160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars?
#1
Pro
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2002
Location: Wichita Falls Tx
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars?
I have a 160 in my car now and when I dynoed the last run I made my most HP. It seems like when the car starts warming up I start making more HP.This same thing happened in my 00ws6 w/160 thermostat.
Is it possible that I have my car toooo cool? I am running about 180 on the highway and 189 in stop and go traffic in the good ol 100 degree Tx days. But I dont run my car during the day and at night I run in the mid 180s. Any info is appreciated.
Is it possible that I have my car toooo cool? I am running about 180 on the highway and 189 in stop and go traffic in the good ol 100 degree Tx days. But I dont run my car during the day and at night I run in the mid 180s. Any info is appreciated.
#2
Team Owner
Re: 160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars? (MY1Fast99C5)
I hate to sound negative, but when this thread is all said and done, you will not know any more than you do now. This has been pretty well covered many times in the past, and there is no conclusive evidence that the thermostats make any difference in horsepower.
I have made a number of runs at the dragstrip, and I'm a very consistent driver. I find no difference in my times when I start at temps below 200, or when I start with the temp at 230.
I have made a number of runs at the dragstrip, and I'm a very consistent driver. I find no difference in my times when I start at temps below 200, or when I start with the temp at 230.
#3
Le Mans Master
Re: 160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars? (MY1Fast99C5)
It really won't make much difference; you have to have a way to turn the fans on earlier. :yesnod:
#4
Le Mans Master
Re: 160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars? (MY1Fast99C5)
I have a Hypertech 160 with an underdrive pulley and fan temps set at 185/210. The car runs a consistent 180-185.
Phillip
Phillip
#5
Le Mans Master
Re: 160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars? (MY1Fast99C5)
Here is the other thread. I won't suggest anything because I got the, you know what kicked out me for even suggesting leaving well enough alone.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/zerothread?id=348007
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/zerothread?id=348007
#6
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2001
Location: Blacker than the blackest black, times infinity.
Posts: 71,363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stealthy Puma Member
Cruise-In IV Veteran
Re: 160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars? (MY1Fast99C5)
From a strictly thermodynmics point of view, a gasoline engine is another type of heat engine. Heat engines are more efficient when the difference between their internal temperature and the outside temperature increases. Beyond that, you can't directly relate efficiency to more power in a real-world case. BTW, as far as heat engines go the gasoline engine is very inefficient. It typically runs at about 5% efficiency. A fridge is much more efficient and typically runs at 300% or better. It really does. :)
#7
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Jul 2000
Location: A FEW CLICKS NORTH OF THE CANAL
Posts: 5,925
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars? (jschindler)
I hate to sound negative, but when this thread is all said and done, you will not know any more than you do now. This has been pretty well covered many times in the past, and there is no conclusive evidence that the thermostats make any difference in horsepower.
I have made a number of runs at the dragstrip, and I'm a very consistent driver. I find no difference in my times when I start at temps below 200, or when I start with the temp at 230.
I have made a number of runs at the dragstrip, and I'm a very consistent driver. I find no difference in my times when I start at temps below 200, or when I start with the temp at 230.
This is how I feel too.... Don't try and make it rocket science :cheers:
#8
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Aug 2001
Location: Savannah GA
Posts: 6,070
Received 280 Likes
on
213 Posts
Cruise-In IV Veteran
Re: 160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars? (RHILL)
I say do it if you are curious and see if you like it. If you don't you are only out 20 minutes of your time and $60. That should cover just about all of the thermostat posts! :yesnod: :cheers:
#9
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Feb 2001
Location: DFW TX
Posts: 3,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Senior Member
Cruise-In III Veteran
Cruise-In IV Veteran
Re: 160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars? (MY1Fast99C5)
The cooler your engine is running the more agressive timing you can run without getting knock. This is why hypertech sells the HPP3 and t-stat together. They reprogram the fuel and ignition curve to take advantage of the lower temps.
Using LS1 Edit I have been to get ~10RWHP out of my using the same principle with a 160 tstat and lower fan on temperatures.
Using LS1 Edit I have been to get ~10RWHP out of my using the same principle with a 160 tstat and lower fan on temperatures.
#10
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Nov 2001
Location: Cincinnati Ohio
Posts: 7,033
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 160 Thermostat Vs 172 Vs 180 Which is better for our cars? (MY1Fast99C5)
I have run 160 degree thermostats for years now in my Monte Carlo Z34 and now my Vert. Friends have them in their Saleen and SS. I just turned 110,000 miles in my 95 Monte with the 160. IMHO....a cooler engine runs better and improves longevity. As for HP....don't start a :boxing . Lot's of members will chime in with their opinions. And you know opinions are like......nevermind. :lol: