Kool88, I read the Fel-Pro link. What is there to argue about with them?
Fel-Pro didn't say WHAT temperature heads warp at, they said engines work best between 190 and 220 F. Those that insist 160 stats run the coolant at 160, why Fel-Pro confirms what GM knows and designs engines for, AND is the same thing that CFI and I say, 160 stats shouldn't be used in C4 engines. Heck, I even use Fel-Pro teflon coated head gaskets and recommend them, they last many times longer than non teflon coated ones. At even the temperature GM says to shut off your engine and let it cool down (260 F), heads don't warp!!!
Air cooled aircraft engines use aluminum heads and operate at 400 F and they don't warp. Your link didn't support your claim!!!

 

He is desperate. He is trying to save a thread of dignity, where there is none left. He is accusing us of not knowing, something that isn't even relevant to the subject, when we really do, making his accusations off subject and moot. He is lashing out irrationally, flailing about, in desperation, trying to disprove the laws of physics. Clearly he has no concept of the principles involved and won't listen to those trying to help him learn. I gave it an honest attempt, but it is clear that it is a waste of time.

RACE ON!!!

 

You two may think you are physics teachers but you are both a little nutty.

 

And here I thought Kool88 ran out of feet to put in his mouth!

 

I read this website. This is a quote from it:
However, there is a "middle ground" where both optimum performance as well as minimal wear share similar characteristics. That "magic" number lies in the 175-180 degree range, which requires a 180 degree thermostat. My engine is in this range most of the time under normal conditions. Although I have a 160 thermostat and the fans come on at 175. I am usually right around 175 - 190 degrees. It will get a little hotter with the AC on in traffic during hot weather. Thanks for the link. I did not come up with the data supplied by these websites. If you disagree you should contact them and argue your point with the experts.

 

that way im seeing this is that coolent flows through your intake which affects your air temp coming into the motor. so cooler coolent temp should help for a cooler charge of air thus increasing hp. however the point that higher temperature will create higher pressure increasing hp and torque is also true. the trick is to find that certain engine setup which gives ya the best of both ya may havta run a lil hotter or colder on coolent temp or air temp then ya may like but the best running motor should theoretically have colder air and more temp in the igniting cylinder. so that is why i say both arguments for higher engine temps and lower coolent temps have good points is basically way im seeing it both are theoretically right but lower coolent temps for the lower temp air charge directly works against the thoery that higher temps in combustion = greter pressure =more hp and torque. ya kinda havta find the middle ground. where the middle ground is i dont know. but right or wrong that seems to be what im getting out of this.

 

This is strange at the same time that you were writing about the "middle ground" I was posting this from my last post: , there is a "middle ground" where both optimum performance as well as minimal wear share similar characteristics. That "magic" number lies in the 175-180 degree range, which requires a 180 degree thermostat' Read my last post, it's very ironic.

 

I see you use Fel-pro head gaskets. I have never had to change a head gasket. Does that tell you anything?

 

Yes, it tells me you don't drive your car much. I drive my 87 Corvette everyday, it has 213k miles, coolant temp runs 195 F which by one of your own posts , " Thats about perfect". You are your own worst enemy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

its just that i`ve personally seen too much evidence that completely contrdicts the accuracy of that graph... one example after another...

no, were talking SBC/BBC`s here, not diesels.
and yeah, marine engines are some of the hardest working, and often, some of the most abused engines out there. and 7000 hours is rare, but not comepletely unheard of... i know a guy that works on them for a living. he`s been turning wrenches on them for longer than you`ve been owning them.

and yes, most do use thermostats. a 140 stat is common, many owners remove them, and some high performance boats dont come with one...
while i have never owned such boats, i do have some experience with automotive derived inboard gasoline engines. i used to work at a machine shop that also builds, and dyno tests racing engines.
many of the engine we got through the shop were marine enigines...

i have personally seen dyno tests where the cooler the engine got, the more power it made. i have read about other dyno tests over the years, that also had the same results.

i have personally used 160 stats in many cars, including my L98, longterm over the years, with no adverse wear noticed...

many years ago, i bought an 87 turbo Learon from a girl i knew. she drove it hard for years, and it was suffering from considerable mechanical neglect. in fact, it was running on only 3 cylinders when i got it, bad fuel injector. she drove it like that for TWO YEARS....
she also said the heater hadnt been working well for almost FOUR years.

i noticed that the temp gauge was barely moving off of the lower mark, she said it had been like that for years.
i replaced the bad injector, and and found out that the low operating temps were due to the fact that the engine had NO THERMOSTAT.
apparently, someone had removed it years before, in an attempt to fix an overheating problem... i installed a 160 deg. thermostat in it.

the car had 204,000 miles on it when ibought it.... i put another 43,000 basically trouble free miles on it, despite consideable abusive driving by me... i then sold it to a friend of mine, who drove it for almost 2 more years, before severe detonation from jacking up the boost to almost 20 psi, finally grenaded a piston at 278,000 miles....
when he took the cyl. head off to see the damage, i was amazed to still be able to see the honing pattern on the cylinder walls...

 

Cylinder hone marks can be seen in the area where the piston does not traverse the cylinder! Says nothing about wear! And......any fool can operate a dynomometer incorrectly!

 

You are a sick, sick man.

 

no kidding???
the hone marks were visible in the upper part of the cylinder...
inside the ring travel area.... on the thrust sides no less....



i can assure you, the man operating that dyno, was no fool...
his engines DOMINATED the dirt tracks and dragstrips around here for years...

when your "theories" dont hold up to the cold hard facts, i guess you can always resort to childish slander and insults....

 

Show me where I slandered anyone or insulted anyone! The theories I point out are from any textbook on thermodynamics and heat flow, they aren't mine!

 

Yep BigLee, there's alot of guys out there that have more experience on marine engines than I, same with auto mechanics, funny thing is, I seem to have found alot of them that don't know squat.

And one of the worse things you can do to an engine, either auto or marine is to completely remove a stat.!!!!!

You're certainly entitled to your opinion regarding the graph....my experience (over 48 yrs. turning wrenches on autos) has to believe it quite accurate.Given the fact we're talking about BOTH performance and longevity.

The only way to increase HP by temperature control (lowering a temp)
is to decrease the intake temperature allowing cooler air into the combustion chamber.That's why we've seen intakes being iced over the years. Decreasing block temperature does nothing to increase HP, and running it to cool only has an adverse affect on engines longevity...that my friend has been proven over and over and over again.

 

The concept is so simple I cannot understand how anyone refutes it! An automobile engine converts the heat energy in gasoline into horsepower! If you remove any heat from the combustion chamber, you effectively remove horsepower! A lower temperature coolant removes MORE heat from the combustion chamber than a higher temperature coolant!
If you do not agree with this concept, then please explain how the reverse happens.

 

+1, he has done a good job bashing rational thought, without giving any reason on why he thinks cooler is better.

 

accept when you add cooler air into the combustion area....do you disagree with that JFB?

 

Coolant does not run through your intake and therefore does not affect the air charge entering the cylinders. It runs through the heads and block. And on the LT1 (don't know about L98) they route it through the TB for cold starts, but many elimminate those lines.

 

icing the intake increases air density which means more air molecules (per unit volume) will enter the combustion chamber. Once there, a hotter chamber will cause a higher level of expansion of this air, causing more force on the piston and more torque.