|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,528
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,528 |
Originally posted by Ray:
hey, svttour;
you do realize that your original SVT engine was cam driven, as well?
Just a little off topic, sorry.
Ray
He just specified "cam" cause he just came back form 3 harships using EWP's. Right Sam?
XL
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,089
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,089 |
Originally posted by liquidX:
Originally posted by Ray:
hey, svttour;
you do realize that your original SVT engine was cam driven, as well?
Just a little off topic, sorry.
Ray
He just specified "cam" cause he just came back form 3 harships using EWP's. Right Sam?
XL
Yea I have a 2001 3L with 99 heads and svt cams. I cut the cam off of the intake cam on the front head for these cams to be able to work with the 99 heads. Since then I have gone through 2 waterpump and I am on the 3rd. I am also going back to the cam driven waterpump via a set of SVT cams I bought from Pope not too long ago. I also have a set of 2001 oval port heads that kinger PnP and port matched to the svt intakes for me. I am awaiting my new block and I will be back to normal in no time. These current cams that fit 99 3L heads are sold already and someone is interested in my Electric waterpump w/ goodies.
So my question still is what T-stat should I go with I saw 160F but then some say no. If there is no real answer soon given FLs conditions and the mods I have done to the car then I will just stick with a stock T-stat. BTW in order to run the EWP I had to remove the T-stat and run a controller.
Please back on topic.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Man, that is why I originially built my hybrid instead of using the 3L heads. I put in the 3L valves but kept my stock heads mainly for the waterpump issues. I felt the stock pump with updated impeller was sufficient and more reliable. Plus the money I saved on the pump was equivalent to the valve work. I loved that motor! Or those heads I should say.  Now quickSVT has them and hasn't used them. If I were you and DIDN't have a way to control fan temps and other factors like timing, I'd just stick with stock. If I had time to experiment and pin down just what benefits the 160 may give with special tuning, then I might try it. Those three things are the deciding factor, time, tuning, or no-worries use what is designed.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 710
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 710 |
Originally posted by BSOELMAN:
Just an observation on my part here, I tried to use the afformentioned 160 degree 96 mustang t-stat. when comparing the original aka CORRECT stat to the mustang stat you will notice the the mustang stat is missing the lower portion wich fits into the bottom port in the thermostat housing, used to control the flow of coolant through the housing. I went ahead and installed the mustang one despite the visual differences. I then began to have overheating issues. Not boiling over overheating but it would run up towards the top of the guage at an idle, with the rpms up to 2000 or so it would come back down. But also going down the road it would definatly run cooler than normal. I recently switched back to the CORRECT stat and havent had a problem since. My conclusion is that the Correct stat is desinged for our cars and the one for the mustang is not.
You must have had air in your system, installed backwards, or something.... the mustang 'shorty' t-stat works fine.
morbid
2000 Contour SVT (black)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015 |
Originally posted by warmonger:
Man, that is why I originially built my hybrid instead of using the 3L heads. I put in the 3L valves but kept my stock heads mainly for the waterpump issues. I felt the stock pump with updated impeller was sufficient and more reliable. Plus the money I saved on the pump was equivalent to the valve work.
I loved that motor! Or those heads I should say.
Now quickSVT has them and hasn't used them.
If I were you and DIDN't have a way to control fan temps and other factors like timing, I'd just stick with stock. If I had time to experiment and pin down just what benefits the 160 may give with special tuning, then I might try it.
Those three things are the deciding factor, time, tuning, or no-worries use what is designed.
Have him sell those heads to me, Tom!
BSOLEMAN - I was gonna say you must've installed the t-stat backwards, too. I have had ZERO issues with my shorty 160F stat.
2000 SVT Turbo 295hp/269ftlb@12psi
#1 for Bendix Brakes Kits!
Knuckles rebuilt w/new bearings $55
AUSSIE ENDLINKS $70
Gutted pre-cats $80/set
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,621
Redneck Troll
|
|
Redneck Troll
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,621 |
What it boils down to (pun intended) is that a lower temp t-stat can provide better power (and even economy by adding timing at part throttle cruise in some cases) by reducing under hood temps as well as combustion temps. Now, key factor here, your cooling system must have some overhead included in order to take advantage of the lower t-stat. If your cooling system still runs up to stock temps after installing a lower stat, you simply need some help. Things like adding Water Wetter, turning the fans on sooner, enabling longer duty cycles for the fans, swapping in bigger/better fans, swapping in a larger radiator, etc. can all help improve this "overhead" in a given cooling system. Just for reference sakes: In my Trans Am, I'm up to 38 degrees of ignition advance on mid grade 89-90 octane (40 worked without ping, but netted no gains, so I went back to 38) at cruise throttle positions and pull down 26 mpg with old school iron block and iron headed V8. All due to a 160 stat, a cooling system that can handle the overhead, and careful logging/tuning. At stock temps (210-220ish), I had ping at 30-32 degrees depending on conditions with premium fuel. I can sit in totally locked traffic on a 100+ degree day with the AC at full blast and not go over 165-170 degrees with the stock radiator. Of course with the new 383 I'll have to get a 3 row aluminum jobbie, but I don't forsee any problems running low temps on that combo as well. 
http://www.bnmotorsports.com
"And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my CEG brothers. And you will know I am the Moderator when I lay my vengeance upon you."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 540
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 540 |
Quote:
What it boils down to (pun intended) is that a lower temp t-stat can provide better power (and even economy by adding timing at part throttle cruise in some cases) by reducing under hood temps as well as combustion temps. Now, key factor here, your cooling system must have some overhead included in order to take advantage of the lower t-stat.
I think you eloquently stated in two sentences what I was trying to say in 4-5 paragraphs. 
'98 SVT Red/midnight blue - a few mods
E0 wheels for sale - PM me
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,528
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,528 |
So in a nutshell for those that only speak English, it basically boils down to this...If you want to lower your operating temp, you need to do much more than just replace your thermo. If you are going with a 160F thermo, you need to lower your ambiance temperature in your engine bay to make the setup efficient, otherwise the thermo will be opening up just to let in coolant that has not had the chance to cool yet. So things like cutting the vent on your CF hood, lowering the cooling fan turn on/off temps, or coolant additives such as water wetter, etc... can improve ambiance temp. That way you have a happy fan, happy t-stat, happy coolant, and as a result, a happy engine.  Capiche?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3
Newbie
|
|
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3 |
Originally posted by Hdbngr8:
Here is where you err, Grasshopper. The heat into the system is everything. The t-stat does not cycle as you think. Once it is full open it has no effect on cooling (other than it is a flow restriction). Its function is to limit the minimum coolant temp, not the max. Once you are past full open (assuming you are applying high Hp) now you are at the mercy of the efficiency of the radiator, ambient air temp, vehicle speed, and mass flow rate of the coolant (or engine speed). When you are not adding much heat to the engine (such as highway driving) then your coolant temp will run at the t-stat setting (assuming a clean radiator). Remember Qin = km(Ti-To). (Ti-To) is basically fixed by the t-stat temp and ambient air temp. The only way to vary the heat is to alter the mass flow rate of the coolant (remember heat is a function of the fluid, mass of the fluid, and temperature). Once Qin is greater than that which the radiator can exchange (the equilibrium temp between the t-stat, radiator, and heat in) the temp. will begin to rise assuming constant coolant and air mass flow rates and ambient air temp.
I agree that heat into the engine is everything, and if you can add more heat than the radiator can take out then you cannot control the upper limit of the temps with the thermostat. HOWEVER, I would assume (no practical experience here with the SVT) that the radiator can pull more heat from the coolant, than the motor can add. Which would lead to the thermostat controlling temps again.
I know the radiator in my S10 is terribly undersized (overheating problems in the southwest are common), and I put a lower temp stat in it to help. I can easily add more heat to the coolant with it than the radiator can pull out, so I completely understand the point, I would just think that the SVT radiator would be of high enough effeciancy to not have this issue......perhaps it is also in the same boat as my S10?
At any rate (and back to the question at hand). I can't see any downfalls to a 160* stat. When the temps are low, and the radiator can pull the heat, you will get lower operating temps which will allow for more timing without detonation. However the overall temps in the summer will most likely not be limited by the thermostat, so be sure to keep that in mind if you are tuning yourself, and leave a bit a room for those hot days.
[/novel]
On the lookout for a "new" SVT.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Stazi,
If he was going to finish this engine then he would have last year. I sold those parts to him almost a year and a half ago! I'd expect he would have completed it. I can't remember how to get a hold of him but I bet he'd be willing to let them go if you convinced him. The most important part of the work was the runner shape and the bowl work under the valves, as well as the exhaust valve area. That is where I spent hours hand sanding. The runner where it meets the lower intake I just hit with a rotary sander to finish it off, then sanded longitudnally to clean them up. They don't have the 'fit and finish' so to speak that I put in under the valve seat areas and the exhaust ports as I felt they were less critical. But hell, they worked awesome and if you wanted them to be absolutely perfect you could refine them some more.
As far as the T-stat topic: I'm going to bow out of this one now. I only see some smidgeons of truth in all of these perspectives and I don't feel they change the whole truth or overall perspective on the matter.
I'm going to point out that if it were that easy for the manufacturer to improve their fuel economy and improve their overall CAFE (corporate average) then this would be standard equipment to every car. It obviously has more drawbacks than even I have indicated in that case. Hell, a tstat is cheap and costs the same irregardless of temperature rating! Why wouldn't they just run a 160 then?
Mods like headers are proven to improve torque and fuel economy. These cost a lot more to make than standard manifolds and there are also packaging constraints and pre-cats for emissions. They are therefore a serious improvement to the car but too expensive to be employed on every model for the performance that they gain. Therefore it makes sense that a manufacturer would cut them first to save cash. It also makes sense to drop some cash and change them out first if you are modding your car.
The T-stat temp being the only factor just doesn't make sense; this is additional reinforcement to me besides everything I posted above.
So to each his own.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
