Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

160 or 180?

Discussion in '1973-1991 K5 Blazer | Truck | Suburban' started by Jonny-K5, May 21, 2004.

  1. Jonny-K5

    Jonny-K5 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    May 27, 2003
    Posts:
    1,654
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SoCal
    i've got a chip in my 89 blazer. i remember on the box it said to use a low temp thermostat, but i cant remember if it was 160 or 180. which one should i use?
     
  2. boz42

    boz42 1/2 ton status GMOTM Winner

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Posts:
    3,181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Hopewell, Tn 38058
    most chips want u to run a 160 degree thermostat
     
  3. rjfguitar

    rjfguitar 3/4 ton status GMOTM Winner

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Posts:
    9,095
    Likes Received:
    144
    Location:
    california
    I would go 180, far as I know the computer will not go into closed loop mode if it only is allowed to warm up to 160.
     
  4. K5Chris

    K5Chris 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Posts:
    805
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA
    stock is 190.... i've been running a 160 in my '91 for 5k miles with zero problems. it runs great and stays cool. go with 160.
     
  5. 4X4HIGH

    4X4HIGH 1 ton status Premium Member GMOTM Winner

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2001
    Posts:
    22,060
    Likes Received:
    69
    Location:
    Pleasanton, CA.
    I agree with rjfguitar about using the 180*, 195* is stock and a 160* will not allow it to go into closed loop like he said.
     
  6. dyeager535

    dyeager535 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Posts:
    26,978
    Likes Received:
    189
    Location:
    Roy WA
    Gotta hide the pinging from too far advanced timing somehow. /forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif
     
  7. rjfguitar

    rjfguitar 3/4 ton status GMOTM Winner

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Posts:
    9,095
    Likes Received:
    144
    Location:
    california
    [ QUOTE ]
    Gotta hide the pinging from too far advanced timing somehow. /forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

    [/ QUOTE ]
    Yeah exactly, far as I know all those chips do is advance the timing and require you to use premium fuel. I would think the money would be better spent on a good intake filter and throttle body spacer or something. /forums/images/graemlins/dunno.gif
     
  8. dyeager535

    dyeager535 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Posts:
    26,978
    Likes Received:
    189
    Location:
    Roy WA
    why "performance chips" are garbage

    I've seen the results of these chips on CCC cars too..talking about cars running 16's in the quarter, and gaining at best 1/10th. Not nearly worth it being forced to run premium fuel all the time.
     
  9. K5Chris

    K5Chris 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Posts:
    805
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA
    what is closed loop mode, and how do i know if it's going into it?? i've been running a 160 ever since i rebuilt my engine, and it runs great, and has never tripped a code.



    also, i found out mine has some "performance chip" in it. i didnt buy it. but, i run regular fuel, and it seems to run just fine.
     
  10. rjfguitar

    rjfguitar 3/4 ton status GMOTM Winner

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Posts:
    9,095
    Likes Received:
    144
    Location:
    california
    Well, I think that if it is not in closed loop than it stays in warm up mode. Does it smell rich at all?
     
  11. dyeager535

    dyeager535 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Posts:
    26,978
    Likes Received:
    189
    Location:
    Roy WA
    Closed loop is essentially when the ECM is using feedback from the sensors to determine engine conditions. Typically people consider the O2 sensor being in use as closed loop.

    I know you can turn off "flags" in the PROM ("chip") to disable codes, so anything is possible, depending on how the chip was programmed. As is mentioned in the article I cited, you can get a fair amount of performance out of chip burning, without resorting to premium fuel. (IE not just more advance)
     
  12. K5Chris

    K5Chris 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Posts:
    805
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA
    no it doesn't smell rich....

    when i bought it, it had 200k miles on the original motor w/ the 195. it was tripping the o2 sensor code. i replaced the o2 sensor, and the code went away. i, then, rebuilt the motor, and stuck a 160 in there. it runs great, and doesn't trip codes.

    is having the 160 bad for it? should i put a 180 in? i dont seem to be having any problems at all.
     
  13. dyeager535

    dyeager535 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Posts:
    26,978
    Likes Received:
    189
    Location:
    Roy WA
    If you aren't throwing codes, then it's probably not a problem.

    People have varying results with the 160 t-stats. The simple fact of the matter is, the thermostat means nothing, only the engine temperature the ECM sees. Obviously those two are tied together, but in many situations, the vehicle runs quite a bit warmer than the thermostats rated temperature. Scanning the ECM is the way to go to see what the ECM sees for engine temp.

    I'd like to see some back to back dyno tests on an injected motor to see what kind of effect engine temp has. Heat in the combustion chamber makes power, (see aluminum heads vs. iron) but hot intake charge costs power, so personally I think there's probably not much difference whichever way you go. Newer GM engines (and probably all other makers) are getting a lot of power out of engines running 195* plus, would be interesting to see if there was much difference changing the t-stat.
     
  14. rjfguitar

    rjfguitar 3/4 ton status GMOTM Winner

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Posts:
    9,095
    Likes Received:
    144
    Location:
    california
    [ QUOTE ]
    If you aren't throwing codes, then it's probably not a problem.

    People have varying results with the 160 t-stats. The simple fact of the matter is, the thermostat means nothing, only the engine temperature the ECM sees. Obviously those two are tied together, but in many situations, the vehicle runs quite a bit warmer than the thermostats rated temperature. Scanning the ECM is the way to go to see what the ECM sees for engine temp.

    I'd like to see some back to back dyno tests on an injected motor to see what kind of effect engine temp has. Heat in the combustion chamber makes power, (see aluminum heads vs. iron) but hot intake charge costs power, so personally I think there's probably not much difference whichever way you go. Newer GM engines (and probably all other makers) are getting a lot of power out of engines running 195* plus, would be interesting to see if there was much difference changing the t-stat.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Dorian is right, engine temp makes a big difference on some motors.

    My 406 made 40 some plus horses when we had it on the dyno when it was nice and cool compared to running temp. /forums/images/graemlins/eek.gif

    Like he said, the engine usually runs warmer than the t-stat settings, I have a 180 and mine runs 195 all day long, mechanical guage reading too.
     
  15. Eric M.

    Eric M. 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Posts:
    2,118
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    I think I read in one of the shop manuals that the ECM goes into closed loop when it sees 140 degrees.

    Eric M.
     
  16. imiceman44

    imiceman44 1 ton status

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2002
    Posts:
    15,160
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    [ QUOTE ]
    no it doesn't smell rich....

    when i bought it, it had 200k miles on the original motor w/ the 195. it was tripping the o2 sensor code. i replaced the o2 sensor, and the code went away. i, then, rebuilt the motor, and stuck a 160 in there. it runs great, and doesn't trip codes.

    is having the 160 bad for it? should i put a 180 in? i dont seem to be having any problems at all.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Well I have tried this before on a non GM engine so I am not sure it will be the same but with the lower temp thermostat, it did run rich, I didn't smell it but the Mileage dropped drastically, when I put the higher temp stat back, it got me good mileage again, just food for thought.
    /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
     

Share This Page