Not on a A&A unit! The intercooler is out in front with a 4-6 inch air
gap. No heat soak, Not like your ECS unit!

 

That fact that you are comparing a thermostat setting to long duration cams and headers speaks for itself and shouldn't require any elaboration on my part.

But, what the hell. Long tube headers would not meet the long term durability requirements that GM needs, and long duration cams won't pass emissions. A warmer running engine aids in efficiency and therefore emissions. A more efficient engine is a more powerful engine. And a change in thermostat temp rating is a zero cost selection. If that (colder engine) made the engine more efficient and powerful, why wouldn't GM do it?

Spin and others agree with this, and I agree that for a practical matter it would be easier to run a cold engine and try and tune it for power than try and deal with a hotter, high compression engine using most crap pump gas. But, like was pointed out above, there is no disputing the likes of Smokey Yunick and other real race builders where they they have tested this theory and have proven it correct.

I'll just add that even in phoenix I believe you can keep the stock thermostat and have the fans keep the engine around 200* and make marginally more power than trying to use a colder thermostat.

 

OK, you have convinced yourself. Go forth and keep the faith.

 

The point was higher HP cars produce more heat and benefit from a lower open thermostat. It wasnt an attack on the kit you have.

 

Don't fear knowledge. I've only posted factual information. Argue if you like, but you do so without facts.

 

Damn tuners with them scan tools.

 

Look in the mirror, you won't see any facts in your hand.

Look in my glove box, you will see timing slips, dyno charts, Autotap graphs. They all show performance improves as coolant temps drop, performance lags as coolant temps increase.

Look on the Corvettes of Westchester website, you will see that Chuck installs a 160 thermo with every header and CAI package he sells.

Look on the other vendor sites (Lingenfelter, LG, SLP, Cartek, many more) you will see they ALL sell and recommend colder thermostats FOR OUR CARS (NOT for purpose built, non computer controlled race cars). They are not getting rich by selling $25 thermostats. They are not doing iso because it's the latest fad, they are doing it based on factual information, rigorous dyno and track testing, and an in-depth understanding of how our computer controls actually work.

Ask the guys on this forum who have the fastest cars, the best track records, and the most practical knowledge --- guys like SpinMonster.

Otherwise, please don't pretend your opinions are facts. They are not. Facts without context are useless.

 

Like I said, the laws of thermodynamics are there and you can stamp your feet in denial all you want. And the thing is, you know I'm right you just want to argue. I've already stated that it's easier to tune for more timing on a colder engine and power can be made. All I'm saying is that there is more power to be had in a hotter engine, IF you have the talent to tune for it. Obviously, you are getting closer to the ragged edge and you need to be concerned that. 160 thermostats are a safety crutch.

 

Runs sooo much cooler, especially in the summer. Mine runs about 180 all the time.

 

Laws of thermodynamics can't be repealed, not denying that at all (I've already said it several times). I know you are accurately describing what you have read, and I am not arguing that point.

I agree that in some cars (non-computer controlled), under some circumstances (a narrow temperature range), there is perhaps more power to be had, and perhaps also a higher risk of engine damage. NASCAR engines blow up regularly from overheating. I am not talented enough of a tuner to disconnect the ECM and all the engine sensors just to experiment with higher coolant temps.

Problem with your thinking is that ALL the talented tuners are NOT trying to figure out how to achieve more power by running hotter. ALL the talented tuners are doing just the opposite. Guess what? It WORKS!

Try this. Name me one top C6 tuner or one top C6 racer who has achieved better results by running hotter. I am talking about street driven cars with computer controls, not purpose built race cars. If you can name just ONE, that will be the first FACT I've heard. The rest is just theory.

 

I wonder if Air Bus likes to hot lap a half dozen times in a row at 90* in AZ to really warm-up the 'ole C6...with fuel rail covers ON For the rest of us mere mortals, dont we rest our cars awhile to cool them off? Is this what you are trying to explain?

 

The fact that you don't "get" why I'm using that comparison (for a different "challenged" posted, BTW)....speaks for itself.


Because; like LT headers, and long duration cams, GM can not meet the criteria they must, using a 160* T-stat. Now do you "Get it" (I don't hold any hope for that)

With WHAT?? I haven't disputed a single thing Spin has said in this entire thread. In fact, you should re-read his posts.


