Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/wannaplaypcola/tech/tstat_test

This page supports both sides of the argument.

They went from a 195 to a 180 thermostat and DID have a measureable difference as seen on the Dyno.

BUT..they also say that running a 160 thermostat didn't provide the desired/expected results, but they didn't post any Dyno graphs to show for an example.

Going from the 195 to the 180 netted them 2HP for a 15 degree drop.
Keeping in mind that the % of gain depends on the % of input.

On a 90-100HP engine 2% gain is only going to give 2 or so HP.

but when you have 300HP, 2% becomes substantial.
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

Seems to be a popular debate on many forums!

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/showthread.php?t=1507224&page=2

Originally Posted by Bill's ZO6

This is a reply to 4enjoyn.

The dyno test before the additions for rear wheel numbers was 450.5 rwhp and 423.4 torque.
After the additions: 484.4 rwhp and 466.4 torque.

are you saying you picked up 33.9 rwhp and 43 rwtq from simply replacing the thermostat.

that has got to be the best bang for the buck mod. i've heard of.
therm. $20, gain 33 and 43, that's less than $1 per rear wheel ft lb. gain.
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
Hey Logres, and Roadboss,where do your cars fit into the Quickest Lincolns thread?I didn't see either of your cars listed.Tiff pushed my 160 thermostat to 14.06 at nearly 100MPHthe nearly 100MPH being the "KEY", as MPH is what HP is based off of.what kind of ET's are you two guys running and with what mods?Just curious::wtf::
[/div]

I haven't gotten my car to the track yet but I hope to this spring. We got rained out at both Smack Down meets that were supposed to occur in the Spring and Fall this year. I also finally found some tires that would hook up for me as well. I was hoping that I would also have a chance to dial it up a bit as we have 106 Octane available and we have a pulley to take us to 18+lbs boost.
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
Hey Logres, and Roadboss,where do your cars fit into the Quickest Lincolns thread?I didn't see either of your cars listed.Tiff pushed my 160 thermostat to 14.06 at nearly 100MPHthe nearly 100MPH being the "KEY", as MPH is what HP is based off of.what kind of ET's are you two guys running and with what mods?Just curious::wtf::
[/div]

I'll be getting on a dyno in the next week or two, but I am into the 13's.

I'll also be posting my mods at that time, since I've got too many to list multiple times.
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
Seems to be a popular debate on many forums!http://forums.corvetteforum.com/showthread.php?t=1507224&page=2Originally Posted by Bill's ZO6This is a reply to 4enjoyn.The dyno test before the additions for rear wheel numbers was 450.5 rwhp and 423.4 torque. After the additions: 484.4 rwhp and 466.4 torque. are you saying you picked up 33.9 rwhp and 43 rwtq from simply replacing the thermostat. that has got to be the best bang for the buck mod. i've heard of.therm. $20, gain 33 and 43, that's less than $1 per rear wheel ft lb. gain.
[/div]

Yeah, and I'm sure putting a 160 tstat in a NASCAR will improve its performance also.

The discussion here involved NA Mark 8's.
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
I dont guess my intake air charge temp fell any substantial amount according to what you say.
[/div]

What objective evidence do you have then?
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

Point being,
it worked on a 3800 N/A v-6
it worked on a N/A Z06

I guess there's something really different about a N/A Mark 8 that makes it DEFY Physics?
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]I dont guess my intake air charge temp fell any substantial amount according to what you say.[/div]What objective evidence do you have then?
[/div]

Do you have any objective evidence to prove otherwise?



I notice that the original poster suggested,

Using USED GEARS in the rear end

Removing the Snorkle/Air silencer

Using a transgo shift kit.

but, you didn't want to "pick apart" his post.
I see a pattern here.

Like I said before.. FEEL FREE to use whatever thermostat that gives you a "WARM FUZZY FEELING INSIDE".
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]eah, and I'm sure putting a 160 tstat in a NASCAR will improve its performance also.
[/div]

I doubt putting a thermostat in a "SANCTIONING BODY" will increase it's perfomance but what do "I" know?

