TR would work by different laws of physics. exhaust heat is, after all, still exhaust heat.
Jace, you do well in drag racing, no arguing that point. But have you ever watched a NASCAR race? Follow the sport AT ALL? Those cars run HOT. I have no idea what thermostat, if any, they are running, but the water temp runs over 200 degrees, on a cool day. The point? Some of the bigger races are worth $1,000,000 or more, to the winner. Not to the entire field, just to the winning team. How long will it take to win $1,000,000 racing a turbo Buick? Maybe, just maybe, the guys who are racing for millions have run tests, and have SOME idea what it takes to win. If you read my post above, you MIGHT understand that I mentioned an OPTIMUM temp, where the trade offs equal out. I don't really know what that temp is, but my guess is that it is somewhere above 160. Maybe not as high as the NASCAR engines, but somewhere in between.
It would also follow, by your logic, that if a 160 is good, then a 140 is better, and so on.l...
in nascar sure that would be better. so would a lower octain than we run be better for nascar. this is apples to oranges.
140 is not better than 160 because the stock computer considers normal operating temperature anything over 150
140 is not better than 160 because the stock computer considers normal operating temperature anything over 150
160 for performace, 180 for stock
A 160 degree t-stat means that the thermostat will open at 160 degrees and allow the water to circulate sooner than if you had a 180 or 190. This does not mean that the car will only run at 160 degrees, just that the water will start to move sooner to try to cool the engine faster. After market chip companies want you to run a 160 because most of the chips change the timing of your motor and add a few degrees in to get you better performance. Because of this the motor will run hotter, thus you need to off set this by running a cooler t-stat. Most cars come with a mild tune from the factory and can get away with a 180 and most new fuel efficient cars use a 190. If you are going to run an after market chip or plan on turning up your boost level past stock, go with a 160 to help keep the motor cooler and let it make more power by running cooler. You will get worse gas mileage, but better performance. If you are running a stock chip stay with a 180 for gas mileage and performance. If you bring a car up to operating temperatures, it's not going to matter on a dyno weather or not you got a 160 or 180 t-stat as most car will run around 200 degrees when hot. You just get the water moving faster to keep the car cooler longer with a 160 degree t-stat, but if you drive the car long enough, it will get just as hot as a car with a 180 t-stat, it will just take longer. There are other options to try to keep the car cool, but a 160 degree t-stat is the only one that will cost you under $10. You could always go with a bigger more efferent radiator, and electric water pump, maybe try some of those products such as water wetter by redline, or even take the t-stat out and run just a restrictor like what they do in NASCAR. With NASCAR, they don't care about the t-stat, they probably don't run them. This way they can get to the temperature they want to be at faster and be at maximum performance that they have tuned for faster. The t-stat was originally for the heating system so you can hot air out of you heater core faster because the water would not circulate and you would get heat faster. Now they have found that they can use the t-stat to get your car to the proper operating temperature faster by using different t-stats. This is why new cars seem to take a long time to heat up. I know that was way too long, does it make scene? You don't have to take my word for it either, I sold parts for 7 years but this doesn't make me an expert or anything. You could always call HyperTech or SuperChips and talk to their tech line if you wanted. As far as the ceramic coating goes, I’ve always looked at it like this, what do you rap you potatoes in to make them cook faster in the oven? Do you really want to wrap you motor in chrome and let it cook faster and keep all the heat in? I'm glad to see somebody did a test finnaly and said that the ceramic coating doesn't really make a huge differeance. Lots of people spending way too much money on that stuff, it's great on a show car, but not when you are trying to make a go-car!
