GM Engine & Exhaust Performance EFI | GEN I/GEN II/GEN III/GEN IV Engines |Small Block | Big Block |

Changing Thermostat, Is cooler better?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 28, 2006 | 05:45 PM
  #1  
Corey B's Avatar
Thread Starter
Teching In
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Default Changing Thermostat, Is cooler better?

2005 GMC 5.3L Stock

I'm going to install a K&N series 77 Air Intake kit and still shopping for a programmer or custom tune.

Should I replace the stat with a lower one, 180 or 160?
What's the stock one, 195 F???

I've read that the hotter the motor and the cooler the air coming in makes the best power.

My last truck was a 1993 5.7 with a 160F stat. Motor was still running good at 250K.

Anyone have any part numbers or links for stats that will work? I've found some with the housing for $50, (don't want) but I know there is the SLP stat #100228 (160F) for around $20. Can't find SLP stat (180F).

Any help would be great.
Thanks,
Corey
Reply
Old Dec 28, 2006 | 05:49 PM
  #2  
bgray's Avatar
TOTM: June 2007
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,781
Likes: 7
From: Hamilton, Ontario
Default

yah toss a cooler thermo in..basically tells motor is runnign cold and dumps more fuel..better power..less mpg
Reply
Old Dec 28, 2006 | 06:20 PM
  #3  
Derek @ EDO's Avatar
FormerVendor
iTrader: (73)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,072
Likes: 8
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Default

you will have to get a 160 if you change stats. you need the LS2 style stat
NOT with the housing. thunder racing has them for 20 bucks
Reply
Old Dec 28, 2006 | 07:19 PM
  #4  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,197
Likes: 0
From: Spring, TX
Default

Not worth it unless your tuning engine to the ragged edge.
You will also lose 1 mpg on average!

Jim
Reply
Old Dec 28, 2006 | 07:29 PM
  #5  
nightrunner's Avatar
Mr. Obvious
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,006
Likes: 2
From: Manchester, TN
Default

stock tstat is 183 degrees
Reply
Old Dec 28, 2006 | 11:02 PM
  #6  
ap2002's Avatar
TECH Senior Member
20 Year Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,411
Likes: 0
From: Houston, Texas
Default

Originally Posted by CHEVY6000VHO
Not worth it unless your tuning engine to the ragged edge.
You will also lose 1 mpg on average!

Jim
I dont think this is true.....

get the 160 thermostat.... truck wont run at 160 anyways, I believe it'll run between 175-180....
Reply
Old Dec 28, 2006 | 11:46 PM
  #7  
14 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,343
Likes: 0
From: Bossier City, LA
Default

Originally Posted by ap2002

get the 160 thermostat.... truck wont run at 160 anyways, I believe it'll run between 175-180....
That's what mine ran.
Reply
Old Dec 29, 2006 | 12:36 AM
  #8  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (36)
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 869
Likes: 1
From: somewhere in the sticks.
Default

mine too 175 to 180 with the 160 in there and e fans runnin high.
Reply
Old Dec 29, 2006 | 12:42 AM
  #9  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,197
Likes: 0
From: Spring, TX
Default

Originally Posted by ap2002
I dont think this is true.....

get the 160 thermostat.... truck wont run at 160 anyways, I believe it'll run between 175-180....
Ok....whatever, that's what mine did. Ihave a SLP 160* t-stat. I lost an average of 1 mpg. I know because I keep constant track of my average mpg on my display. There was no increase in hp either. It uses a lot more gas as well during warm up as well. That's mainly where the average is hurt at.
I really think the 180* stat would be a better choice for a stock engine.
That's my opinion.

Jim
Reply
Old Dec 29, 2006 | 12:50 AM
  #10  
kbracing96's Avatar
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (26)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,485
Likes: 31
From: Oakland, OR
Default

I put a 180 stat in my truck and it ran the same 196 it did with the stock stat.
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:59 AM.