How many guys running "NO" thermostat???

monte87

Founding Member

Feb 26, 2001

876

18

49

new york

Mar 29, 2006

#1

• Mar 29, 2006

• #1

Guys-

I was wondering how many guys are running "NO" thermostat or a restrictor kit on there 5.0's???????????

to thoise that are running no therm's can do explain your experience??? In terms of fuel economy, driveability and all- I would greatly apprciate it and wanted to know-before i go ahead and perform surgery! hahahaha the reason-im taking the therm out is because it hits the electric fan sensor switch in the T-stat houing causing many crazy weird noises in that area, So its needs to be moved or elimintaed.

Many Thanks-Anthony

 

Roland69

Sergeant Tangnet

Sep 17, 2005

2,867

3

58

Port Elgin, Ontario

Mar 29, 2006

#2

• Mar 29, 2006

• #2

I ran no stat in my 95 V6 for a while till I started to see how bad the MPG was and heard that it was a bad thing to do on a street car. My friend who races stock sars on an oval track runs no T-stat but they run 7-8K for a while and still get real hot. They have 3 garden hoses ready for after the race to spray on thier rads if they get real hot during a race.

 

feifong

New Member

Apr 4, 2005

319

0

0

mesa

Mar 29, 2006

#3

• Mar 29, 2006

• #3

Really crap gas mileage Acceleration was poor in my 83 had to wait for it to heat up long.

 

8

8950HO

New Member

Mar 31, 2005

658

2

0

Mar 29, 2006

#4

• Mar 29, 2006

• #4

Not running a thermostat is a seriously bad idea.

Fuel economy will suck,you won`t get any heat from the heater,your engine will sludge up and your cylinder bore and rings will wear at a much faster rate.

Not a wise move.

 

soylentgreen

Member

Jun 17, 2003

102

7

18

Mar 29, 2006

#5

• Mar 29, 2006

• #5

8950HO said:

Not running a thermostat is a seriously bad idea.

Click to expand...

I agree. I have not actually done this, but it stands to reason that an EFI car will suffer drivablity, fuel economy, and power loss...plus premature wear. The computer will not go into "closed loop" operation until the engine comes up to the correct operating temperature.

Don't do it.

 

HISSIN50

"How long does it take to get help in here?

15 Year Member

Nov 29, 1999

31,179

34

129

Mar 29, 2006

#6

• Mar 29, 2006

• #6

The computer goes into closed loop after just a few minutes of engine operation. It does require about 180* at the ECT to see full fuel trim however.

 

monte87

Founding Member

Feb 26, 2001

876

18

49

new york

Mar 29, 2006

#7

• Mar 29, 2006

• #7

The what about a RESTRICTOR???

Guys-
thanks for replying-first off-
I normally run a Mr. gasket 180 thermostat, But it seems the T-stat is coming out to far and coming in contact with the E-fan 3/8 thermal switch sensor that is located in the FMS T-Stat housing, causing it to freak out and make loud metallic noises, and clicks, clacks and all that other ****. i have an autometer temp gauge sensor sitting in the stiocker location-and have no other place to put the switch as long as the Thermostat sits in the housing-this is why-i wanted to use a MOROSO WATER RESTRICTOR kit. it comes in 3 sizes 1 inch, 3/4 and 5/8... im not sure which one to use though.
the rest of the cooling system is Edelbrock hi-flow water pump, Fluidyne aluminum Rad, 70/30 mix of Dex cool and 2 bottles of water wetter.

Whatta ya guys think????????
Many Thanks Anthony

 

vristang

15 Year Member

Mar 31, 2005

4,933

101

124

Seattle

Mar 29, 2006

#8

• Mar 29, 2006

• #8

Some other brands of t-stat may clear?