That's like saying putting a TURBO on a NHRA will make it faster!
(rolls eyes}
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
[/div]I haven't gotten my car to the track yet but I hope to this spring. We got rained out at both Smack Down meets that were supposed to occur in the Spring and Fall this year. I also finally found some tires that would hook up for me as well. I was hoping that I would also have a chance to dial it up a bit as we have 106 Octane available and we have a pulley to take us to 18+lbs boost.
[/div]

Roadboss, that attachment pic is just SICK sir.. SICK I tell ya!
:eek:
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
Do you have any objective evidence to prove otherwise?I notice that the original poster suggested,Using USED GEARS in the rear endRemoving the Snorkle/Air silencerUsing a transgo shift kit.but, you didn't want to "pick apart" his post.I see a pattern here.Like I said before.. FEEL FREE to use whatever thermostat that gives you a "WARM FUZZY FEELING INSIDE".
[/div]

Warm fuzzies can be more easily obtained when someone recommends something that has some fact behind it. My goal here is to help the original poster by asking for something he would probably want before spending some cash and doing some work. When folks ask for advice, especially the inexperienced, they are depending on people who know to give them something sound. Am I that person? In this case, no...that is why I did some research, and when someone who has done some dyno tunes with various tstats in our engines says that going to a 160 reduces power, that goes a lot farther than someone who theorizes that a 30 degree drop in coolant temperature correlates to a 30 degree temp drop in air charge, which it does not. Send a PM to ponyfreak, Lonnie, or Mad1stGen and they'll all say the same thing.
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong][div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]eah, and I'm sure putting a 160 tstat in a NASCAR will improve its performance also.[/div]I doubt putting a thermostat in a "SANCTIONING BODY" will increase it's perfomance but what do "I" know?That's like saying putting a TURBO on a NHRA will make it faster!(rolls eyes}
[/div]

I'm happy to see you're not taking this personal.
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]Do you have any objective evidence to prove otherwise?I notice that the original poster suggested,Using USED GEARS in the rear endRemoving the Snorkle/Air silencerUsing a transgo shift kit.but, you didn't want to "pick apart" his post.I see a pattern here.Like I said before.. FEEL FREE to use whatever thermostat that gives you a "WARM FUZZY FEELING INSIDE".[/div]Warm fuzzies can be more easily obtained when someone recommends something that has some fact behind it. My goal here is to help the original poster by asking for something he would probably want before spending some cash and doing some work. When folks ask for advice, especially the inexperienced, they are depending on people who know to give them something sound. Am I that person? In this case, no...that is why I did some research, and when someone who has done some dyno tunes with various tstats in our engines says that going to a 160 reduces power, that goes a lot farther than someone who theorizes that a 30 degree drop in coolant temperature correlates to a 30 degree temp drop in air charge, which it does not. Send a PM to ponyfreak, Lonnie, or Mad1stGen and they'll all say the same thing.
[/div]

Brrr,it's cold outside!

I went out, started my car.. sat in it while it idled for roughly 20 minutes.

Jumped out opened the hood and shot the X-over tube where it exits the intake
182 degrees
Then I shot the intake tube closest to the back of the Alternator
161 degrees
Then I shot the intake tube closest to the Throttle Body
136 degress

I was suprised at the temp difference between the front of the intake and the back of the intake.. Crazy.

I "assumed" the rear of the intake would have been hotter, go figure.

anyways, regardless... this is all purely speculative.

Later when Tiff comes back I'll do the same on her car and post the temps measured at the same locations as above.

Do I presume to have more knowledge than the people you listed above?
NO.

Am I saying the people you listed above are wrong?
NO.

I can only speak from my own experience, simple as that.

As stated before, "your mileage may vary".
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

Just for conversational/argumentative sake.

before I put the thermostat in my car the temp gauge was at the top of the "M" and top of the "O" under hard driving.

now it stays "welded" to the bottom leg of the "L" under all conditions pretty much.

Before the temp would swing from bottom of "M" to top of "O" most driving situations, now the temp swing is from bottom of the "L" to mid way up the "L"

how's that for some indisputable scientifically gatherd irreputable evidence?
HAHA

anyways..I'll be glad when 5'clock gets here because then I can begin my weekly 1.5 hour trip to the dragtrip the DA right now is -533 ft!

COME ON 5 oclock!

Have fun and be safe out there
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
Just for conversational/argumentative sake.before I put the thermostat in my car the temp gauge was at the top of the "M" and top of the "O" under hard driving.now it stays "welded" to the bottom leg of the "L" under all conditions pretty much.Before the temp would swing from bottom of "M" to top of "O" most driving situations, now the temp swing is from bottom of the "L" to mid way up the "L"how's that for some indisputable scientifically gatherd irreputable evidence?HAHAanyways..I'll be glad when 5'clock gets here because then I can begin my weekly 1.5 hour trip to the dragtrip the DA right now is -533 ft!COME ON 5 oclock!Have fun and be safe out there
[/div]

My car also runs on the "L", but I've got a 180 tstat. The greatest impacts to coolant temp that I've experienced are bypassing the OEM tranny cooler into a separate one, and using Water Wetter. I haven't tried using an aftermarket radiator.
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

FWIW I run a 160 T-stat.

