[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by wnta1ss

I had TWO of the Mishimoto thermostats crap out, both with just a few months of use. JUNK.

IMO, go with a Katech thermostat if you want to make a change from stock. My experience with their thermostat was that it lasts for years, instead of just a few months like both Mishimotos had.

[ctrlz]

A similar discussion:
https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=584809

[Katech_Zach]

We have a few different temperature thermostats available, all are based on the GM piece and will not fail

[lt4camaro]

Originally Posted by s346k

in an effort to push the cooler temps is more power agenda - what performance gains did you see by using a 160 tstat?

Overall if the entire engine, intake manifold, throttle body etc is cooler there would be a small HP gain. But one must think of the less chances of power loss due to timing being pulled at the higher temps.

[s346k]

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

Overall if the entire engine, intake manifold, throttle body etc is cooler there would be a small HP gain. But one must think of the less chances of power loss due to timing being pulled at the higher temps.

for the sake of discussion, let's bs for a minute.

my car runs 178-188. let's say 183 average.
you said yours is high 160s-low 170s. let's call it 170 average.

how much difference is 13* in coolant temp going to make between 170-183? we should further break this down between 93 & e85, because you know e85 is far more resilient to knock.

anecdotal story: my car has never knocked, on 93 or ethanol, as a result of the engine tune. even when it was lean after making some changes, still no knock.

[lt4camaro]

Originally Posted by s346k

for the sake of discussion, let's bs for a minute.

my car runs 178-188. let's say 183 average.
you said yours is high 160s-low 170s. let's call it 170 average.

how much difference is 13* in coolant temp going to make between 170-183? we should further break this down between 93 & e85, because you know e85 is far more resilient to knock.

anecdotal story: my car has never knocked, on 93 or ethanol, as a result of the engine tune. even when it was lean after making some changes, still no knock.

Go and monitor multiple dyno pulls on the same engine and do not alter the tune and see the difference as the engines water temps go up or down. Not uncommon to see a 1% difference. Also monitor timing retard , the ecm is very sensitive to timing and temps of AITs and water temps. Heat, high compression, and very sensitve knock sensors all promote knock, timing is pulled to prevent and or stop knock = power loss. I will take gains in HP no matter how small. Nickles and dimes eventually add up to dollars.

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by s346k

for the sake of discussion, let's bs for a minute.

my car runs 178-188. let's say 183 average.
you said yours is high 160s-low 170s. let's call it 170 average.

how much difference is 13* in coolant temp going to make between 170-183? we should further break this down between 93 & e85, because you know e85 is far more resilient to knock.

anecdotal story: my car has never knocked, on 93 or ethanol, as a result of the engine tune. even when it was lean after making some changes, still no knock.

What power level are we talking about?

[s346k]

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

Go and monitor multiple dyno pulls on the same engine and do not alter the tune and see the difference as the engines water temps go up or down. Not uncommon to see a 1% difference. Also monitor timing retard , the ecm is very sensitive to timing and temps of AITs and water temps. Heat, high compression, and very sensitve knock sensors all promote knock, timing is pulled to prevent and or stop knock = power loss. I will take gains in HP no matter how small. Nickles and dimes eventually add up to dollars.

i have. i've monitored my cars and several others over the years. dynos, tracks, street pulls you name it. there was never enough of a difference to confirm or deny. 1% hp at 500 or even 800 isnt repeatable enough to be absolute. i guess my question is: why replace a perfectly good thermostat proven to last 100k miles/10 years? when it has no bearing on performance.

Originally Posted by Joshinator99

What power level are we talking about?

any power level operating in that coolant temp range. the less power we're talking, the less difference will be seen. this thread is low power. stock to bolt on na lt1 is minute to no difference. certainly not worth taking apart a newish car and replacing a known oem part with one of the aftermarket parts containing the highest failure rate in the industry.

[Essmotorsports]

https://youtu.be/UWdvHIq3DWc

Opens up options for thermostats. Also came with 160 but I switched to 174.

[radz28]

Keep the comments respectful or post somewhere else.

[Smokin19]

I am running this Moto rad 160 stat in my build. I don't track the car but, have run it hard in 95 degree temps with no problems. I also like that it's made of billet aluminum (manufactured by AMP) and don't have to worry about a belt break taking out the plastic OEM. They are well known in the automotive industry.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by Smokin19

I am running this Moto rad 160 stat in my build. I don't track the car but, have run it hard in 95 degree temps with no problems. I also like that it's made of billet aluminum (manufactured by AMP) and don't have to worry about a belt break taking out the plastic OEM. They are well known in the automotive industry.

I've been kicking around the idea of a billet t-stat housing, too. It's less hard to justify when you put it into a context like that. I hate coolant though... lol. I'll be hating it more if a belt does break and smack that plastic OEM housing...

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by Smokin19

I am running this Moto rad 160 stat in my build. I don't track the car but, have run it hard in 95 degree temps with no problems. I also like that it's made of billet aluminum (manufactured by AMP) and don't have to worry about a belt break taking out the plastic OEM. They are well known in the automotive industry.

Originally Posted by radz28

I've been kicking around the idea of a billet t-stat housing, too. It's less hard to justify when you put it into a context like that. I hate coolant though... lol. I'll be hating it more if a belt does break and smack that plastic OEM housing...

Although I’m running the Katech tstat and have had zero issues, I gotta admit the idea of the billet housing setup makes a ton of sense!

[KingLT1]

The only reason to run a cooler thermostat would be for a FI application. In a NA setup stock is perfectly fine. LS/LT engines are designed to make best power around 190 degrees. They like to have some heat in them. When you watch youtube and see guys reference heat soak on the dyno, that is in relation to inlet and/or manifold air temps which the ECU uses in reference for spark retard. The timing pull is what costs power not the coolant temps.