Do we have any rpoof or UOAs that show higher wear when using a 160F T-Stat
- Thread starter Alex D
- Start date
- Status
I posted a decent UOA yesterday for my truck that uses a 160 stat.
I'm not knocking a 260 F stat-there may and probably are some vehicles that run better with one. But they would be few and far beween. Fuel eficiency, deposits, varnish buildup, and performance will be better with the higher stat. If you need a 160 stat to keep the engine cool in summer there may be another problem. The stat shouldnt allow the engine to run hotter when the cooling is taxed to the limit- ie hot weather, a.c. on and going up a steep hill. It may appear to help BC before you get to the hill the engine may be slightly cooler and that may save it.
I assume there may be higher performance stats out there that will open a bit wider and possibly quicker to control the temp at the specified setpoint.
So I would be just be very careful with the lower temp stat-especially in colder weather. Just an opinion though.
I assume there may be higher performance stats out there that will open a bit wider and possibly quicker to control the temp at the specified setpoint.
So I would be just be very careful with the lower temp stat-especially in colder weather. Just an opinion though.
I am sure a 260F thermostat will make your engine run warm enough.......just kidding.
varnish, deposits??? hmmmm .... I was asking the above question to see if we have some facts about this issue. We can SWAG all day long. Hypertech has been selling these 160F T-Stats for a long time and over at the corvette forum a lot of people have them in their cars. I have yet to see just one post or comment that they are actually hurting your engine. All posts and comments about how bad they are are based on "beliefs" and "feelings". SBC350gearhead's UOA would serve as some proof that they do not increase wear or even oil contamination with fuel or water. See his post mentioned above. He's been using a 160F T-Stat for over 35,000 miles on his 350 in the summer and winter in the upper midwest.
Do we have anymore UOAs of cars with a 160F T-Stat??
varnish, deposits??? hmmmm .... I was asking the above question to see if we have some facts about this issue. We can SWAG all day long. Hypertech has been selling these 160F T-Stats for a long time and over at the corvette forum a lot of people have them in their cars. I have yet to see just one post or comment that they are actually hurting your engine. All posts and comments about how bad they are are based on "beliefs" and "feelings". SBC350gearhead's UOA would serve as some proof that they do not increase wear or even oil contamination with fuel or water. See his post mentioned above. He's been using a 160F T-Stat for over 35,000 miles on his 350 in the summer and winter in the upper midwest.
Do we have anymore UOAs of cars with a 160F T-Stat??
quote:
Originally posted by Al:
I'm not knocking a 260 F stat-there may and probably are some vehicles that run better with one. But they would be few and far beween. Fuel eficiency, deposits, varnish buildup, and performance will be better with the higher stat. If you need a 160 stat to keep the engine cool in summer there may be another problem. The stat shouldnt allow the engine to run hotter when the cooling is taxed to the limit- ie hot weather, a.c. on and going up a steep hill. It may appear to help BC before you get to the hill the engine may be slightly cooler and that may save it.
I assume there may be higher performance stats out there that will open a bit wider and possibly quicker to control the temp at the specified setpoint.
So I would be just be very careful with the lower temp stat-especially in colder weather. Just an opinion though.
- Status
Similar threads
