When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Most of the people I have talked to said there is no downhside to going to a 160 thermo, and that there are distinct advantages. If that were true, then why does not GM simply use 160s in the car to begin with? My question is this. What are the advantages and disadvantages of replacing the thermo? I live in Chicago and drive in very cold weather (13 degrees last week). Any issues?
I have a 160 in my '06 A6. Last full tank I got 24 MPG in mixed (mostly highway) driving. This is measured from the mileage and the gas receipt, not the DIC (which is very accurate also). I average 23-24 MPG every tank.
Most of the people I have talked to said there is no downhside to going to a 160 thermo, and that there are distinct advantages. If that were true, then why does not GM simply use 160s in the car to begin with? My question is this. What are the advantages and disadvantages of replacing the thermo? I live in Chicago and drive in very cold weather (13 degrees last week). Any issues?
There is a downhill side for GM when it comes to emissions.....
If you like cold feet during the winter I would definitely install a 160* thermo, can't beat it unless you left the windows open! It will be more than windy in the windy city.
Upside is...a consistently faster car after you've been forced to idle for any extended length of time and less underhood heat meaning longer lasting parts.
The car is designed to run generally at a higher temperature for maximum efficiency and low emmisions.
All the 160 does, is lets the coolant circulate sooner than, say a 180. But the ultimate and equilibrium temperatures end up the same. The motor does not run cooler. We have no trouble here in AZ (with common temps over 110) with the std thermostat.
But the ultimate and equilibrium temperatures end up the same. The motor does not run cooler. We have no trouble here in AZ (with common temps over 110) with the std thermostat.
i disagree......i run 20* cooler in this AZ heat....
I would normally run around 210 to 220 in town with the std tstat in Phoenix. I changed to the 160 and the car became much more consistent and I hardly see anything above 200 even in the summer.
Here's the real proof: 2 dyno pulls on a hot June evening, the engine pulled timing on the second pull and I lost 18 hp between runs. Came back 1 week later after installing a 160 stat, still a hot evening, and I gained 1 hp on my second pull.
If you live in Arizona or any hot climate, it is my opinion that the 160 stat will make your car more consistent. I never see steady state temps below 176 or above 200 in all weather and driving conditions.
i disagree......i run 20* cooler in this AZ heat....
How can that be without a larger or more efficient radiator, or extra fans?
Is the thermostat change all you did?
And how did you control environmental factors to accurately compare before and after?
How can that be without a larger or more efficient radiator, or extra fans?
Is the thermostat change all you did?
And how did you control environmental factors to accurately compare before and after?
if you try it you will find out for yourself. i think glennhl just about cover it all. just about everyone on this forum that runs a 160 stat will agree cruising temp is right around 178-180 / stock stat is more like 198-200*....if you let it sit there and idle for 20 min stright and not move or turn the fan on earlier then yes, the temp will be the same as the stock stat. if you want the pcm to pull the timing at 212* coolant temp / 86* iat in this AZ heat, the stock stat will help get there much much sooner. it is your car after all.
zig, what glennhl is saying is, instead of losing 18hp on the 2nd pull w the stock stat. he actually gain 1hp on the 2nd pull w 160 stat...it is within the variation of the dyno pull..he was making a point that there was no heat soak issue that time.
if you try it you will find out for yourself. i think glennhl just about cover it all. just about everyone on this forum that runs a 160 stat will agree cruising temp is right around 178-180 / stock stat is more like 198-200*....if you let it sit there and idle for 20 min stright and not move or turn the fan on earlier then yes, the temp will be the same as the stock stat. if you want the pcm to pull the timing at 212* coolant temp / 86* iat in this AZ heat, the stock stat will help get there much much sooner. it is your car after all.
Cruising temps may well be lower since the cooling system is not maxed out. I could see that. But what will a 20* drop in temp at cruising really do for you other than give you a nice cool fuzzy feeling? Will you not lose that 18 HP if you suddenly hammer it at that lower cruising temp? Better fuel economy? Will the temps or HP be any different with racing, where you're maxed out most of the time?
I don't think the 160 stat will give you a gain. My point was that I did not lose 18 hp on the second pull after the 160 stat. To give you the numbers:
Stock: 1st pull: 334 rwhp, 2nd pull: 316 rwhp
After 160 stat and LG Pro Headers: 1st pull: 359 rwhp, 2nd pull: 360 rwhp
Cruising temps may well be lower since the cooling system is not maxed out. I could see that. But what will a 20* drop in temp at cruising really do for you other than give you a nice cool fuzzy feeling? Will you not lose that 18 HP if you suddenly hammer it at that lower cruising temp? Better fuel economy? Will the temps or HP be any different with racing, where you're maxed out most of the time?
like i stated, it is your car, do what you please, already stated the facts on power reduction due to heat soak. if you want dyno prove then take a look what glennhl stated above...or have your car dyno in this AZ heat back to back and you will find out for yourself.