160 why this thermostat now

[kbeck59]

I wonder what Torrie at Unleashed's thoughts on the160° t-stat would be ?

I'm thinkng about  PM ing him and ask him to chime in .

 

[BiGMaC]

http://autos.yahoo.com/maintain/repairqa/fluids_heat_air_conditioning/ques019_2.html

FYI. I'm Tom

Cool and concise article.  I can accept the statements even without knowing the author and with the "can =possibly" sections.  So no debate and points well taken.  :beer2:

I assume LMS, like any reputable tuner would,  has tested this recommendation with their vehicles on the dyno and on the street... but that is an assumption on my part, even if aside from the other unanswered CEL question. It may even be specific to the proprietary tune(s) of LMS.

As far as staying in an open loop which is definitely not good... Dave should know in a few minutes of driving if the engine is still at the higher revs of the startup mode at idle when his heater is working already (open T-stat). I think this will answer that question

I'm a bit on the fence in my thinking about it as far as the upper end of operating temp as I think about my first "SHO" summer in Phoenix traffic with ambient air temp 110-125 degrees regularly... is that going to damage my engine, can those two little fans, even in high mode, actually cope with this to keep the engine<195 degrees in stop and go traffic?  The next few months will tell I guess.... here in Phoenix at least i would think that starting to cool things sooner might give a longer run in the optimal operating range at least in the summer.

Overall I'm anxious to hear about Dave's real world testing as far as being too cold an operating temp with the colder T-stat... the car will tell him quickly as noted above.

 

[DJE624]

Let me know what you do with your 170.

  Will do. 

 

[DJE624]

The guy that posted right above my last post.

:clown:

:clown:  X2

 

[DJE624]

I will report exactly what I find out and as much as possible.  If I don't like the 160, I'll tell you all and go back to the 170.  No big deal.  (Although now that I put the stock air box back in, it's not going to be as easy as it was swapping TStat's as when I just pulled the tube on the Typhoon.)

 

[BiGMaC]

I will report exactly what I find out and as much as possible.  If I don't like the 160, I'll tell you all and go back to the 170.  No big deal.  (Although now that I put the stock air box back in, it's not going to be as easy as it was swapping TStat's as when I just pulled the tube on the Typhoon.)

Thanks Dave!

 

[Larrylu]

Lots of interest in your testing Dave!

 

[DJE624]

Thanks Larry.  I hope it comes by Wed so I can get to it on my night off.  I'll do some testing on the 170 Tues night.

 

[explorergotoluvit]

mine will be on it way as well if any problems ill post

 

[DJE624]

Sounds good. It will be great to have another opinion.  Especially in another model.

 

[BiGMaC]

I nkow the weather's bad and real life closes in... but I'll keep watching  :lurk:  ... very interested!!

 

[JMR76]

I tried the 160 and I'm going back to the 170.  Granted I only tried for 1 day, but I put 75 miles on, highway and stop and go.  Cycled off on about 10 times with 3 total cool downs.

160 ran 2-3 degrees warmer at cruising and highway speeds.  Usually ran 186-189 cruising up to 190 sometimes.  Stop and go it ran 182-187.  Downhill off throttle or after just getting on throttle it would dip to 172, but go back up into mid 180's quick.

Put 170 back and it ran like it did before right away.  Likes 182-185, sometimes 188, but rarely and only on light constant throttle up hill.  It regularly dips down to 177-178.

Fans had no impact.  They were always on at 178+ (I have to get that changed).

Granted, 160 would cool down further AFTER a hard run, but for me 170 is more consistent and run a few degrees cooler at normal driving.

 

[68_GT]

I tried the 160 and I'm going back to the 170.  Granted I only tried for 1 day, but I put 75 miles on, highway and stop and go.  Cycled off on about 10 times with 3 total cool downs.

160 ran 2-3 degrees warmer at cruising and highway speeds.  Usually ran 186-189 cruising up to 190 sometimes.  Stop and go it ran 182-187.  Downhill off throttle or after just getting on throttle it would dip to 172, but go back up into mid 180's quick.

Put 170 back and it ran like it did before right away.  Likes 182-185, sometimes 188, but rarely and only on light constant throttle up hill.  It regularly dips down to 177-178.

Fans had no impact.  They were always on at 178+ (I have to get that changed).

Granted, 160 would cool down further AFTER a hard run, but for me 170 is more consistent and run a few degrees cooler at normal driving.

that result doesn't surprise me. Looking forward to more testing. The Reiche racing t-stats are hand made that's why they cost more. I've had them before and nothing ever performed as well as his.

 

[BiGMaC]

I tried the 160 and I'm going back to the 170.  Granted I only tried for 1 day, but I put 75 miles on, highway and stop and go.  Cycled off on about 10 times with 3 total cool downs.

160 ran 2-3 degrees warmer at cruising and highway speeds.  Usually ran 186-189 cruising up to 190 sometimes.  Stop and go it ran 182-187.  Downhill off throttle or after just getting on throttle it would dip to 172, but go back up into mid 180's quick.

