thermostat temp

[Bob Ayers]

You never cease to amaze, Bob. Go look at that graph again and read the paragraphs surrounding it.

If I'm not mistaken, the 195 is in the "GREEN" area, isn't it???? And Vince has already stated that the PCM is tuned for 195....why wouldn't you use 195? And your
point about additional engine wear at 195 ISN'T true.......

But you know, you can use a 180 all you want, I'm certainly not stopping you!!!

 

[Bob Ayers]

I put a 195 in and my hoses get hot now...but not sure if the head and stuff get hot yet...

I'm glad you made the right decision Anthony!!!

 

[TheRoadVirus]

You've gotta be the most hard headed guy I've ever met on the net. Lol. I never said anything about 195 causing more wear.. I was merely making a point that the graph even shows that there is no difference in wear between 195 and 180. It's the middle point, and yes I know that the computer is programmed for 195* hence why I continue to run one. It was just a discussion, at least that's how I'm looking at it. You seem to take it a little far.

 

[Bob Ayers]

I never said anything about 195 causing more wear.. I was merely making a point that the graph even shows that there is no difference in wear between 195 and 180..

"It'd likely be healthier for an engine to run at 180*"

Define "healthier" from your previous post!

 

[TheRoadVirus]

Haha, I just went back and looked and you caught me. I retract that statement. But I don't go back on the fact that 180* won't cause more wear (according to that graph, anyways). Then again, I'm still not 100% on whether 195 is just as healthy for an engine just because of a single graph.

 

[A_G]

I'm glad you made the right decision Anthony!!!

it was a 195 before to. But i dont know why it would stay open. had been hat way since i put it in 6 months ago...bet it was bad out of the box.

 

[blacksnapon]

Haha, I just went back and looked and you caught me. I retract that statement. But I don't go back on the fact that 180* won't cause more wear (according to that graph, anyways). Then again, I'm still not 100% on whether 195 is just as healthy for an engine just because of a single graph.

You have to forget what you know about "older" technology. Then, it was more beneficial to be cooler. Bearing clearances were more (not a good thing to have thin oil). Hot oil is thin oil. Petroleum products are different today. Combustion causes moisture and acids in different amounts than before. Hotter temperatures burn off these harmful contaminates. Remember when finding creamy white substances inside the oil filler cap wasn't a good thing? Now its just that the pcv system hasnt had time to clear the moisture from the crankcase. Short trips cause this as well (not enough heat built up).

 

[d-kuzmen]

You have to forget what you know about "older" technology. Then, it was more beneficial to be cooler. Bearing clearances were more (not a good thing to have thin oil). Hot oil is thin oil. Petroleum products are different today. Combustion causes moisture and acids in different amounts than before. Hotter temperatures burn off these harmful contaminates. Remember when finding creamy white substances inside the oil filler cap wasn't a good thing? Now its just that the pcv system hasnt had time to clear the moisture from the crankcase. Short trips cause this as well (not enough heat built up).

 

[surewhynot]

I wonder if oiling the K&N filter with Amsoil would help...

 

[blacksnapon]

I wonder if oiling the K&N filter with Amsoil would help...

OH GEEBUS! INCOMING!

 

[d-kuzmen]

I wonder if oiling the K&N filter with Amsoil would help...

This should be interesting.

 

[Skandocious]

I wonder if oiling the K&N filter with Amsoil would help...

Oh gawd, leave it to Tony.


But wait a minute... I like Scamsoil

 

[Bob Ayers]

I wonder if oiling the K&N filter with Amsoil would help...

Tony, you really know how to bring tears to a guy's eyes!!

 

[msb71]

What a way to cap off a overdrawn thread, :


MIke

 

[eco]

You have to forget what you know about "older" technology. Then, it was more beneficial to be cooler. Bearing clearances were more (not a good thing to have thin oil). Hot oil is thin oil. Petroleum products are different today. Combustion causes moisture and acids in different amounts than before. Hotter temperatures burn off these harmful contaminates. Remember when finding creamy white substances inside the oil filler cap wasn't a good thing? Now its just that the pcv system hasnt had time to clear the moisture from the crankcase. Short trips cause this as well (not enough heat built up).

