Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Thermostat temperature


NIAGARA REGION, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 308
Date:
Thermostat temperature
Permalink  
 


I run 180's in my cars, seem to run good. The 38 got up to 215 a couple of time this summer, of course we were driving through Death valley and it was 118 out. If you have a good shroud and air flow through the rad you should never have a problem.



-- Edited by DavyJ on Sunday 16th of December 2012 07:17:27 PM

Attachments
__________________
DavyJ


ONTARIO

Status: Offline
Posts: 4606
Date:
Permalink  
 

Get rid of that $hitty flex fan !! Are they aluminum or brass rads? If they're brass, take them to the recyclers. Another thing, where is the fan located in relation to the shroud? Looking from the top of the fan, half should be protruding out and half should be protruding into the shroud. Electric fans work better too !!



-- Edited by hemi43 on Sunday 16th of December 2012 07:43:07 PM

__________________


ONTARIO

Status: Offline
Posts: 4606
Date:
Permalink  
 

I use a Flex-a-Lite 180 electric fan mounted to an 18X22 dual core aluminum rad. The shroud of the fan covers 100% of the fin surface so there's no chance of losing any flow. The fan flows 3300 CFM, so I know for a fact that I get 3300 CFM of airflow through my rad. Like I said before, the car will idle for hours in the middle of summer with the AC on.
Too many guys use a fan with a Mickey Mouse shroud that doesn't cover the whole rad and that's where they have problems. If you already have too much money in the rads, then at least get a good electric fan/shroud combo like the link below. It will fix your problems !!


BTW, I did not use the fan control that came with it, because I don't like using a temp sensor between the fins. Use a thermocouple mounted directly into your coolant.

http://www.flex-a-lite.com/auto/html/180_black_magic_x-treme.html

edit; I found a picture of my rad !! I hate paying the ridiculous price of aftermarket rads so I built my own. I got this core from Howe racing for $106 and built my own tanks.



 



-- Edited by hemi43 on Sunday 16th of December 2012 09:37:49 PM

__________________


BROCKVILLE, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 655
Date:
Permalink  
 

Seem to recall this was discussed before but what temp thermostat is everyone running? I generally run a 180 in most of my old cars, other seem to think 160 is the way to go, then again others say 195 is better. Perhaps someone could set this up as a poll.



__________________


BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 2047
Date:
Permalink  
 

I like the 160 for peace of mind that if caught in traffic you have some 'lee way" for increase in Temp. Others say the hotter it runs the better [ 195 to 220] Both my cars climb "quite" high when sitting in traffic, especially at the border waiting in line, 64 hit 230 last time & I was $hittin a brick, wishing I never put the guage in, idiot lights don't give you bad nerves.

__________________

I can only please one person a day, Today is not your day!!Tomorrow doesn't look good either !!!!



CLINTON, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 3909
Date:
Permalink  
 

I run 180 in my old motors and 195 in newer cars/trucks

 

I had a 427 Strato Chief that ran great..   no guages   no overheating   no worries  

I like Pete added guages    

drove me nuts..     never again..  

If it starts and runs,  the hell with the oil pressure and rad temperature  

 never again



__________________

 

 



ONTARIO

Status: Offline
Posts: 4606
Date:
Permalink  
 

I run 195 in everything. If your car overheats in traffic, then there's a problem which is usually airflow. I can idle my car in the hottest weather with the AC on and it will not over heat. Best advice I can give is use an aluminum rad and use a shroud.

__________________


NORTH BAY, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 3717
Date:
Permalink  
 

Agreed, i used to run 160 in my older vehicles, then switched over to a 195 after changing out the rad and all hoses and being told it would run better, which i'm sure it seemed like it did. May be just my imagination, but the fuel mileage seemed to improve slightly.

__________________


BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 2047
Date:
Permalink  
 

Have re-core rads in both, shrouds on both, new water pumps & hoses on both, 7 blade flex fan on 64 & 7 blade clutch fan on 52!! 64 will run 160 all day long while moving, 52 runs 195 to 215 on hwy & city in summer, ran 160 in fall. Stop either one in traffic & goes sky high! Going to try & build "duct work" on 52 this winter to direct air flow to rad!! May be losing some up& over the top & bottom of rad???

