Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Bob NH, if your temperature spiked as you describe, it is possible that you do have thermostats and maybe they are not working properly and sticking in the closed position. Just a thought you may want to check out.

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Thank you Jim for your input, that would be a possibility that needs checking, Bob

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Oops ! sorry John

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

jm35 what was your temps when going from tahoe up the 7 grade then down the hill on our run that day you were certainly giving it the gun up the mountain did it get hot

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Bob, if it's flowing like a hydrant, from cold, there are no stats in it.

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Here I am in Manila, Utah, population 308, elevation 6,348 feet, half way through my little overnight run testing everything out for the big Mt. Evans climb next week.

Get a load of these digs I'm staying in. It's the Steineker Motel. Yeah, it's a double wide trailer divided into 5 rooms but only two are operable at this time. No office - have to call the propietor upon arrival to drive over and open up the room. Quaint. My favorite kind of stay.

http://i1059.photobucket.com/albums/...ps07059a6f.jpg

Drove 200 miles today from 5,000 to over 10,000 feet elevation in ambient temperatures from 90° to 60°. The Stant stats worked great. The engine temperature climbed to 195° on one long 8% grade in second gear and dropped down to 160° on one long descent. Other than those extremes the engine stayed between 170° and 190° all day. Another 200 miles to complete the circle to home tomorrow.

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Hello Everyone,

First off, we all could greatly benefit from a handy, and independent editor. I messed up the title to the graph and I own that. As far as goofs, and Prof. Henry, I am a big fan, and help me as much as you can please, goofs... we all do it frequently. Remember when troubleshooting if you do the same thing and get the same result... Try something else. Is it logical?

One thing that just hit me was, gosh, I'd love to have a testing loop that was like the one in this example. I take the car out and 'around the block' but out and back to Squaw Peak Overlook, I don't have a chance to do that! Utah is awesome!

Another thing I just saw on the graph. Look at the magenta line.

It is much more consistent than the blue one. Especially on the decline. But it works better on the warm-up too, as pointed out by Prof. Henry. But I have to be a wimp and give props to my neighbor JM35 for pointing out that more data would make the picture clearer.

Sorry but one last comment to all readers, not pointed towards any 'Barner... But if you have an original Ford casted block... Have you really ever seriously cleaned it out? Are you sure there is not _fill in the blank quantity_ of sand/rust/other in there blocking passages and taking up volume? Just asking.

-VT/JeffH

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

I just drove 400 miles over two days at 5,000 to 10,000 feet elevations in ambient temperatures between 60° and 90° and my engine with the NAPA 111 170° thermostats stayed between 170° and 190° the whole way. Now that right there is what you might call some of them there facts that GM deals out (or is it deals in?? . . . Oh, whatever.) Only dropped down to 155° for a minute or two going down a 9 mile long 8% grade and bumped up to 195° going up such a grade. Conclude what you will from them there facts.

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Your engine problem could have very well been in part caused by no thermostats and widely varied engine temperatures.

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Good for you Henry Now to complete the experiment get a set of of the type GM recommends and see how they might compare .I can send you a set if you wish. Johnny.

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Trev, we (Jeff and I) were clipping along at a pretty good pace going up and down that mountain. That 21 stud bored out to a whopping 0.030" over 3-1/16" can run right up there with the big dogs ;). That was my second run over that same mountain so I was already aware of some of those sharp turns. Maybe Jeff had his toe on the accelerator or was pulling on that hand throttle when I wasen't looking :D.
Anyway, to be honest, I don't remember exactly what my engine temperatures were on that perticular run. I believe in general, on the way out and back, the temperature gauge stayed pretty consistently in the 180-190° F range until I started climbing the higher elevations. During those runs while assending I had some max temperatures in the 200-210 ° F range until I started descending from the peak. Then it would cool down quickly and level out again at ~ 180°. I have Skip Haney pumps in the heads and his overflow check valve, plus a good radiator cap with seal that is allowing the system to run at 3-4 psi. I am also running original can/sleeve style thermostats mounted in center of upper hoses.Worked well for me for over 7k miles on the tour.

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

thanks john

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Professor Henry, I have been enjoying your posts. Very informative. While some may disagree, no one can say your haven't been doing your homework. Up here in NW Wisconsin a hot August night can be 45 degrees and mid day 90 degrees. I have always run stats in my 47. It's a 276 and I run 180's, 4# cap and DC water pumps. No Problems overheating yet. Knock on wood!!