With my street driven car, running on 91 octane (max) I don't give a rats **** what Smokey "and other real builders" did in their day, with their cars, in THEIR conditions, with THEIR CRITERIA! WTF do you keep bringing up data that is not relevant here?


Well... "I believe" the earth is flat. lol BS. Prove it. My car (in Park City, UT) NEVER, EVER runs below 198*F w/the stock stat. That means it DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU DO TO THE FANS! If I'm driving down Parleys Canyon (3000' vertical drop over 13 miles), in 50* weather, my engine runs....198-201*F. A wind tunnel for a fan, couldn't help my engine run any cooler, b/c the t-stat is dictating the minimum operating temp. The fan is completely out of the equation. Lets see you run 200* consistently, in AZ with nothing other than a fan adjustment. You can't do it. And even if you could, who cares? 200 is still to warm for the conditions guys like me are after.

Still looking for an engine that "died" due to a 160 stat....

 

Tom, good point about the average coolant temps with the OEM thermostat. Before I swapped mine out, my coolant temps stayed pretty constant around 200. Programming the fans would not do much good --- even if the fans alone were enough to drop the coolant temps under 195, then the thermostat would start to close, and you'd have the fans fighting the thermostat.

Siffert, I have a few cases where hot-lapped cars improved their times, especially on F-body's. I think their ECM's were not as aggressive at pulling timing. Usually when I have seen it was at night sessions, where the air was rapidly cooling off. In contrast, the last time I was at MIR (one and only time with my C6), my first pass was at 10:30 AM, second pass after cool down was around noon, and the air density and temps were much worse. I lost 3 tenths.

Best temp management I have seen is Ranger, who carries a giant fan with him to the track. As soon as he pulls back into the pits, that fan is sitting on top of his engine blowing air. It's that kind of attention to detail that makes him the fastest Z06 around.

 

Airbus: Maybe this was posted and I didn't see it but what you are missing is that our engines are set by GM right at the edge of pre-ignition, in fact, get into it all the time and get pulled back by the knock sensors telling the PCM to pull timing. For just cruising, that's fine, high temp, efficiency good. But, when you want max power, having timing pulled by KR is very bad, because the PCM pulls lots of timing, for a long time. A much better solution is to run the coolant cooler via a 160 and reset fans because the water jackets in the heads surround the combustion chambers and by keeping the coolant cooler you reduce the hot spots in the chambers which cause pre-ignition. No pre-ignition, no KR, max power.

You are right that a hotter engine would make more power than cooler one IF YOU COULD KEEP IT FROM KNOCKING. Unfortunately, ours, as designed by GM don't make more power @ 200 degrees then they do @ 180 because of the timing being pulled to keep them from knocking themselves to death.

Run a 160, reset the fans, add a little water wetter or similar product to keep the coolant attached to the water jackets around the chambers and you'll make more power.

 

Great input!!

 

Lots of emotions on here!

I won't go into the t-stat debate, but I'll say this: As long as the oil is getting to normal operating temperatures (200*F plus) within a reasonable amount of time, then a 160* t-stat shouldn't affect the engine negatively.

Cold engine oil after 20-30 minutes of operation (those of us in the ice-snow belt) will cause problems for sure. Water begins to build up and forms acids which attack soft metals. You will also start seeing sludge build up. Obviously bad stuff.

Best way to see this is through oil analysis.

bye

Rick

 

No, I didn’t say I was an expert. I was saying you are feebly trying to demonstrate to Vette owner’s that you know something about thermodynamics and physics; and with your posts, it’s plainly obvious to me that you don’t. Fortunately, after reading the posts of others, you haven’t fooled most of them either. What I simply find amazing is your blatant advertising to thousands of Vette owner's your complete lack of education and experience in the two subjects…...oh yea, now that is funny.

 

And the funny thing is, we've been in agreement nearly this entire thread for the most part.

I'll just add you don't know ALL the talented tuners, and with the secrecy surrounding some of the faster cars you would be surprised on what they are actually doing. I do know a very talented tuner in phx, but I won't mention his name in order not to drag him into this retarded discussion.

 

Thanks for the well thought out and intelligent response. We are in agreement, though I haven't seen any timing being pulled at 200*. Over 214*, yes.

 

What's the old saying about arguing with a pig in a mud hole? He likes it and you just end up in the dirty? I need a shower...