__________________

I can only please one person a day, Today is not your day!!Tomorrow doesn't look good either !!!!



BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 2047
Date:
Permalink  
 

Fans are where you say, Brass rads & have too much in them to go alum. Also have elect. pusher on 52, comes on at 200F still won't lwr. any more than 5 f. Club member has a 64 Bonniville & he has Alum. rad but his overheats as soon as A/C comes on???? Flex fan helped the 64, slowed down the temp rise!!! Timing is "bang on" on both!!!

__________________

I can only please one person a day, Today is not your day!!Tomorrow doesn't look good either !!!!



ONTARIO

Status: Offline
Posts: 701
Date:
Permalink  
 

dualquadpete wrote:

! May be losing some up& over the top & bottom of rad???


 This is a big problem on alot of cars I see. Too much airflow, recirculating hot air over the top of the rad support back to the front. If your ride is fine while moving, but gets hot in traffic or sitting still, check it out.

 I had a 454ci  '57 Chev here with overheat problems. He had 2 14" electric pullers, and 2 12" pushers on a high end aluminum rad trying to cure the problem. I removed the 12" pushers, (My opinion...pushers suck), built an air dam to seal the hood to the rad support, problem solved. It'll now sit there all day at idle and not get hot.

IMHO, If you need a 160 thermostst to keep your temps in check, you have another issue with your cooling system.



__________________

There is a very fine line between “hobby” and “mental illness.”



COBOURG, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 2145
Date:
Permalink  
 

i would only use what your car came with, your engine is designed to run at a certain temp, a 160 will make it run too cold and that will hurt your fuel economy and hp as well.  a shroud that channels the airflow to ur fan is the best way.  im one talk i dont run shrouds on anything and both my truck and 51 will get hot if they sit long enough idleing,  this is also why its bad to run without a thermostat, the coolant has to stay in the engine to pull the  heat from the block and take it away after the thermostat opens



__________________


ONTARIO

Status: Offline
Posts: 4606
Date:
Permalink  
 

fatstax wrote:

i would only use what your car came with, your engine is designed to run at a certain temp, a 160 will make it run too cold and that will hurt your fuel economy and hp as well.  a shroud that channels the airflow to ur fan is the best way.  im one talk i dont run shrouds on anything and both my truck and 51 will get hot if they sit long enough idleing,  this is also why its bad to run without a thermostat, the coolant has to stay in the engine to pull the  heat from the block and take it away after the thermostat opens


 It's not just fuel economy, but parts will wear quicker at lower temperatures.



__________________


AJAX, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 343
Date:
Permalink  
 

I ran a stock replacement 3 core rad with an aftermarket flex fan and factory shroud in front of a decent 350 in a Nova. Car also had a '69 Camaro style cowl hood on it (which allowed a ton of hot air to escape from the engine compartment). Ran a 180/185 (whatever the number was) thermo and never had an issue with cooling. I could sit in traffic till I ran out of gas and it would not overheat. I heard of a guy years ago who was running a SBC in a Toyota P-up with cooling problems ... he louvered the hood and never had an issue again.

As Hemi mentioned, I have also heard that running a 160 creates accelerated wear on engine components.

__________________

If at first you don't succeed you do have options ... lower your standards or just plain quit are the two I usually choose from :)



LONDON, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 672
Date:
Permalink  
 

The other matter that comes into play is timing.  Pete you say the timing is "dead on", right?  What source are you using for vacuum advance?  It really makes a difference especially in Chevys.  Have  a read of the following.  I have used this for years for the un-believing

 

This was written by a former GM engineer as a response to a similar question on a Camaro board:


As many of you are aware, timing and vacuum advance is one of my favorite subjects, as I was involved in the development of some of those systems in my GM days and I understand it. Many people don't, as there has been very little written about it anywhere that makes sense, and as a result, a lot of folks are under the misunderstanding that vacuum advance somehow compromises performance. Nothing could be further from the truth. I finally sat down the other day and wrote up a primer on the subject, with the objective of helping more folks to understand vacuum advance and how it works together with initial timing and centrifugal advance to optimize all-around operation and performance. I have this as a Word document if anyone wants it sent to them - I've cut-and-pasted it here; it's long, but hopefully it's also informative.

