Sesshoumaru

iTrader: (1)

i've ran a few FC's with out and it always operatated cooler than normal. I put one back in my car (oem) and it always runs cooler than stock (fluidyne rad).

During the winter i freeze my *** off WITH a thermosat and couldn't think of it with out.

this is the same thing as the BAC. It's not for everyone but as long as you know the advantages/disadvantages it's fine either way you go

NZConvertible

I think I'll just stick with what the experts have been doing and recommending for decades, particularly since there are zero positive effects to running without a 'stat.

KNONFS

iTrader: (14)

I've seen the same thing, except I sued to live in PR, over two years without thermo; just because I was CHEAP!

igottafc

iTrader: (6)

hey RE ted, it may be possible that my stat had failed, im wondering if i should core out the stat since i rarely drive it in the winter and mostly during the summer. Summers in MI range from 70-90°F. When you say remove the core, its basically removing the thermowax correct? thanks -alex

RETed

I don't think it's "wax" - I think it's temperature sensitive metal?
Yeah, when you look at the thermostat, you'll see 4 legs - two on top and two on the bottom.

Get a good pair of wire cutters and cut all 4 legs out.
The center should drop out.
Replace the flange into the water pump housing.


-Ted

gotrotors?

Without the thermostat, the computer will take longer to identify the car is warm, and therefore the mixture will be more rich because of the lack of heat. It is best to keep the oem thermostat in. Dont even waste money on that pep boys crap, as OEM is the only way to go for that kind of thing. The thermostat also causes *backpressure* (for lack of a better word) in the cooling system, which will keep it flowing evenly thru the cooling jackets. If you dont have the thermostat in, you will develop hot spots on your housings due to lack of water pressure in the system. Hope that helped

Impreza2RX7

Do the temps drop if you core it? If not, why do it? A new Mazda thermostat is only like 12 bucks with a new gasket..

RETed

Guess somebody didn't read the whole thread...


-Ted

astrochild7

iTrader: (3)

I think this whole discussion is funny... think about this logically.... andyou can figure it out.... go with reTed but if your afraid of the cold run a 165 t stat and you get both warm up and lower temps.... I've done both and had luck with both...

kenn_chan

one other thing to consider besides ECu/fuel mixtures is that all new cars are running at higher temps than before, part of this is due to wear, your engines suffers about 80% of its wear when the engine is cold, and not warmed up thats why they have always taught you to let the engine warm up prior to driving it. The cooler temps will cause emissions problems, due to fuel mixture problems, and possibly more wear and tear in the long run.

Remember Ted does high performance versions of our engines, and what is acceptable for a race car is not necessarily preferred for a daily driver.

either way you have to make the decision, and the 165 degree thermostat sounds like a good compromise.

Kenn

Tofuball

Hrm, I was just wondering about that.

Anyone know where a 165 thermostat could be aquired?

WonkoTheSane

iTrader: (2)

Just for the record, since this thread is about 3 months old or more.. I was more looking for any negative effects, since I was trying to troubleshoot my engine's overheating problem, I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't going to be anything too bad happening while I was playing with it. Those of us up north know that it's not a good idea to run year-round without one

NZConvertible

Why would you want to run that cold? All you're doing is increasing engine wear. You are not increasing the cooling system's ability. If you have an overheating problem with a 180degF thermostat, you'll still have a problem with a 165degF one.

Have a read of this link. It pretty much answers the original question ("Any danger to running too cold?").

http://www.carnut.com/ramblin/_cool3.html

d0 Luck

NZconvert and RETed brings up both strong points. and both scenarios i've tried

and guess what? running w/o thermostat does and will eventually f*ck up your motor and increase engine wear (which i never belived from the beginning).

reason to back up?
after 850 miles running w/o a thermostat, the motor slowly just gave in... as in hard time starting, power loss, and 'rough feeling'
even 1 full bottle of water wetter nor 50/50 of antifreeze didn't work.

i am sure i've learned from this mistake and will go back to an OEM Mazda t-stat. even coring gives me the goosebumps...

my .02 cents

gingenhagen

anyone know if it makes a difference if i run a generic OEM thermostat rather than the mazda one?

RETed

I've been running it like this for the past 5 years.
It has seen near freezing temps in winter and over 110F degree temps during the summer.
Currently, it has been in Hawaii for the past 2 years with moderately high temps with no problems.
I think your experience is an isolated one that does not necessarily relate to the thermostat removal?