Put 170 back and it ran like it did before right away.  Likes 182-185, sometimes 188, but rarely and only on light constant throttle up hill.  It regularly dips down to 177-178.

Fans had no impact.  They were always on at 178+ (I have to get that changed).

Granted, 160 would cool down further AFTER a hard run, but for me 170 is more consistent and run a few degrees cooler at normal driving.

Thanks for the report JMR... interesting.  It makes me think ... Wonder if there is a significant flow restriction in the 160 due to not fully opening (spring/man defect, etc.. Maybe all of them, Maybe just the one you used.

IMHO you should report this... call them... to LMS and ask for a replacement, because this one clearly doesn't do what it should if the engine is cooler with the 170.

Keep the reports going .... more info is better.

 

[JMR76]

I'm just keeping the 170.  I did report it and ask for fan adjustments.  It's a little different made than stock and the 170, maybe the hot side and cold side issue. 

My guess would be it's working as designed (maybe not for our vehicle though) but if it cold side instead of hot side, it takes longer to open cause that cold side coolant stays pretty cold for a while keeping the housing cool and once it opens, it equalizes and the TS will remain open longer.  Therefor the 160 will cool down more after opening but once closed again the cycle repeats.

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

We are moving to a 160* for various reasons. #1 is as the factory is a 180, the step to 170 was only a minor change. As these cars are making more and more power it benefits them even more to have a cooler starting point. #2. We worked with a Tier 1 OEM supplier to develop this new thermostat to ensure the highest quality and performance available. We also wanted a thermostat that is a true direct replacement, many thermostats we sold in the past were not a true direct fit. While they worked in certain applications they sometimes needed unique gaskets, spacers, or other adapters to work properly. We want our customers to have a trouble free experience, and part of this is ensuring the items we sell can use OEM designed and approved gaskets. Imagine being on a road trip and having a "unique" gasket fail. Where do you get one from? With our new thermostats those application issues are gone, so now you could get a production gasket and be back on the road quickly.

I realize that is a rare possibility, but it's just an insight into why we make changes on product offerings. We are always looking for ways to improve our offerings, and better service our customer's needs. Pushing the envelope means developing new and better products. This is what we do every day, and what makes us unique. We are always finding new ways to make our offerings better than before, and this is just one of those items that we developed for that.

 

[4DRHTRD]

Others may feel that the 170 t-stat is just fine for the ecoboost and works well, maybe better than the 160. Heck many people say not to change it at all from stock.
It's a great debate but Reische makes a great t-stat and it works very well. Livernois has decided to change theirs but I still agree with Reische and will stick with them.

 

[DJE624]

I have been running my 160 for a couple weeks now.  Weather has been in the teens and up close to 50.  I have not even had a hint of a problem.  I know I am running cooler but you wouldn't even notice it daily driving.  I'm sure I'll be very happy having it at the track next week.  In the meantime, I'll be making a six hour each way trip this coming Wednesday and Thursday. I'll see how the temps hold doing 70's for several hours straight.

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

I tried the 160 and I'm going back to the 170.  Granted I only tried for 1 day, but I put 75 miles on, highway and stop and go.  Cycled off on about 10 times with 3 total cool downs.

160 ran 2-3 degrees warmer at cruising and highway speeds.  Usually ran 186-189 cruising up to 190 sometimes.  Stop and go it ran 182-187.  Downhill off throttle or after just getting on throttle it would dip to 172, but go back up into mid 180's quick.

Put 170 back and it ran like it did before right away.  Likes 182-185, sometimes 188, but rarely and only on light constant throttle up hill.  It regularly dips down to 177-178.

Fans had no impact.  They were always on at 178+ (I have to get that changed).

Granted, 160 would cool down further AFTER a hard run, but for me 170 is more consistent and run a few degrees cooler at normal driving.

Sorry for missing some of the details in this post, as you can see last nights post was rather late. It sounds like the cooling system wasn't burped properly. Large heat fluctuations like this are a tell tale sign of an air pocket being trapped in the system.

I am not certain where anyone would get the idea that our thermostats are made incorrectly. They are made by the same OEM supplier that makes Ford thermostats, so they are made based on the OE design. Implying ours are made incorrectly also suggests the OEM stat is made incorrectly. Unfortunately, these statements that were made about the design of our thermostat were not based on facts, just like when people posted that the cars would run too cold and go into open loop, or never leave warm up mode. Neither of these accusations are true, and it's unfortunate that misinformation is being put out there about the products we have designed to help better the community, and the performance of these great vehicles.

 

[SHOdded]

One way or the other, I would like to see technical data quantifying the benefits of non-OEM-temp TStats, especially as they relate to the EB engines in this case.  More power?  More MPG?  Better engine life?  Effect on emissions?  What and how much?  Is the benefit mostly in the initial warmup period?