TIMING AND VACUUM ADVANCE 101

The most important concept to understand is that lean mixtures, such as at idle and steady highway cruise, take longer to burn than rich mixtures; idle in particular, as idle mixture is affected by exhaust gas dilution. This requires that lean mixtures have "the fire lit" earlier in the compression cycle (spark timing advanced), allowing more burn time so that peak cylinder pressure is reached just after TDC for peak efficiency and reduced exhaust gas temperature (wasted combustion energy). Rich mixtures, on the other hand, burn faster than lean mixtures, so they need to have "the fire lit" later in the compression cycle (spark timing retarded slightly) so maximum cylinder pressure is still achieved at the same point after TDC as with the lean mixture, for maximum efficiency.

The centrifugal advance system in a distributor advances spark timing purely as a function of engine rpm (irrespective of engine load or operating conditions), with the amount of advance and the rate at which it comes in determined by the weights and springs on top of the autocam mechanism. The amount of advance added by the distributor, combined with initial static timing, is "total timing" (i.e., the 34-36 degrees at high rpm that most SBC's like). Vacuum advance has absolutely nothing to do with total timing or performance, as when the throttle is opened, manifold vacuum drops essentially to zero, and the vacuum advance drops out entirely; it has no part in the "total timing" equation.

At idle, the engine needs additional spark advance in order to fire that lean, diluted mixture earlier in order to develop maximum cylinder pressure at the proper point, so the vacuum advance can (connected to manifold vacuum, not "ported" vacuum - more on that aberration later) is activated by the high manifold vacuum, and adds about 15 degrees of spark advance, on top of the initial static timing setting (i.e., if your static timing is at 10 degrees, at idle it's actually around 25 degrees with the vacuum advance connected). The same thing occurs at steady-state highway cruise; the mixture is lean, takes longer to burn, the load on the engine is low, the manifold vacuum is high, so the vacuum advance is again deployed, and if you had a timing light set up so you could see the balancer as you were going down the highway, you'd see about 50 degrees advance (10 degrees initial, 20-25 degrees from the centrifugal advance, and 15 degrees from the vacuum advance) at steady-state cruise (it only takes about 40 horsepower to cruise at 50mph).

When you accelerate, the mixture is instantly enriched (by the accelerator pump, power valve, etc.), burns faster, doesn't need the additional spark advance, and when the throttle plates open, manifold vacuum drops, and the vacuum advance can returns to zero, retarding the spark timing back to what is provided by the initial static timing plus the centrifugal advance provided by the distributor at that engine rpm; the vacuum advance doesn't come back into play until you back off the gas and manifold vacuum increases again as you return to steady-state cruise, when the mixture again becomes lean.

The key difference is that centrifugal advance (in the distributor autocam via weights and springs) is purely rpm-sensitive; nothing changes it except changes in rpm. Vacuum advance, on the other hand, responds to engine load and rapidly-changing operating conditions, providing the correct degree of spark advance at any point in time based on engine load, to deal with both lean and rich mixture conditions. By today's terms, this was a relatively crude mechanical system, but it did a good job of optimizing engine efficiency, throttle response, fuel economy, and idle cooling, with absolutely ZERO effect on wide-open throttle performance, as vacuum advance is inoperative under wide-open throttle conditions. In modern cars with computerized engine controllers, all those sensors and the controller change both mixture and spark timing 50 to 100 times per second, and we don't even HAVE a distributor any more - it's all electronic.

Now, to the widely-misunderstood manifold-vs.-ported vacuum aberration. After 30-40 years of controlling vacuum advance with full manifold vacuum, along came emissions requirements, years before catalytic converter technology had been developed, and all manner of crude band-aid systems were developed to try and reduce hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust stream. One of these band-aids was "ported spark", which moved the vacuum pickup orifice in the carburetor venturi from below the throttle plate (where it was exposed to full manifold vacuum at idle) to above the throttle plate, where it saw no manifold vacuum at all at idle. This meant the vacuum advance was inoperative at idle (retarding spark timing from its optimum value), and these applications also had VERY low initial static timing (usually 4 degrees or less, and some actually were set at 2 degrees AFTER TDC). This was done in order to increase exhaust gas temperature (due to "lighting the fire late") to improve the effectiveness of the "afterburning" of hydrocarbons by the air injected into the exhaust manifolds by the A.I.R. system; as a result, these engines ran like crap, and an enormous amount of wasted heat energy was transferred through the exhaust port walls into the coolant, causing them to run hot at idle - cylinder pressure fell off, engine temperatures went up, combustion efficiency went down the drain, and fuel economy went down with it.