-Ted

RETed

We'e had bad experiences with Stant brand thermostats.
These are the most easily available at the local auto parts stores.
We've seen them dead BRAND NEW!


-Ted

NZConvertible

Many people have their bad experiences with non-Mazda thermostats. It's not worth the risk just for a few bucks.

totallimmortal

I would not reccomend that, i know from experience that although when you have no coolant availible watter is better than nothing but even on a cold day collant temps can reach about 212 on many engines even if just for a moment this will boil the water and thats not good. Antifreeze or coolant not only have a lower freezing point but also a higher boiling point thus the reason it is used and not just water

eViLRotor

iTrader: (2)

You are missing two obvious facts:

1) The system is under pressure (.9 bar), therefore it does not boil at 100C/212F. This basically negates any advantage that the higher boiling point of the eg/w mix would have.
2) Water has much greater thermal conductivity than ethylene glycol.

Water is the best coolant.

The main reason we run ethylene glycol is to prevent the coolant from freezing (hence the term 'anti-freeze') and to prevent corrosion, not because of its better heat dissipation properties.

RETed

Coolant also has lubricants (primarily) for the water pump.
Without the added lubricants, the water pump will have a shortened life.


-Ted

87turbomkiii

It is best to run a Mazda OEM thermostat in the cooling system to prolong the life of the engine. Running a motor(any motor) below the temps that it was designed to run is going to shorten the life of the motor. Why do you think they install a thermostat in the car in the first place. A great deal of engine wear occurs when the engine is cold. Cold temps could also cause oil sludging which will in turn create more wear and tear on the engine. I understand this has all been stated before, but I would just like to offer my agreement to the people that have been saying to run the OEM thermostat. Your engine will thank you.

RETed

I *think* excessive wear is a bit extreme.
Modern oil compositions should have enough protection at lower temps to prevent that.
Hell, thicker oil implies better film strength and better protection against friction.
If "cold" oil was that much of a problem, we'd all be running block heaters!

I dunno what your definition of "oil sludging" is, but it sounds like oil that has been overheated causing sludge...

Thermostats are deisgn to get the engine to opertating temps quicker.
This decrease emissions and raises gas mileage, PRIMARILY.


-Ted

87turbomkiii

The term "Excessive Wear" is not by any means extreme. When an engine is cold the oil will be "thicker" and the metal to metal tolerances in the engine are wider. This will increase the chances that there will be contact between the moving parts. Why do you think that most people recommend an engine to be at optimal temp before running it hard. Hell, If thicker oil implies better film strength and better protection against friction then why don't we run our engines til 8,000rpm right after start-up in the winter? I would just like to see people run their engines properly, and also promote the spread of proper information throughout the forum.

RETed, I respect your opinion, please do not take this as a personal attack, just a difference of opinion.

RETed

"Cold" and "thicker" are relative.
I live in Hawaii, and I might maybe see 50's degrees F.
I've seen oil pumps explode when ambient temps are in freezing or under.

Engines are designed to run at operating temps - usually about 190F.
"Clearances" are optimized, and oil viscosity is thinned out.

I know all about what you're talking about.


I did not imply that we should be doing as you described.
There is this thing called "common sense".

What I meant to imply is that why are engines able to run 0W to straight 30W?
If we are worried about thicker oil, why don't we all run all thin oil from the start?
I'm not talking about running 150W gear oil in the engine...


You have a funny way of expressing...your opinion.
Please don't insult me with things that are just counter to common sense.

I presented my direct experience.
The rotary engine tends to heat up pretty quickly.
I do run at least 50/50 anti-freeze mixtures.
I've started the car in 30.0 degree F ambients with no obvious problems.
The only problem with the car is at ambients temps at around freezing, highway cruising will tend to drop coolant temps under 180F.
My VDO water temp gauge shows temps down to 160F.
The engine has been torn down twice within being in 2 years of NorCal 110F+ summers and sub 30F winters; internal inspection of the engine parts show no obvious signs of premature wear.
So, my direct experience tells me it doesn't do anything detrimental to the engine.
Please don't insult me by telling me what I'm telling people is false.

Now, I'm not recommending doing this if you regularly see freezing temps.
If your car see temps under 20F consistently, then this is a really dumb thing to do, obviously...


-Ted