-Gabe
A 160 degree t-stat means that the thermostat will open at 160 degrees and allow the water to circulate sooner than if you had a 180 or 190. This does not mean that the car will only run at 160 degrees, just that the water will start to move sooner to try to cool the engine faster. After market chip companies want you to run a 160 because most of the chips change the timing of your motor and add a few degrees in to get you better performance. Because of this the motor will run hotter, thus you need to off set this by running a cooler t-stat. Most cars come with a mild tune from the factory and can get away with a 180 and most new fuel efficient cars use a 190. If you are going to run an after market chip or plan on turning up your boost level past stock, go with a 160 to help keep the motor cooler and let it make more power by running cooler. You will get worse gas mileage, but better performance. If you are running a stock chip stay with a 180 for gas mileage and performance. If you bring a car up to operating temperatures, it's not going to matter on a dyno weather or not you got a 160 or 180 t-stat as most car will run around 200 degrees when hot. You just get the water moving faster to keep the car cooler longer with a 160 degree t-stat, but if you drive the car long enough, it will get just as hot as a car with a 180 t-stat, it will just take longer. There are other options to try to keep the car cool, but a 160 degree t-stat is the only one that will cost you under $10. You could always go with a bigger more efferent radiator, and electric water pump, maybe try some of those products such as water wetter by redline, or even take the t-stat out and run just a restrictor like what they do in NASCAR. With NASCAR, they don't care about the t-stat, they probably don't run them. This way they can get to the temperature they want to be at faster and be at maximum performance that they have tuned for faster. The t-stat was originally for the heating system so you can hot air out of you heater core faster because the water would not circulate and you would get heat faster. Now they have found that they can use the t-stat to get your car to the proper operating temperature faster by using different t-stats. This is why new cars seem to take a long time to heat up. I know that was way too long, does it make scene? You don't have to take my word for it either, I sold parts for 7 years but this doesn't make me an expert or anything. You could always call HyperTech or SuperChips and talk to their tech line if you wanted. As far as the ceramic coating goes, I’ve always looked at it like this, what do you rap you potatoes in to make them cook faster in the oven? Do you really want to wrap you motor in chrome and let it cook faster and keep all the heat in? I'm glad to see somebody did a test finnaly and said that the ceramic coating doesn't really make a huge differeance. Lots of people spending way too much money on that stuff, it's great on a show car, but not when you are trying to make a go-car!
-Gabe
Pronto
No amount of evidence will ever persuade an idiot.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2002
- Messages
- 16,751
As far as ceramic coating go, my experience on a 79 T/A was they did keep the temps in the engine compartment down some and they definately looked good. I hate looking at a nice car and engine to see a set of cruddy headers. It just takes away from the whole picture.
I run a 160 thermastat because that's what Eric recommends for his chip. Good enough for me. It's never run better.
I run a 160 thermastat because that's what Eric recommends for his chip. Good enough for me. It's never run better.
If the efficiency of the radiator is good, then the motor will not eventually reach 200 degrees, even if it has a 160 thermostat. If the radiator is doing its job, then the engine will typically run in the 160-175 range most of the time, even in heat and traffic. If the radiator is not working right, it will reach 200+ degrees in traffic, like mine. With a properly working system, the 180 thermostat will run in the 180-195 range.
Basically, lets assume the radiator/pump/fan are always doing their job. A 160 thermostat will always run cooler than a 180.
That said, the lower temps are ok (not great, but ok) with the stock pistons, which dont require thermal expansion to meet tolerances and keep blowby and leakdown to a minimum.
If the engine has been rebuilt with non hypereutectic pistons, the pistons DO require thermal expansion to keep blowby and leakdown to a minimum. Its also required to limit piston slap and keep the ringlands clean. It is required for proper ring seal. If its not sealing properly, the chambers get nasty and the oil gets contaminated very fast. The rings wear much faster. The valves get nasty. Nothing kills flow like a bunch of carbon on the back of the valves, which got there when the contaminated, syrupy oil bled down the guide, and built up cause it wasnt hot enough to burn off. Sure, alky injection keeps them clean, but not everyone wants alky. Carbon buildup is bad, no matter where in the engine it happens. A motor running too cool cant burn carbon out. Carbon is abrasive. Thats not something you want tearing up your rings/walls and valve guides.