If you look at the centrifugal advance calibrations for these "ported spark, late-timed" engines, you'll see that instead of having 20 degrees of advance, they had up to 34 degrees of advance in the distributor, in order to get back to the 34-36 degrees "total timing" at high rpm wide-open throttle to get some of the performance back. The vacuum advance still worked at steady-state highway cruise (lean mixture = low emissions), but it was inoperative at idle, which caused all manner of problems - "ported vacuum" was strictly an early, pre-converter crude emissions strategy, and nothing more.

What about the Harry high-school non-vacuum advance polished billet "whizbang" distributors you see in the Summit and Jeg's catalogs? They're JUNK on a street-driven car, but some people keep buying them because they're "race car" parts, so they must be "good for my car" - they're NOT. "Race cars" run at wide-open throttle, rich mixture, full load, and high rpm all the time, so they don't need a system (vacuum advance) to deal with the full range of driving conditions encountered in street operation. Anyone driving a street-driven car without manifold-connected vacuum advance is sacrificing idle cooling, throttle response, engine efficiency, and fuel economy, probably because they don't understand what vacuum advance is, how it works, and what it's for - there are lots of long-time experienced "mechanics" who don't understand the principles and operation of vacuum advance either, so they're not alone.

Vacuum advance calibrations are different between stock engines and modified engines, especially if you have a lot of cam and have relatively low manifold vacuum at idle. Most stock vacuum advance cans aren’t fully-deployed until they see about 15” Hg. Manifold vacuum, so those cans don’t work very well on a modified engine; with less than 15” Hg. at a rough idle, the stock can will “dither” in and out in response to the rapidly-changing manifold vacuum, constantly varying the amount of vacuum advance, which creates an unstable idle. Modified engines with more cam that generate less than 15” Hg. of vacuum at idle need a vacuum advance can that’s fully-deployed at least 1”, preferably 2” of vacuum less than idle vacuum level so idle advance is solid and stable; the Echlin #VC-1810 advance can (about $10 at NAPA) provides the same amount of advance as the stock can (15 degrees), but is fully-deployed at only 8” of vacuum, so there is no variation in idle timing even with a stout cam.

For peak engine performance, driveability, idle cooling and efficiency in a street-driven car, you need vacuum advance, connected to full manifold vacuum. Absolutely. Positively. Don't ask Summit or Jeg's about it – they don’t understand it, they're on commission, and they want to sell "race car" parts.

Written by JohnZ,
Washington, Michigan

 

 

 



__________________


ONTARIO

Status: Offline
Posts: 4606
Date:
Permalink  
 

That was a good article !! I always thought vacuum advance was connected to ported vacuum, and that total timing included it ! I let a computer control my timing now !!

__________________


BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 2047
Date:
Permalink  
 

I may be on the ported fitting!!! When I get feeling better with this "stinking cold" I'll go check them out!! Good article, learned something there!!!!

__________________

I can only please one person a day, Today is not your day!!Tomorrow doesn't look good either !!!!



NORTH BAY, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 3717
Date:
Permalink  
 

Think that was the best article i have read on that. Good posting, enjoyable read.

__________________


THUNDER BAY, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 183
Date:
Permalink  
 

I had my brass rad rebuilt and use a 180 thermostat and a shortened 5 blade fan and no shroud. Never overheats,, as the guy said who rebuilt the rad it will cool anything I put under the hood. I had "overheating problem" with last car, turned out to be my gauge of course.. Usually if your cooling system is well maintained you should not have a problem.

__________________


BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Status: Offline
Posts: 2047
Date:
Permalink  
 

Ya thats what my rad shop said on the 52, "will cool a big block" no problem!!!!

__________________

I can only please one person a day, Today is not your day!!Tomorrow doesn't look good either !!!!

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard