The message to which you are about to reply is shown first. GO TO REPLY FORM



 VIEW    REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE Replies to this message will be emailed.    PRINT   SAVE 

Thermostat choice...cooler...better...?? 200 1990

posted by  Survivor99 on  Tue Mar 18 11:30 CST 2003
Author: [PROFILE] [EVERY POST] [THREADS] [BEST POSTS] RSS Feed     [IGNORE ALL POSTS] [RELATED]

Guys,

This is one of those theoretical questions:

I noticed there are a lot of choices for thermostate temp rating.

92' for cold climates, 88' for hotter, but I even saw one rated 86 or something lower (not an OEM installation)

I was thinking, would it be better for the engine to operate at a relatively low temp such as 86'. My logic is lower the temp, less wear on the engine. Less premature combustion (therefore less pinging and knocking)

Because heat softens the metal thus allowing more steel molecules to rub off as the parts turn.







USERNAME
Use "claim to be" below if you don't want to log in.
PASSWORD
I don't have an account. Sign me up.
CLAIM TO BE
Use only if you don't want to login (post anonymously).
ENTER CAPTCHA CODE
This is required for posting anonymously.
OPTIONS notify by email
Available only to user accounts.
SUBJECT
MODEL/YEAR
MESSAGE

DICTIONARY
LABEL(S) +
IMAGE URL *
[IMAGE LIBRARY (UPLOAD/SELECT)]

* = Field is optional.

+ = Enter space delimited labels for this post. An example entry: 240 muffler


©Jarrod Stenberg 1997-2022. All material except where indicated.


All participants agree to these terms.

Brickboard.com is not affiliated with nor sponsored by AB Volvo, Volvo Car Corporation, Volvo Cars of North America, Inc. or Ford Motor Company. Brickboard.com is a Volvo owner/enthusiast site, similar to a club, and does not intend to pose as an official Volvo site. The official Volvo site can be found here.