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

My main concern about GM/Shewman's stats aren't with their ability to deal with heat so much as their ability to deal with cold such as in the really cold winter when I want some quick heat or even in the summer descending long steep mountain roads. I would like to have a look at those stats, take some macro pictures, and some measurements just to satisfy my curiosity. I was going to pay Bob the $25.00 for one just to do that but if you have one to send me that would be great. PM me for my address.

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Prof Henry, this is a very interesting thread, and thank you for posting your research, photos etc, it is much better to get out there and test stuff than post opinion/speculation.

Lets face it, nine times out of ten thermostats only became an issue when yr old jalopy with a badly maintained cooling system boiled on a hot day. So what did you do? Pulled out the stat(s) because a) its more than likely stuck open/shut/somewhere in between, and, whatever, it was getting in the way of the coolant! A new thermostat which worked, and a cleaned out system/new rad core would have solved the problem. It was a time/money thing.

The way I see it, your thread has dealt with two separate issues. 1) Is the V8 subject to a flow restriction when its thermostats (of whatever design) are open and 2) does it matter to the long term health of our engines if we don't fit thermostats at all.

For 1), you certainly don't have a cooling problem with your motor with fully open NAPA 111's. If you can run up a steep hill in second gear in 90 degrees, with not much air going through your radiator, without boiling, your cooling system is working well! I suspect not all old Ford owners could say that...

for 2) if you can be bothered, it would be great if you could do the reverse test...ie the Sherwen stats against your NAPA 111's, against no stats on a cold winter day in Utah, then we can see what works in those conditions....and even better with an oil temp gauge fitted, because the main problem with running too cool is that the oil takes a long time to get warm, and may not ever get up to correct temperature, which is just about the worst thing for an engine. Over to you...!

Cheers, Tom.

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

I'm confused which Stat did you use Henry? The Napa 111 or the Stat thermostat?

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

The one I used I bought from O'Reilly as their part # 2962 that was in a Murray box # 4157 but it's the same as the NAPA # THM 111 and the Stant # 14157. All the same stat manufactured by the same manufacturer for a 1990 Subaru Justy.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31a823RbYaL.jpg

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

1) Yes. All thermostats of whatever make restrict the flow of coolant through the engine more than no thermostats do. The neck on the head of my 59A is 1½ " I.D. = 40 mm. Even the Ford original stat only had an opening of 29 mm and that's the biggest opening of any stat that will fit in that neck or hose. That 29 mm opening only passes half the flow that the neck will pass. So, why use a stat if every one is going to restrict the flow even when fully open? That brings us to

2) Why use stats at all? Here are all of the reasons that I know and have read:

a. It warms up the oil quicker to thin it out so it flows better in the pressure system and splashes better up under the pistons.

b. It boils off the moisture in the crankcase that will otherwise contaminate the oil and do other damage.

c. To get heat sooner in the heater in the winter.

d. It prevents the rapid expansion and contraction of the engine block and all engine parts caused by rapid fluctuation in engine temperature and the consequential damage caused by such rapid expansion and contraction.

e. And . . . the Number One reason to use thermostats: Because Mr. Ford said so (and every engine manufacturer since).

So, understanding all of the reasons to use thermostats why would anyone go without? Only two answers I can think of:

a. Their cooling system is so sick that the mere addition of the restriction of even the best of thermostats causes it to overheat. So, instead of diagnosing and solving the problem with something else in the cooling system they do the easiest thing - remove the thermostats.

b. Because they've bought a water pump from a manufacturer that tells them not to use a thermostat with it. Why would a water pump manufacturer say not to use a thermostat? Because the manufacturer promotes his pump as higher volume than other pumps but knows that such is only the case if the restriction of the thermostat is removed because his impeller was designed to move more water only when there is no restriction such as a thermostat whereas all other pumps are designed to move more water through the thermostat. Why would anyone buy such a pump? Because they don't know or don't believe these facts because someone is repeatedly promoting the pumps without disclosing these facts. :(

Nuff said.

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

With VeryTangled's help we were able to add in the elevation data to the test report chart that tells a little more of the story.

http://i1059.photobucket.com/albums/...psfceb8dfa.jpg

Re: To Stat or Not To Stat? That is the question.
 

Thanks for the clarification on the stats. I used the Staunt brand, installed and drove. I have Skip's water pumps and the 330 stats ran at 220 to 230 removed the stats right head ran 180 left 160. With the Staunt stats Henry tested and wrote about I ran it today in 80 degree weather and maintained 170 on left head and 195 right head. For me this works so I am in agreement with Henry on the stats.