Running To Hot For Me!!!
- Thread starter MY 85 GT
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
Yeah I burped the system twice just to make sure there wasn't Any air left I can do it again...lol...I don't know what my timing is at the shop that installed my turbo did the tune I have not touched it...its marked with white paint and it hasn't moved...lol...
David Pepiton
Active Member
3300 cfm is highly unlikely. but depends on the brand/design/size/rpmare you sure there are no small leaks? have you done a pressure test?
i have a similar issue my temp gauge got to 245 on the temp gauge i have after the t-stat.
i have a similar issue my temp gauge got to 245 on the temp gauge i have after the t-stat.
Yes its a 3300 cfm flex-a-lite draws 18 amps... i checked re checked the fan..cfms..I think i might have found my problem...AIR flow the air diffuser is blocked by the intercooler...my intercooler sits low i didnt want my bumper cut so they did it that way...so i think i have no air flow to the Radiator hense while idling with hood open it stays at 180...so how can i get that diffuser more air..i can post pictures later of the front of the car so you can see what im saying..Thats why i think a cobra insert will help and a cowl hood get more air in and out....
65ShelbyClone
Founding Member
Likewise it is a myth that the coolant can flow too fast through the radiator. It has no effect whatsoever on the energy transferred from the engine to the coolant to the radiator to the air in a given amount of time. What it does do is lower the temperature difference between the hottest and coldest parts of the cooling system.
Besides, if the thermostat was constantly cycling, then doesn't that suggest a surplus of cooling capacity?
My personal opinion...
I prefer Derale twin fans, 4000 cfm (draws 50 amps
) but will cool anything I've seen on a 100 degree day. Also, I would like to know more about your converter. A lot of these aftermarket converters are spragless. If this is the case, consider having the converter cut open to have a sprag put in it. After putting a sprag back in an 8"converter we saw trans temps that were much cooler and resulted in engine temps that were cooler as well. Just a thought. I find it curious that your running hot problems seem to have started after the C4 install?
I prefer Derale twin fans, 4000 cfm (draws 50 amps
) but will cool anything I've seen on a 100 degree day. Also, I would like to know more about your converter. A lot of these aftermarket converters are spragless. If this is the case, consider having the converter cut open to have a sprag put in it. After putting a sprag back in an 8"converter we saw trans temps that were much cooler and resulted in engine temps that were cooler as well. Just a thought. I find it curious that your running hot problems seem to have started after the C4 install?
The trans is an Art car c4 rated a 1000 hp, sfi bell housing,Sfi scatter shield,B&M deep trans pan. it was new never installed..in a project car..i know Art car isnt in business anymore..it is a full manual reverse valve body with a trans brake that isnt hooked up...lol...it has a 9 inch convertor. the stall was a 3500 but in my car it seems to stall at 3000..i know the convertor for my build is to big but i figure i would try it...And i forget the brand i the paperwork i saw it said super torque 26 spline?? if that means anything...
mikestang63
SN Certified Technician
I respectfully disagree with your statements regarding coolant heat absorption and thermal dynamics as it pertains to dispersing of heat in an engine.. A constantly cycling or wide open thermostat at too low a temperature is not conducive to an efficiently running engine for a host of reasons. I don't have the time to elaborate on the facts supporting my posts, but it is readily available with a simple search. There have been many posts over the years that have empirically shown a 160 thermostat causes more harm than good in most street engines. However as I always say, that is why Baskin Robbins makes 31 flavors- feel free to run what you think is best on your car.
65ShelbyClone
Founding Member
I'm not doing the legwork to find your sources. Proposing that coolant can have insufficient time to transfer heat in the radiator or engine due to velocity suggests that the laws of thermodynamics themselves do not apply to automotive cooling systems anyway.
http://www.stewartcomponents.com/tech_tips/Tech_Tips_3.htm
Look under "coolant flow rate" about half way down:
http://www.arrowheadradiator.com/14...apability_in_high-performance_automobiles.htm
mikestang63
SN Certified Technician
I understand this has been a highly debated subject for years, and do respect your thoughts.
However, if a lower 160 thermostat was preferred, then we should all simply remove all of our thermostats, including NASCAR that use restrictors instead of thermostats. I can cite as many opposing articles as you can in support of my statement
Scroll down to where they discuss water pumps and thermostats
http://www.novak-adapt.com/knowledge/cooling.htm
Again, I stand by my claim that if the system is pushing water faster than the radiator can dissipate the heat, that can lead to overheating . The system has to reach a point of heat equilibrium. If the radiator cannot cool the coolant sufficiently then the temperature in the engine has to actually rise to meet the higher temperature of the coolant passing through the radiator.
However, my main point on not using a lower temp thermostat was more focused on the engine is designed to run at a certain temp range and a 160 thermostat does not offer any benefit.
Similar threads