Going without is bad. The colder the coolant temps go the faster the cyl bores wear, wear increases exponentially with decreasing temp. Anything below about 180-190F gets noticeably bad.
jason

 

monte87

Founding Member

Feb 26, 2001

876

18

49

new york

Mar 29, 2006

#9

• Mar 29, 2006

• #9

So-If you guys were to use a Restrictor, what size would you go with???
I measured the T-stat houing-Its 1 inch 3/4
the kit comes with a 1 inch restrictor, 3/4 and 5/8's-Which one would you use for proper flow and ideal cooling capability.

Thanks-Anthony

 

kr8zstang

New Member

Nov 3, 2005

53

0

0

upstate, sc

Mar 29, 2006

#10

• Mar 29, 2006

• #10

Yeah, i agree with these guys. When i bought my stang it had no stat. I got about 11 mpg city and crappy throttle response. Put in a 160 and now i get about 15 mpg and much better throttle response.

 

vristang

15 Year Member

Mar 31, 2005

4,933

101

124

Seattle

Mar 29, 2006

#11

• Mar 29, 2006

• #11

monte87 said:

So-If you guys were to use a Restrictor, what size would you go with???
I measured the T-stat houing-Its 1 inch 3/4
the kit comes with a 1 inch restrictor, 3/4 and 5/8's-Which one would you use for proper flow and ideal cooling capability.

Thanks-Anthony

Click to expand...

I would drill and tap a second hole into a coolant passage on the lower intake, before I tried running without a stat.
My advice is to find another way to make it work.

Going without a stat is going to cause you some headaches in the future.

jason

 

8

8950HO

New Member

Mar 31, 2005

658

2

0

Mar 29, 2006

#12

• Mar 29, 2006

• #12

kr8zstang said:

Yeah, i agree with these guys. When i bought my stang it had no stat. I got about 11 mpg city and crappy throttle response. Put in a 160 and now i get about 15 mpg and much better throttle response.

Click to expand...

A 160* thermostat is way too cool.A 180* thermostat minimum at least.
I run a 195* high-flow.

 

kr8zstang

New Member

Nov 3, 2005

53

0

0

upstate, sc

Mar 29, 2006

#13

• Mar 29, 2006

• #13

Why is a 160 too cool? I always thought a cooler engine made more hp. I know i'm probably wrong, but what does an extra 20 deg. do for me?

 

8

86ttopmustang

New Member

Mar 16, 2006

51

0

0

north babylon

Mar 29, 2006

#14

• Mar 29, 2006

• #14

I thought the same, I thought a cooler engine is better...maybe we're wrong

 

midlife89

Member

Mar 30, 2005

91

0

6

youngstown,oh

Mar 29, 2006

#15

• Mar 29, 2006

• #15

I've had cars run hotter without a thermosat.The coolant wasn't in the radiator long enough to cool it down.Although it took longer to heat up,once it got to operating it stayed there only cooled down if you got on the freeway.Kept my fingers crossed if I caught more than a couple lights in a row.

 

vristang

15 Year Member

Mar 31, 2005

4,933

101

124

Seattle

Mar 29, 2006

#16

• Mar 29, 2006

• #16

Guess I should have posted this before

There is no reason to run a 160F stat.
Here is an explanation of how hotter is better (to a point naturally).
Everything in the combustion chamber, including fuel, air, cylinder walls, piston, and valves, will take on heat during combustion. The heat is what causes the air trapped in the combustion chamber to expand. The expansion of the heated gasses is what pushes on the piston. If you are putting more and more heat into the cylinder walls because the coolant keeps taking away more and more heat, then you lose power and efficiency.
There are trade-offs. Cooler intake air is denser in O2, but it will soak up more heat energy before it may combust. Obviously running too hot will destroy the motor.
The best answer for power/efficiency is probably the stock 195F stat, but 180F seems to be everyone’s favorite, as a happy compromise.

Also consider that as coolant temperatures decrease, cylinder bore wear will increase exponentially. That means that a relatively small drop in coolant temp will result in much more rapid bore wear.

 

kr8zstang

New Member

Nov 3, 2005

53

0

0

upstate, sc

Mar 29, 2006

#17

• Mar 29, 2006

• #17

That makes some sense to me. I guess i'll try a 180 and see how it does.