I'll use your quote again about how TFS could have a piston to valve clearance problems on 87 and later cars where the AFR heads would not. This is not the case. There are no combo's out there that an AFR 185 can fit onto without P to V problems that the TFS can also not fit onto. The reverse however is true since there is more clearance already built into TFS heads.
In this particular instance your "information" is incorrect. So are you. It seems that you have many many misconceptions that you believe is gospel truth. Either that, or you don't have the integrity to admit when you are wrong. It seems that you've been shown plenty of reference and documentation by many in an effort to assist you in uderstanding your misconceptions but you still hold the line that everyone must be wrong except for you. This forum offers you the opportunity learn why those misconceptions are incorrect. Michael Yount seems to have taken an extra step even in offering you relevant proof. My suggeston would be to have a discussion with these folks and make the attempt to "understand" those things that are pointed out as false. On the matter of the thermostat well... So far, everything that Mike and Rick have posted on the matter is actually correct. I've verfied it both by research and by trial and error since being here on this forum. A 160* T-stat on a Stang with a stock computer and otherwise correctly functioning cooling system is a problem. I installed one in my own ride at the recommendation of Kenne Bell when I installed the Blowzilla. That never ran right. Drove me nuts trying to discover why. That's when someone suggested that the t-stat might be too low. Like you, I wasn't sure that the t-stat could be the cause of the problem. Then folks like Michael Yount, Rick, TMOSS, and a few others explained the operation of the EEC (where it relates to coolant temp) and referred me to the reference material that allowed me to physically check the mode of the computer. Sure enough... The thing was stuck in open loop mode because the computer did not see the temps necessary to make the change to closed loop. Under those conditions, the computer disregards inputs from other sensors and runs a preset fuel table designed to allow the car to run in what it sees as a "cold engine". It runs very rich and cut daily driving fuel mileage by about 1/3rd. After discarding the 160* stat and installing a 180* stat, the problem went away and the AFR across the RPM range returned to normal. That is not to say that the AFR at WOT was any different (that I noticed) but all other power settings reverted to nominal (WOT settings have their own fuel tables). I'm one of those folks who doesn't want to know just he answer but the method behind that answer. I've certainly gotten that here. So can you.
On the matter of oil at less than ideal temperatures. I've seen the result of this first hand on an 86 F-150 where not only was a 160* t-stat used but also an oil cooler. Over time, this particular vehicle released less and less oil during oil changes. The owner thought that because of the age of this vehicle, that the oil was being burned and tossed out the exhaust. I was there to help him pull the oil pan and intake off in order to remove all of the sludge left behind due to the oil's inability to get to proper temperature for adequate flow. Once we'd removed all we possibly could by hand and other means, we took it to a facility that was able to flush the parts of that system we could not reach without a full blown tear down. We expended two oil tranfusions and two large filters (the size of K&N conical) on the machine before we felt we'd gotten it clean enough. It's been roughly 5 years since then. The t-stat of course, was replaced at that time due to having to tear apart the top end to get the sludge out. The oil cooler was also removed because it was too clogged to be bothered with. The oil pan was last removed this last summer in August and the engine is clean as a whistle inside. I never understood why until I got here and learned what I've learned from these folks who have all "been there" at one point or another. You can kick and scream and refute it all you like. The facts are the facts and they speak for themselves. Or perhaps... maybe you DO know more than everyone else. In that case, you don't need this forum so.... why are you here?
raph130 said:
In this particular instance your "information" is incorrect. So are you. It seems that you have many many misconceptions that you believe is gospel truth. Either that, or you don't have the integrity to admit when you are wrong. It seems that you've been shown plenty of reference and documentation by many in an effort to assist you in uderstanding your misconceptions but you still hold the line that everyone must be wrong except for you. This forum offers you the opportunity learn why those misconceptions are incorrect. Michael Yount seems to have taken an extra step even in offering you relevant proof. My suggeston would be to have a discussion with these folks and make the attempt to "understand" those things that are pointed out as false. On the matter of the thermostat well... So far, everything that Mike and Rick have posted on the matter is actually correct. I've verfied it both by research and by trial and error since being here on this forum. A 160* T-stat on a Stang with a stock computer and otherwise correctly functioning cooling system is a problem. I installed one in my own ride at the recommendation of Kenne Bell when I installed the Blowzilla. That never ran right. Drove me nuts trying to discover why. That's when someone suggested that the t-stat might be too low. Like you, I wasn't sure that the t-stat could be the cause of the problem. Then folks like Michael Yount, Rick, TMOSS, and a few others explained the operation of the EEC (where it relates to coolant temp) and referred me to the reference material that allowed me to physically check the mode of the computer. Sure enough... The thing was stuck in open loop mode because the computer did not see the temps necessary to make the change to closed loop. Under those conditions, the computer disregards inputs from other sensors and runs a preset fuel table designed to allow the car to run in what it sees as a "cold engine". It runs very rich and cut daily driving fuel mileage by about 1/3rd. After discarding the 160* stat and installing a 180* stat, the problem went away and the AFR across the RPM range returned to normal. That is not to say that the AFR at WOT was any different (that I noticed) but all other power settings reverted to nominal (WOT settings have their own fuel tables). I'm one of those folks who doesn't want to know just he answer but the method behind that answer. I've certainly gotten that here. So can you.
On the matter of oil at less than ideal temperatures. I've seen the result of this first hand on an 86 F-150 where not only was a 160* t-stat used but also an oil cooler. Over time, this particular vehicle released less and less oil during oil changes. The owner thought that because of the age of this vehicle, that the oil was being burned and tossed out the exhaust. I was there to help him pull the oil pan and intake off in order to remove all of the sludge left behind due to the oil's inability to get to proper temperature for adequate flow. Once we'd removed all we possibly could by hand and other means, we took it to a facility that was able to flush the parts of that system we could not reach without a full blown tear down. We expended two oil tranfusions and two large filters (the size of K&N conical) on the machine before we felt we'd gotten it clean enough. It's been roughly 5 years since then. The t-stat of course, was replaced at that time due to having to tear apart the top end to get the sludge out. The oil cooler was also removed because it was too clogged to be bothered with. The oil pan was last removed this last summer in August and the engine is clean as a whistle inside. I never understood why until I got here and learned what I've learned from these folks who have all "been there" at one point or another. You can kick and scream and refute it all you like. The facts are the facts and they speak for themselves. Or perhaps... maybe you DO know more than everyone else. In that case, you don't need this forum so.... why are you here?
It's no fair if you post the answer Mike! Sheesh
...like that matters...IN SHORT...LEARN TO BE HONEST...and in the end it will prevail...I promise...If your going to "fool" people on here...it takes some practice and in that case...you need to go back to the gym...You have so far (unless you could prove otherwise) lost all credability as valid IMO...whether that matters to you or not...but your post will be warned of in the future by me...some of the things you are posting could cause some serious damage to the unknowings car and I don't much appreciate that...if I'm not sure of something I will always refer to "make sure this is confirmed" or "wait for a confirmation"...your post literally are dangerous...Literally...
