>>A 180 is debateable, but 195 is optimal for an EFI engine.
>>You most certainly will **** off the computer if you monkey
>>around with it. You'll be soorrryyyy!!!!!!!!
>
>
>What are the problems that the computer is supposed to have
>with a 160 or 180 thermostat? Don't say that it will stay
>in open loop cause that's just not the case. It goes into
>closed loop at a lower temp than 160. And don't say that it
>will cause the engine to overheat cause of the thermostat
>never closing and not allowing the coolant to stay in the
>radiator long enough. First hand experience in the
>Mississippi heat and humidity has proven that wrong. Me or
>the 15 or 20 Mustangs racers that I used to run with have
>never had a single problem with a 160. No drop in fuel
>mileage or power but rather an increase in power cause the
>engine runs cooler. Any racer knows that's ideal. You
>don't want to remove the thermostat cause then it might run
>too cool. But a 160 or 180 will NOT be a problem. Up north
>I would probably stick with a 180 but down south a 160 or
>180 is fine.


OK, before I get another hot poker shoved up my a$$, let me try to explain my position. I never said it wouldn't go into closed loop. YOU implied that I did. I never said that it would overheat. YOU implied that I did. Every little tidbit you've contributed here is in regard to your Mustang which you admit is modified and you race. I will not dispute the benefits of lower engine temp. We're talking about pickup trucks here. We're never going to see a dragstrip. We will, however, have to drive our trucks in the wintertime. It gets cold up here. Sure is nice to have a heater. Some of us will also have to try to pass an emissions test. That little tin box under the dash has got its hands in everything. In another lifetime, I worked in a shop that did emissions testing and I had several vehicles fail because the engine temp was too low. Why? Somebody put in a 160 degree t-stat. If a 160 is the cureall for everything, explain to me why nearly every new vehicle that rolls off of an assembly line does so with a 195 degree thermostat.

 

BlueOval,

Sorry if I vented too much in your direction. I wasn't trying to be rude. PCMENTEN is the one who said something about closed loop, and I've heard a lot of people say stuff about overheating. I agree with you about the heater. That's why when I moved to Minnesota, I put a 180 in there. I also don't doubt that emissions might go up with a cooler thermostat. When an engine is cooler, the computer dumps more fuel in the motor. By the way, my Mustang is essentially stock, just a few bolt-ons. The valve covers have never been off. And, I do have an F150 that I run a 180 in with no problems and the heater works fine. And all the Mustang people that I knew down in Mississippi drove their cars everyday. We did race but our cars were street cars. Sorry again if I came across as too harsh. I just get a little irritated when I hear people say that a vehicle won't run right with a 160 or 180 degree thermostat.

 

Hey, it's all good. No offense taken. They make all those different stats for a reason. I do run a 160 in my Mustang for all the reasons that you stated. But, like I said, in a reasonably stock truck, I stick with a 180 or 195 because I'm a pansy. I hate to be cold! And when I mentioned it upsetting the computer I was referring mostly to emmissions functions. It's frustrating to have to pay for a test twice because of something as simple as a thermostat. But hey, that's while we are all here! Debate is a beautiful thing. I don't think that there is anyplace else on the internet that has the level of experience and participation that we do here.

 

Daniel,

If the engine's distributor is the original one, and if the engine originally had EGR, then the advance curve of the distributor will need to be changed. A lot of spark advance was added to part throttle operation to compensate for the slower burn rate of engines with EGR.

I wonder if the new intake has a leak in the lifter valley. Does the engine seem to use oil?

Best regards,