I agree with everyone. :+

Roadboss is spot on that the T-stat only determines the opening of the coolant flow to the radiator. My car does NOT run 160*, the same as anyone's car with a 180 T-stat does not run 180*.

When I bypassed the OEM tranny cooler for the 40K aftermarket tranny cooler, both the engine and tranny benefitted.

The cooling fan mod is my secret weapon at the track. It may not be so much that it runs cooler as it is more the point it runs more consistant. It still runs hotter and slower on hot days. But with the 160 T-stat, I have the digital fan controller set to turn on the fan at 180* and turn off the fan at 165*. On cool days it will cycle much quicker than on hot days when it will have much more on time.

Once at the track the fan mod quit working. After a couple runs, I was forced to the pits to cool down... I couldn't bear the thought of watching the ETs get slower with each pass. Then at SSHS6 my fan motor was malfunctioning. Luckily the weather was very cool and cooperative as well as the track being crowded allowing more cool down time between runs where I was able to maintain a certain level of consistency.
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

Damn, this turned into a huge debate.

Yes, lowering water temp will lower intake air temp. Not by as much as the decrease in the water temps, but it will lower the air temp.

I said above, most power comes from hottest possible engine temps with the lowest possible intake temps. You'll gain more from cooling down the intake than you'll lose from cooling down the combustion chamber. So, a colder thermostat, within reason, will cause you to gain a small amount of hp. It will also cause a small amount of additional wear.

Will you notice the additional hp? Certainly not, seat of the pants. Maybe, if you drag race regularly.

Will you notice the additional wear? Highly doubtful, considering these motors generally don't fail from engine wear. And the way we treat them, we can't be too picky about that small amount of wear.

And, you can take it too far. If the engine gets too cold, the EEC won't allow full timing. I think that's the major reason to stay away from a 160° stat. But with a proper tune that shouldn't make a difference. On my mark, I ran a 180° stat. I can't say i noticed an increase in power or wear.

On my boat, I run a 145° thermostat, and coolant temp usually stays in the 160° range. Unless a rock sticks the thermostat open or a bunch of seaweed blocks the water intake. (both happened this summer). At those temperatures, I am seeing some excessive wear, per blackstone. But i think the culprit is the oil temperature, it's only getting to 140° or so. I will be adding an oil thermostat in the spring to combat this, and switching to mobil 1 v-twin 20w50 oil. Oil needs to be in the 180° to 210° range to get the rated viscosity.
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
Will you notice the additional hp? Certainly not, seat of the pants. Maybe, if you drag race regularly.
[/div]

This is the effect of heatsoak that prompted me to take further action.

http://www.lincolnsclub.org/forum/user_files/1879.jpg

Ambient Temps / IAT Temps / Time between runs

85 / 99
86 / 101 / 0:22
87 / 107 / 0:18
87 / 111 / 0:25

90 / 103 / 1:11
90 / 107 / 0:29
90 / 107 / 0:10

90 / 103 / 1:00
90 / 105 / 0:26
90 / 102 / 0:27
90 / 107 / 0:17

Notice above how the IAT temperatures ramp up hot-lapping and the easily visible increase in the quarter mile ET graph.

This is now a fair comparison:

http://www.lincolnsclub.org/forum/user_files/1880.jpg

Ambient Temps / IAT Temps / Time between runs

66.90 / 76
66.90 / 79 / 0:08
66.90 / 79 / 0:05

68.30 / 87 / 0:38
69.70 / 89 / 0:05

71.10 / 87 / 0:43
71.42 / 88 / 0:04
71.73 / 92 / 0:11
72.05 / 95 / 0:05
72.37 / 95 / 0:05
72.68 / 98 / 0:10
73.00 / 99 / 0:05
73.00 / 99 / 0:05

Still showing heat soak(but at a slower pace and much less prevalent) and the ETs are significantly more consistent(the high 'peak'(13.878) in the second graph indicates an attempt to stall the converter at launch).
 
RE: Bang for the Buck Gen 1 Mods..

Great thread in the beginning for newbs to the MK VIII like me. Been around plenty of cars and rods and all that info above is sage advice.

We all have our opinions too just like any board. }(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top