Some of my best friends are A&P's I like to think they keep me safe.I honestly have no idea why NASCAR does anything as I hate redneck racing lol. And my original question was in relation to swapping thermostats and getting lower temps when the temp is controlled by the efficiency of the radiator. This isn't rocket science either. I've already seen that having a 160 or 170 stat gives the same CHT that I have with stock. So I'm calling "snake oil sales pitch" until someone can prove otherwise with some actual data instead of "because I said so".
No worries about the A&P thing, I got smarter and decided to break airplanes instead of fixing them lol
I have one also Free for the asking! I will ship free also.Wow, this thread has gotten pretty silly with the debates. I'm not getting involved with that...
I just wanted to post up that I have a brand new Evenflo 160 thermostat that I bought from Livernois a while ago that I'm willing to give to someone...I'll even pay shipping. Only thing I ask is the person posts up results after they install it. If your interested just PM me.
The reason I'm not installing is I picked up a Reisch 170 from Lethal when I was there getting other things and decided to go with that instead.
I'm surprised that you are still trying to defend the Evenflo. There are more than enough examples in this thread to show that it does not lower the temps as low as the Reische. Maybe the Evenflo should be change to the Evenflo 175 because saying that it is 160 is just flat out misleading.
Or, is there another reason behind the defense of this Evenflo....
OK, just to go over some more info, the stock stat is technically done in C, not F. I understand what is inscribed in the stock stat, but if you test it, you will see it starts to open around the 178 mark.
The bigger issue is that almost everyone is automatically assuming that making it as cold as possible is the pure goal here. It isn't. Our thermostat opens at the 160 mark (as proven my independent testing from customers numerous times), to achieve a target CHT, ECT, and EOT that fits with all of our testing to show the best balance of power, and durability.
What I find more troubling is that people are overlooking that somehow the other stats mentioned here are dropping the temps far more than they should, which right there shows you they are not doing as intended. If so, you would only see a 4-9* drop (since nothing is 100% efficient) when using a 170 and ours would range in the 13-19* range (again, since nothing is 100% efficient). So those posting that their temps are dropping 30-40* from an 8* (ok, let's call it 10*) lower stat should be alarmed that something is causing the engine to run too cool. Instead the focus is that the other thermostat is lowering the temp further than ours is.
And yes, if there is a consistent bypass allowing coolant to flow past the thermostat, it will allow for easier burping. Again, this is not a positive not matter how you look at it.
So, why we continue to defend the EvenFlo, is simple. We know it's doing what it's supposed to do, which is lower the temps in the range specified above. NOT to lower the temps to 160. No thermostat will ever allow the engine to run at the temp it opens at, no matter how cold the ambient temp is. It's designed to open at that temp and start cooling. Since, as mentioned, these cars don't actually have a coolant temp sensor, only a CHT sensor, everything else is assumed, or modeled. Now, put a sensor in the thermostat housing (like some cars used to have) and all of this might change, but they don't do things like that any longer.
yes it is inferred. lots of different manufacturers infer things like valve temps, barometric pressure, manifold pressure (ford also), etc. they create a model around in house/lab testing and use the model as part of the tune, including the torque model. all spark, airflow, and fueling is now controlled based off deviation from the model and driver input (demand). it is no longer just about measuring airflow.How does the car tell what the coolant temperature is? Does it use some calculation of the CHT?
Interesting, thanks!yes it is inferred. lots of different manufacturers infer things like valve temps, barometric pressure, manifold pressure (ford also), etc. they create a model around in house/lab testing and use the model as part of the tune, including the torque model. all spark, airflow, and fueling is now controlled based off deviation from the model and driver input (demand). it is no longer just about measuring airflow.
When I installed my Reische I refilled with a bottle of wetter and distilled water. If I recall correctly I used a little under 2 gallons to refill (front of the car was on ramps, so it didn't fully drain).Came here to see if anyone was running a water/glycol mix with water wetter with the Reische 170, and what that ratio was...