How far back in time do you have to go for the above to be a factor? Before the time of the PVC system? That came out in the early-mid 60s and we are talking about late 80s early 90s rigs. They (Ford) were using the 170* and 180* (with 190* as an option) t-stat up till when....1978? After that the 192* was used exclusively. Ironically, that coincides with the onset of stiff emissions standards.

 

[blacksnapon]

How far back in time do you have to go for the above to be a factor? Before the time of the PVC system? That came out in the early-mid 60s and we are talking about late 80s early 90s rigs. They (Ford) were using the 170* and 180* (with 190* as an option) t-stat up till when....1978? After that the 192* was used exclusively. Ironically, that coincides with the onset of stiff emissions standards.

Late 80's-early 90's, things were starting to change. Remember straight weight oil? Bearing clearances were enough that the oil was actually used as a "shock absorber". Clearances decreased, and the oils went to multi weight oils. Some are 0-w-20, or 5-w-20. Thats like water. With clearances that close, "shock absorption" isn't necessary. Aluminum heads, cast iron blocks brought different expansion/contraction rates. Heat just wasnt the same any more. The construction methods used to make an engine and its components, cause more issues. Ever hear techs talking about the one piece stc fitting on the 6.0? Thats used in the navistar version of the 6.0. We cant use it! The rear of the VT365 navistar engine is cast iron, the rear of the 6.0 is cast aluminum. The difference in the amount of flex in the block (yes, the block) makes it necessary to use the 2 piece stc fitting in the fords.

 

[eco]

Late 80's-early 90's, things were starting to change. Remember straight weight oil? Bearing clearances were enough that the oil was actually used as a "shock absorber". Clearances decreased, and the oils went to multi weight oils. Some are 0-w-20, or 5-w-20. Thats like water. With clearances that close, "shock absorption" isn't necessary. Aluminum heads, cast iron blocks brought different expansion/contraction rates. Heat just wasnt the same any more. The construction methods used to make an engine and its components, cause more issues. Ever hear techs talking about the one piece stc fitting on the 6.0? Thats used in the navistar version of the 6.0. We cant use it! The rear of the VT365 navistar engine is cast iron, the rear of the 6.0 is cast aluminum. The difference in the amount of flex in the block (yes, the block) makes it necessary to use the 2 piece stc fitting in the fords.

Are you saying that even if you were to hook up a tuner like tweecer and reprogram the computer to run the air/fuel ratio properly at 180* there would still be problems? You said earlier that you were told that the temp sensor would cause the problems. We arn't dealing with aluminum heads, the STC fitting (not sure what that is exactly) etc. with our generation.

Even though oil ratings, materials used etc. has evolved over time, and things were changing in the late 80s - early 90s, operating temp has remained constant since 1978 - the introduction of stiffer emission laws, which was the REAL reason for that change as well as other changes.

 

[blacksnapon]

Are you saying that even if you were to hook up a tuner like tweecer and reprogram the computer to run the air/fuel ratio properly at 180* there would still be problems? You said earlier that you were told that the temp sensor would cause the problems. We arn't dealing with aluminum heads, the STC fitting (not sure what that is exactly) etc. with our generation.

Even though oil ratings, materials used etc. has evolved over time, and things were changing in the late 80s - early 90s, operating temp has remained constant since 1978 - the introduction of stiffer emission laws, which was the REAL reason for that change as well as other changes.

If you modify things with a tuner, some things will work, others wont (it all depends on what perameters they change). I'm just going on stock configurations. The electronic cooling fans wont even come on until 214-225 degrees. Some vehicles rely on the water temperature to be 195 for the pcm to adjust air fuel mixtures, some rely on oil temp for the major adjustments. With the engines being more "sealed up" today, for emissions, they rely more on engine heat for burning off the harmful contaminates. Yes, the 50-60-70-and some 80s engines, had much more leeway in the temperature variances, not today.

 

[surewhynot]

Tony, you really know how to bring tears to a guy's eyes!!

I figured you could use a good laugh Bob.

 

[Bob Ayers]

How far back in time do you have to go for the above to be a factor? Before the time of the PVC system? That came out in the early-mid 60s and we are talking about late 80s early 90s rigs. They (Ford) were using the 170* and 180* (with 190* as an option) t-stat up till when....1978? After that the 192* was used exclusively. Ironically, that coincides with the onset of stiff emissions standards.

And MPG for Cafe standards!