Oil cooler question

[ttchevelle]

Any recommendation for a -10 oil cooler to mount under the car?

[chicane]

Where exactly 'under the car' we you thinking...?? as this may point the direction to which type of cooler to use.

For instance, if you were thinking of under the floor board... a round tube/finned type would work better... and if you were thinking somewhere on or near the core support, a stack plate would be better suited. There are even a couple of cylindrical flow thru types that might be worth consideration.

Anyway... Setrab (or Earls) for a stack plate... and there are numerous tube type manufacturers, so the selection might be overwhelming... but Ron Davis, C&R, Griffen, Baker Precision and even Durale... have a few to choose from.

The question is... I guess... where were you thinking of mounting it ?

[Steve1968LS2]

I need an oil cooler as well.. my issue is where to put it.

Is there a distance issue? In other words should the oil lines not exceed a given distance?I was thinking of a tube type under the floor board. The lines would run back from the engine then forward to the remote oil filter and then back to the engine.

All I know is that my oil temp went WAY up after a few laps at the track.

[chicane]

Where to put it ???

In the radiator... where it belongs. I would have the drivers side tank modified for a heat exchanger... there really is no other choice for what you are trying to accomplish. Not to mention that when looking at it from a cost / performance point of view... it's a no brainer.

Suck it up... and just do it... halfassing it isnt an option. :lol:

[Blown353]

In the radiator... where it belongs. I would have the drivers side tank modified for a heat exchanger... there really is no other choice for what you are trying to accomplish. Not to mention that when looking at it from a cost / performance point of view... it's a no brainer.

I agree with Tom. After messing with air/oil & water/oil coolers, a properly sized in-radiator heat exchanger is the way to go. Another benefit is that it gets the oil up to temp faster. Also, unlike an air/oil setup there is no need for a thermostat in the oil cooler lines which is strongly recommended on a street car so the oil doesn't stay too cool under "normal" driving conditions-- no such problem of "too cool" oil with a heat exchanger in the radiator if you size it properly for the job.

Plus, it can be a real PITA on some vehicles to fit a properly sized air/oil cooler within the confines of the nose and still expose it to enough airflow to be effective. It's a lot easier to stick a heat exchanger in the hot side tank of the radiator.

[Steve1968LS2]

Where to put it ???

In the radiator... where it belongs. I would have the drivers side tank modified for a heat exchanger... there really is no other choice for what you are trying to accomplish. Not to mention that when looking at it from a cost / performance point of view... it's a no brainer.

Suck it up... and just do it... halfassing it isnt an option. :lol:

That's not really cost effective if you already own a radiator... lol

Option #2?

[Vegas69]

Could it be welded onto your current setup? I don't have room but you may.

[chicane]

That's not really cost effective if you already own a radiator... lol

Option #2?

Well... yeah, it can be. Doing the math, after the cost of the cooler, the lines, the fittings and the time... the cost of modifying the tank and adding the cooler... is close. And then... the function aspects of what was done by that, clearly out perform the other options by a long shot. I'd give Chet a call at C&R (and the others as well) just to see what it would take.

I mean... if you look at what CarlC has into his set up and what it does performance wise... the $695 he spent on the radiator... would tell me to sell the current radiator and step up to what it is that you really need vice that of slapping a bandaid on your current cooling system.

Option #2...

Hang a stack cooler on the front of the core support and deal with it. It's the only other choice that will actually provide enough of a cooling benifit for the cost involved.

Anything that you place under the car, under the trunk etc etc... will need dedicated, directed air and an external fan for it to even worth it's consideration. But, that increases it's complexity ten fold....

[Roadbuster]

Where to put it ???

In the radiator... where it belongs. I would have the drivers side tank modified for a heat exchanger... there really is no other choice for what you are trying to accomplish. Not to mention that when looking at it from a cost / performance point of view... it's a no brainer.

Suck it up... and just do it... halfassing it isnt an option. :lol:

Is the automatic transmission cooling connections in an aluminum radiator sufficient for this purpose? It would be nice to be able to reuse that when I swap to a manual trans.

Jon

[chicane]

Is the automatic transmission cooling connections in an aluminum radiator sufficient for this purpose? It would be nice to be able to reuse that when I swap to a manual trans.

Jon

In short... no.

The minimum line size for an enginer oil cooler in any application is -10 (1/2")... and allow me to stress this... the very minimum size. Ideally, -12 is perfectly suited for the majority of applications here... but there are some that may even require -16 for the feed with multiple -12 returns.

The associated in tank auto trans cooler is much too small fitting-wise and capacity as well.

Although... it may be used for the return side of the power steering... in lighter duty applications.

[Steve1968LS2]

Well... yeah, it can be. Doing the math, after the cost of the cooler, the lines, the fittings and the time... the cost of modifying the tank and adding the cooler... is close. And then... the function aspects of what was done by that, clearly out perform the other options by a long shot. I'd give Chet a call at C&R (and the others as well) just to see what it would take.

I mean... if you look at what CarlC has into his set up and what it does performance wise... the $695 he spent on the radiator... would tell me to sell the current radiator and step up to what it is that you really need vice that of slapping a bandaid on your current cooling system.

Option #2...

Hang a stack cooler on the front of the core support and deal with it. It's the only other choice that will actually provide enough of a cooling benifit for the cost involved.

Anything that you place under the car, under the trunk etc etc... will need dedicated, directed air and an external fan for it to even worth it's consideration. But, that increases it's complexity ten fold....

Does he have a website? Does the $695 include the elec fans? Been happy with my AFCO unit but I need cooler oil on the track.. that's a proven fact.

[Steve1968LS2]

Is this it?

http://www.crracing.com/radiators/late_model_heat.shtml

[Roadbuster]

In short... no.

The minimum line size for an enginer oil cooler in any application is -10 (1/2")... and allow me to stress this... the very minimum size. Ideally, -12 is perfectly suited for the majority of applications here... but there are some that may even require -16 for the feed with multiple -12 returns.

The associated in tank auto trans cooler is much too small fitting-wise and capacity as well.

Although... it may be used for the return side of the power steering... in lighter duty applications.

Thanks for clearing that up!

Jon

[ttchevelle]

I had planned on installing the cooler under the floor plan due to the limited room in front of the radiator because of my intercooler. The trans cooler is already being used for the trans. My biggest concern would be a presssure loss. Im using the lingenfelter adapter and the line sizes are -10 at the oil filter area.

[CarlC]

Mine is more like the NASCAR type. I got lucky when I purchased it. The radiator was on closeout and scored it for $400 or so. It's really too big for the car. If it was 3" narrower it would be perfect. And no, it does not come with any sort of fan for $625+. The good stuff is going to cost more up front, but in the long run will be less expensive than having to do it all over again.

The hottest the oil has ever been was 240*, and that was with a 106* ambient, 130*+ on the track, 20 minute session with the old iron 406.

I don't see why your tank could not be modified to accept a cooler. The question is, as Tom points out, is how much will it cost? If it could be done for less than 1/2 the cost of a new radiator, then OK. If more than that you might as well sell the one you have and buy the Big Kahuna.

I don't think you will be happy with an undercar cooler. Too many compromises and likely an ineffective system. Think of how PO'd you will be if you found out it was not effective and you had to go the in-tank heat exchanger later on? $$$$$$$$ and time (that's free.)

[Steve1968LS2]

Mine is more like the NASCAR type. I got lucky when I purchased it. The radiator was on closeout and scored it for $400 or so. It's really too big for the car. If it was 3" narrower it would be perfect. And no, it does not come with any sort of fan for $625+. The good stuff is going to cost more up front, but in the long run will be less expensive than having to do it all over again.

The hottest the oil has ever been was 240*, and that was with a 106* ambient, 130*+ on the track, 20 minute session with the old iron 406.

I don't see why your tank could not be modified to accept a cooler. The question is, as Tom points out, is how much will it cost? If it could be done for less than 1/2 the cost of a new radiator, then OK. If more than that you might as well sell the one you have and buy the Big Kahuna.

I don't think you will be happy with an undercar cooler. Too many compromises and likely an ineffective system. Think of how PO'd you will be if you found out it was not effective and you had to go the in-tank heat exchanger later on? $$$$$$$$ and time (that's free.)

I will give them a call.. I don't mind spending for quality stuff. Might be a decent tech story on oil cooler theory in there someplace. After three laps I was near (over?) 300-degrees..

Maybe I could still run my current single fan with thier shroud? That would save me $ plus I wouldn't have to mess with the electronics. They would also have to be able to put the in and out both on the pass side (LS Setup).

damn.. this site is always costing me cash.. lol

[CarlC]

The C&R does not have a shroud. It's a blank on both sides.

Mine is dual-pass with fittings on the passenger side. However, they are sized for Gen1. You would want them fitted for LS sizes. You could also have the in/outlets modified for angle/height/length/curves to accomodate a standard hose.

Measure your fan width and height before making the call. That way it will be easier to narrow down the choices. Max total width for the lower tanks would be helpful as well.

Something else to think about. If I could do it all over again I would make a lower mount/upper plate similar to a 2nd gen. Basically a floating mount so that the radiator is not hard-mounted to the radiator support.

[Vegas69]

I will give them a call.. I don't mind spending for quality stuff. Might be a decent tech story on oil cooler theory in there someplace. After three laps I was near (over?) 300-degrees..

Maybe I could still run my current single fan with thier shroud? That would save me $ plus I wouldn't have to mess with the electronics. They would also have to be able to put the in and out both on the pass side (LS Setup).

damn.. this site is always costing me cash.. lol

What was your coolant temp?

[CarlC]

After three laps I was near (over?) 300-degrees..

Not surprising. A similar build to the previous 406SBC in another f-body car had the same thing happen. He had to back off for several laps to get the oil temperature down even with a Canton road-race pan. Water temperatures were not abnormal. High RPM will make oil temperatures rise much faster.

Welcome to the Tom and David spending plan.

[Steve1968LS2]

What was your coolant temp?


Like Carl said.. not abmormal.. 205ish I think.

[chicane]

Does he have a website? Does the $695 include the elec fans? Been happy with my AFCO unit but I need cooler oil on the track.. that's a proven fact.

Electric fan(s)... no. But you dont need more than one fan to begin with... if you use the right fan from the get go.

The only time I might recommend... read: might... run more than one fan is if I was wanting to run duals for the secondary to kick on when the AC is active. But... you dont have that problem... and niether do I. So why not run a single fan that pulls more than the two you have now ??

Secondly... you dont really need a shroud. If you purchased a Mark VIII fan with the same size core as the OEM offering... the fan shroud of the Mark VIII fan would be nearly perfect. Not having a shroud with this fan is not really an issue... it's will damn near pull the car forward in neutral.

The dual pass mechanics... is really where the performance gain is.

[Steve1968LS2]

Electric fan(s)... no. But you dont need more than one fan to begin with... if you use the right fan from the get go.

The only time I might recommend... read: might... run more than one fan is if I was wanting to run duals for the secondary to kick on when the AC is active. But... you dont have that problem... and niether do I. So why not run a single fan that pulls more than the two you have now ??

Secondly... you dont really need a shroud. If you purchased a Mark VIII fan with the same size core as the OEM offering... the fan shroud of the Mark VIII fan would be nearly perfect. Not having a shroud with this fan is not really an issue... it's will damn near pull the car forward in neutral.

The dual pass mechanics... is really where the performance gain is.

Sorry.. I should have said FAN since that's what I run now.. one large fan. I plan on contacting C&R next week. I still like the idea of a shroud, even if it's for asthetic reasons. And my current AFCO radiator is a double pass unit.

What do you think about an oil cooler story? discuss plate, tube and heat sink options along with location. Could be a good theory piece. I hate doing the same old stories over and over. Thoughts?

[James OLC]

I think that it is a great idea for a story Steve. It's definately something that everyone would benefit from and I would think that it is something that the majority of people have at least given some consideration to over the course of ownership. And for a bit of variety, it's not LSx specific...

Two things that I have used on my last two builds that I thought were cool was (1) a "sandwich" style thermostat/bypass on my 502 (it was off of a Mercury Racing marine big block) and (2) the Canton remote thermostat that I have on the '67 now. Hindsight being 20/20 I might have gone with a cooler in the rad but that ship has sailed.

On my last '67 I bought a used Fluidyne nascar setup from Rousch racing. While it was not an integral part of the rad it was designed to be mounted directly beneath it.

[CarlC]

It would be interesting to get C&R's take on aftermarket/fabricated shrouds. Some of the AM "shrouds" act more like barriers.

What is very interesting on newer cars is just how small the radiators are and how well the fan systems work with them. Nearly all of radiator is covered by the shroud and there is a very high open area ratio. If air cannot freely flow, cooling effectiveness is reduced. This is very important when space is at a premium, even for our applications where turbos/intercoolers/plumbing take up a lot of space.

As said earlier, mine is too big, and the car has a problem getting enough heat in the oil during the cooler months. I'm fabricating a block-off plate that will slip down the front of the radiator and block off a portion of the top section during the winter months. A thermostat would be a better option, and I'm in the planning stages for that as well.

A technical story would be very interesting. Each type will have advantages and disadvantages. I have a lot more respect for a product when the company points out not only where their products work, but also applications where it is not well suited.

[Y-TRY]

Would it be futile to try and cool the oil in a turbo set-up?

[Steve1968LS2]

It would be interesting to get C&R's take on aftermarket/fabricated shrouds. Some of the AM "shrouds" act more like barriers.

What is very interesting on newer cars is just how small the radiators are and how well the fan systems work with them. Nearly all of radiator is covered by the shroud and there is a very high open area ratio. If air cannot freely flow, cooling effectiveness is reduced. This is very important when space is at a premium, even for our applications where turbos/intercoolers/plumbing take up a lot of space.

As said earlier, mine is too big, and the car has a problem getting enough heat in the oil during the cooler months. I'm fabricating a block-off plate that will slip down the front of the radiator and block off a portion of the top section during the winter months. A thermostat would be a better option, and I'm in the planning stages for that as well.

A technical story would be very interesting. Each type will have advantages and disadvantages. I have a lot more respect for a product when the company points out not only where their products work, but also applications where it is not well suited.

Hey Carl,

C&R felt that a shroud should be ran on the street and shouldn't be ran on the track. This is due to the high track speeds over pressurizing the fan. With the lower speeds on the street the shroud is a good idea.

Also, I talked with AFCO and they are going to make a radiator with the built in oil cooler similar to the C&R piece. In fact they are working on it right now.

I also heard BeCool will do it on request.

Sort of nice to have more options.

[Steve1968LS2]

Oh and there will be an "oil cooler 101" type story. :)

[BBC69Camaro]

Just want to throw this into the mix, how about a Oil thermostat bypass on the oil cooler? Get the engine up to temp faster.

[Steve1968LS2]

Just want to throw this into the mix, how about a Oil thermostat bypass on the oil cooler? Get the engine up to temp faster.

That's a good idea if you are using an air based cooler. But, if you're running one through the radiator they it's unnessary since the water will warm the oil in addition to cooling it.

[Y-TRY]

Kinda back to the original application (and for my own interests)...

I see how a turbo application could REALLY benefit from cooler oil but I question if any set-up would make a dent. Turbos are pretty efficient at raising oil temps.

I've thrown some ideas and theories around this subject and came to the conclusion that no oil cooler could be more efficient at cooling than the turbos are for heating the oil.

Basically- I theorize that you'd be pissing-in-the-wind trying to cool the oil in a turbocharged engine. The oil will reach a similar max temp regardless of how you try to cool it down. Am I wrong?

[CarlC]

That's a good idea if you are using an air based cooler. But, if you're running one through the radiator they it's unnessary since the water will warm the oil in addition to cooling it.

Not so.

On cool days the oil temperature in mine during normal cruise the oil temps get to maybe 150*. On the freeway, 140*. If I hammer it for a while, 180*. On warm days it will get up to over 200* occasionally.

I would really like the oil temp to be 210-220* during normal operation, so a thermostat is in the planning stages. I may go with a Mocal, but the CV part is really nice.

No matter how much heat turbos may add to the oil, if the oil is overheating a cooler is needed. Worst case the cooler will delay the onset of overheating, but the amount of oil a turbo uses is much smaller than that used in the rest of the engine, which creates a lot of waste heat during high-horsepower output.

[Steve1968LS2]

Not so.

On cool days the oil temperature in mine during normal cruise the oil temps get to maybe 150*. On the freeway, 140*. If I hammer it for a while, 180*. On warm days it will get up to over 200* occasionally.

I would really like the oil temp to be 210-220* during normal operation, so a thermostat is in the planning stages. I may go with a Mocal, but the CV part is really nice.



Hmm.. the techies at C&R is where I got my info. Interesting.

My water temp is never below 190, so shouldn't the oil always end up near this since it's warmed by the water much like it's cooled by the water?

[David Pozzi]

Not so.

On cool days the oil temperature in mine during normal cruise the oil temps get to maybe 150*. On the freeway, 140*. If I hammer it for a while, 180*. On warm days it will get up to over 200* occasionally.

I would really like the oil temp to be 210-220* during normal operation, so a thermostat is in the planning stages. I may go with a Mocal, but the CV part is really nice.

No matter how much heat turbos may add to the oil, if the oil is overheating a cooler is needed. Worst case the cooler will delay the onset of overheating, but the amount of oil a turbo uses is much smaller than that used in the rest of the engine, which creates a lot of waste heat during high-horsepower output.

Carl,
Was this with your old engine with cooler and radiator inlet on the same side? The LS enters the pass side right?

The way it should work is the oil heat exchanger should be on the radiator inlet side tank receiving the warmest coolant. I'm getting a Be Cool rad and it's double pass, they have to put the exchanger in the pass side tank.

Thermostat valves take up a bit of room especially with all the extra plumbing. The cleanest way would be to have it on the engine block. I don't think you need to actually shut off the rad cooler and open the bypass. I think just opening a bypass would be enough, the cooler should have enough extra resistance to flow that would not allow much flow thru it when the bypass is open.

[Steve1968LS2]

Carl,
Was this with your old engine with cooler and radiator inlet on the same side? The LS enters the pass side right?

The way it should work is the oil heat exchanger should be on the radiator inlet side tank receiving the warmest coolant. I'm getting a Be Cool rad and it's double pass, they have to put the exchanger in the pass side tank.

Thermostat valves take up a bit of room especially with all the extra plumbing. The cleanest way would be to have it on the engine block. I don't think you need to actually shut off the rad cooler and open the bypass. I think just opening a bypass would be enough, the cooler should have enough extra resistance to flow that would not allow much flow thru it when the bypass is open.

A factory LS radiator (from GM) has the inlet on the drivers side and the exit (lower) on the pass side.

Most aftermarket LS radiators have the inlet and outlet both on the pass side to make plumbing cleaner. That's how my current AFCO is and how the C&R unit is.

My new AFCO will have both on the pass side and the cooler will be on the upper driver's side like the C&R unit.

[CarlC]

With the C&R dual-pass radiator the oil cooler is placed in the mid-tank. Hence, the engine coolant has already gone through 1/2 of the cooling cycle. By the time the coolant, which exits the engine at thermostat temperature, gets to the mid-tank it has cooled significantly. This keeps oil temperatures low on cool days.

It's the same for both the previous 406 and the current LS. On warm days while street driving it takes quite a bit to get the oil into the 220* range. On track days it performs very well. Having the cooler in the return tank would help keep oil temperatures up.

David,

The inlet/outlet are on the RH side and the oil cooler is on the LH (pics on website). I think the Mocal type could be used with only one extra hose in my application. I've thought of a simple bypass as well. Any hints on a good design/parts?

Though I like the design of the ATS pan it would have been really nice to have a sandwich-type thermostat adapter, even if it meant having to 90* the filter to make it work. Having the thermostat built in to the radiator heat exchanger would also be kind trick but a nightmare if servicing was needed.

[chicane]

Oh and there will be an "oil cooler 101" type story. :)

Nice... definately, looking forword to that and getting the 'tech' out to the masses.

[JNS]

Would it be futile to try and cool the oil in a turbo set-up?

nate- you still got your turbo setup in the 68?

[Steve1968LS2]

Nice... definately, looking forword to that and getting the 'tech' out to the masses.

Right now I'm doing a shock tech story.. like a "shock 101" deal.

My problem is that I have more story ideas than I have time.

[Vegas69]

Not sure how the LS motors are bypassed but I have recently learned you need to increase the blow off pressure of the bypass when running a cooler or remote oil filter. (At least on a genv/vi big block) 11 to 30 lbs in my case.

[Y-TRY]

nate- you still got your turbo setup in the 68?

Yep, I still have it all but the car is on a rack right now for paint/body. I commited to the project before the economy went South. It's still moving forward albeit a bit slower.

[CarlC]

Resurrection.....

So today I did some testing using a recently installed Mocal high-temp (202*F) thermostat. This type of thermostat, as David mentions above, is a bypass type. It never totally closes off either passage. Instead, the increased resistance to flow created by the cooler, and the longer flow runs, makes the oil bypass through the thermostat. As the oil temperature gets near the thermostatic temperature, the bypass starts to close and force more oil to the cooler. Even with the thermostat fully deployed there is still some internal bypass.

Two tests were performed. First, the car was run for about 1/2-hour in various street and highway conditions with the cooler plugged and oil temperatures noted. This allowed no oil to get to the cooler, hence, zero external cooling. The next test was to re-connect the oil cooler and do the same driving loop. Ambient temperatures were within 2* for both tests.

The total increase in the hose length of cooler connected vs. dis-connected is approximately 24". -10 lines are used. The cooler is located after the first pass of the dual-pass radiator. On most days the car can easily run with a block-off plate covering the entire first pass and still run cool without the fan coming on excessively, i.e., the car has excessive cooling capacity. The temperature sensor is placed at the bottom of the the oil pan sump. New Torco 5W-30 oil is used.

Results? No significant difference in overall oil temperatures. But here's the kicker. The oil temperatures never went over 155* in either test even when some "spirited" canyon driving was done. The ambient temperature is only 55*F so it is pretty cold. The coolant thermostat in the car is 160*F.

Warmer/summer ambient temperatures will hopefully bring up the temperatures.

So, the Mocal bypass thermostat is doing what it is supposed to do. It would be very nice if an aftermarket LS-series pan was available that utilized the stock LS small-body filter mount and location, an internal thermostat bypass, and the current ATS trap-door design. I'd gladly have paid additional money to clean up the installation and reduce the number of external hoses.

[wedged]

interesting... I've previously heard that oil temps usually can run similar to engine temps, and this seems to back that up in this application. This also concearns me a little. Would it not be better to run a hotter engine coolant thermostat ? (i did not read the enitre thread, so I do not know your complete set up)

[Vegas69]

I agree with that. I'd run a 195 in that LS motor in the winter time.

[CarlC]

Going to a higher coolant thermostat is a mixed bag for me. Pros: Higher oil temperatures and some increase in engine longevity. Cons: Higher engine temperatures mean higher induction temperatures for forced induction. It also means having to change the fan on/off temperatures if a coolant thermostat swap was done at the beginning/end of summer.

If I pop for HPTuners so that I can easily change the fan on/off temps then I'll switch to a higher temperature coolant thermostat and retest. For now, with a fan preset of 170on/165off the switch to a 180+ thermostat means the fans will not shut off once they turn on. It would also allow real-time logging of intake vs. engine temperatures on cooler winter days to see if there is a significant difference.