Sure, a cooler combustion chamber reduces detonation, but doesnt anyone realize how low temperatures affect everything else? The mains and rods dont have proper clearance. everything is too tight, and I dont need to explain why thats bad. You end up with loose pistons slapping around in the cylinders, and mains and rods that are too tight. I havent heard of an OEM ever building a car (built for daily driving and abuse) with a 160 thermostat. These engineers have spent their lives work, designing things that are backed by science. They dont design ANYTHING based on "seat of the pants", or what some dude on an internet site said. Everything is backed by Physics. Science. Data.
I'm only continuing with running my 160 thermostat for the time being, because my radiator sucks and it keeps the engine running in a safer zone. Once I get a better radiator, the 180 will go back in. I'd gladly lose a couple pounds of boost, then have my wallet drained by what should have been an unnecessary rebuild.
Basically, lets assume the radiator/pump/fan are always doing their job. A 160 thermostat will always run cooler than a 180.
That said, the lower temps are ok (not great, but ok) with the stock pistons, which dont require thermal expansion to meet tolerances and keep blowby and leakdown to a minimum.
If the engine has been rebuilt with non hypereutectic pistons, the pistons DO require thermal expansion to keep blowby and leakdown to a minimum. Its also required to limit piston slap and keep the ringlands clean. It is required for proper ring seal. If its not sealing properly, the chambers get nasty and the oil gets contaminated very fast. The rings wear much faster. The valves get nasty. Nothing kills flow like a bunch of carbon on the back of the valves, which got there when the contaminated, syrupy oil bled down the guide, and built up cause it wasnt hot enough to burn off. Sure, alky injection keeps them clean, but not everyone wants alky. Carbon buildup is bad, no matter where in the engine it happens. A motor running too cool cant burn carbon out. Carbon is abrasive. Thats not something you want tearing up your rings/walls and valve guides.
Sure, a cooler combustion chamber reduces detonation, but doesnt anyone realize how low temperatures affect everything else? The mains and rods dont have proper clearance. everything is too tight, and I dont need to explain why thats bad. You end up with loose pistons slapping around in the cylinders, and mains and rods that are too tight. I havent heard of an OEM ever building a car (built for daily driving and abuse) with a 160 thermostat. These engineers have spent their lives work, designing things that are backed by science. They dont design ANYTHING based on "seat of the pants", or what some dude on an internet site said. Everything is backed by Physics. Science. Data.
I'm only continuing with running my 160 thermostat for the time being, because my radiator sucks and it keeps the engine running in a safer zone. Once I get a better radiator, the 180 will go back in. I'd gladly lose a couple pounds of boost, then have my wallet drained by what should have been an unnecessary rebuild.
83ttypecooled
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2003
- Messages
- 2,082
160 tstat
I ran a couple of different chips,always with the stock thermostat. I changed waterpumps and decided to go with a 160. A big difference in coolant temp, down over 20 degrees all the time. I was surprised, as I always thought that it would only be a small change, because I figured the 160 would just be open a lot, but things like AC would eventually cause the temp to creep back up. Not so! I never run over 90 C now, moniter it on the gauge and the scanner. As far as changes to my car's operation,knock is way down, still looks good on block learn and integrator, passes emissions with flying colors. My High speed relay doesn't do much anymore...
I ran a couple of different chips,always with the stock thermostat. I changed waterpumps and decided to go with a 160. A big difference in coolant temp, down over 20 degrees all the time. I was surprised, as I always thought that it would only be a small change, because I figured the 160 would just be open a lot, but things like AC would eventually cause the temp to creep back up. Not so! I never run over 90 C now, moniter it on the gauge and the scanner. As far as changes to my car's operation,knock is way down, still looks good on block learn and integrator, passes emissions with flying colors. My High speed relay doesn't do much anymore...
Similar threads
