12-25-2005, 02:14 PM
|
#1
|
|
AF Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: chula vista, California
Posts: 76
|
160' thermostat
is it a noticable performance increase i got a 94 3.4L camaro
|
|
|
|
12-25-2005, 03:02 PM
|
#2
|
|
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Orlando, Florida
Posts: 1,364
|
Re: 160' thermostat
if its a factory car and if you live where it get very cold i wouldnt do a 160. Maybe a 180.
Unless those 3.4s run cooler than the thirdgens already but i dont know
__________________
92 z28 camaro 5.7 TPI
current - slp intake runners and base-BBK 52mm throttle body-MSD 8.5mm wires, blaster coil, and 6AL Box-edelbrock headers-160 degree stat.-hotchkis strut tower brace
waiting in the garage - LQ4, milled heads 317 casting (10.5 to 1), hardened pushrods, ported LS6 oil pump, manley dual spings with titanium retainers, MTI X1 cam, hawks longtube headers
|
|
|
|
|
12-25-2005, 04:00 PM
|
#3
|
|
Son of Satan
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: MilesFromNowhere, Indiana
Posts: 4,981
|
Re: 160' thermostat
the 3.4's are prone to overheating...was a very common problem with them i read...i know the 94 3.4 i had overheated if i did over 60 mph so unless its super cold i'd get one and i doubt you will notice any increase in performance...it may help but i doubt it will be noticeable
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
12-25-2005, 04:11 PM
|
#4
|
|
Will Whore For Car Parts
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Port, Michigan
Posts: 2,924
|
Re: 160' thermostat
you will notice a gain if your computer is programed to run a 160 degree thermo (turning the fans on longer etc..)
__________________
1995 Camaro - Z28 - M6 - Hardtop
2007 GMC Sierra 2500HD SLT Classic
-R.I.P. Andy (Hypsi)-
|
|
|
|
|
12-27-2005, 09:18 AM
|
#5
|
|
Backstabbing AF Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Glen Ellyn, Illinois
Posts: 7,529
|
Re: 160' thermostat
This is a more sensable approach. Using a 160* stat you run the potential of not being in closed loop, then you'll notice a difference, starting iwth terrible mileage.
|
|
|
|
|
12-27-2005, 12:30 PM
|
#6
|
|
AF Fanatic
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tenafly, New Jersey
Posts: 4,697
|
Re: 160' thermostat
I ran my 160 for around a year with no tuning or anything, it DID stay cooler, it DID switch to closed loop, and all that other crap. Of course it's better with tuning but it still helps without
__________________
97 Camaro - 2.077 60', 14.745 @ 92.20 - still down, one year later.
194k miles-160* thermo-V8 shocks/springs (V6 rear springs)-3" Magnaflow !cat (3" dynomax bullet) back-SLP CAI-stock boxed LCAs-poly tranny mount and torque arm bushing-custom HPTuners tuning-4.10s/eaton/TA girdle-3.5" alum DS-spohn LCA brackets-prostar skinnies
179.75 RWHP, 204.52 RWTQ
ON ITS WAY: MORE
R.I.P. Andy
87 Benz 190e - DD
01 EX250 - still gotta get my license for this thing
|
|
|
|
|
12-27-2005, 01:21 PM
|
#7
|
|
Backstabbing AF Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Glen Ellyn, Illinois
Posts: 7,529
|
Re: Re: 160' thermostat
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wrightz28
Using a 160* stat you run the POTENTIAL of not being in closed loop,
|
potentially, not definately 'crap'.
2 identical cars with identical setups can run entirely different at different locations (i.e. elevations, temp and humidity, etc.).
|
|
|
|
|