[Vegas69]

There is always a compromise huh Carl. I've found my car runs way to cool in the winter as well. Mine went down to 125-130 on the way to the Optima challenge and it wasn't that chilly. I'm ditching the high flo t stat for a stock GM 180. I've read teh high flo stats don't like to close after they open until they cool off. My fans don't come on until 185 which would be reasonable for you. You're running alot thinner oil than I am so it probably not as big a deal. I just don't like not burning off the condensation in the oil.

[CarlC]

A new 2010 ZO6 would cure a lot of the compromises Todd!

In general, the oil temperatures for this engine are far lower than the previous GEN1 SBC's the car has had. At the last track day the oil never exceeded 185* with an ambient around 85*F. With the previous 406 SBC it would have been 220+. The current supercharged LS makes more power, turns at higher engine speeds, and has less oil capacity, yet runs significantly cooler.

I see no need for whoop-de-do thermostats for these engines unless the build is pretty wild. These engines already have the good stuff built in.

I need to pony up for HPTuners so that I can change fan temps. I'm just a cheap SOB for some things.

[Vegas69]

Ha ha....that would be to cheap and easy. :rolleyes:

[wedged]

Are you pulling cold air into the intake system ? If so, (this is all theory) then will an increase in the engine temps make the same difference in intake charge temp at the intake port, after the supercharger ? if so, by how much ? You may be able to negate the some of that gain, if there is any, by insulating the intake duct work before the SC ?

[Bow Tie 67]

I need to pony up for HPTuners so that I can change fan temps. I'm just a cheap SOB for some things.

Carl,

HPTuners can change fan temps, but on the newer Gen 4 ECU's it will take upgrading to the 2bar system, this allows you to put a lower temp value in the table.

If you are using a GMPP Gen 4 ECU then your Sh*t out of luck.

[CarlC]

A cold-air intake system is definately as much, if not more, of an important function. It is not uncommon during the summer months for under-hood air intake temperatures to reach 140*F+. This is a killer for forced induction systems. The 160* coolant thermostat is worth 15-20 ft-lb across the board vs. 195* as a stand-alone modification for my build.

Heat soak of the entire intake system affects intake charge temperatures. So, the lower the intake track temperature, the lower the intake charge temperature. The OE plastic and dry intake manifold helps keep intake charge temperatures low. Mine in all aluminum, so there is more heat soak.

I'm still old-school GENIII so ECM programming is easy. Given the performance of this ancient (in the electronics world) system, and the later model GENIV, it's really hard for me to justify using an aftermarket (GMPP) system with minimal/difficult systems changes available. The aftemarket support for the stock PCM's is fantastic.

[Steve1968LS2]

The guys at Canton made a good point when I spoke with them today. Thier oil t-stat is set at 215-degrees. Why? So that any water (ie moisture) in the oil will burn off.

They said that this is especially true of cars that sit alot (like our cars) and they aren't fond of the lower temp t-stats.

[CarlC]

The hard part is getting the oil to 215*. Unless the coolant thermostat is 195+ and the engine is run hard, it may not get there very often. If the thermostat is a bypass design (MOCAL, CV, etc.) then some oil will always go through the cooler.

[Steve1968LS2]

The hard part is getting the oil to 215*. Unless the coolant thermostat is 195+ and the engine is run hard, it may not get there very often. If the thermostat is a bypass design (MOCAL, CV, etc.) then some oil will always go through the cooler.

Funny.. mine gets there all the time the way I drive.. lol

Around town my oil temp is fine.. it's only when really flogging that it goes up and I need a cooler.

heck, at Optima I think it hit 260-270 with Dave.. the year before (no cooler) it almost hit 300.

To be honest, if you're running synthetic, 215 is a good temp..

[Vegas69]

How many quarts are you running in Penny?

[Steve1968LS2]

How many quarts are you running in Penny?

That pan is around 6... plus the lines, remote filter and cooler.. so maybe a bit less than 8