| Slant Six Forum https://slantsix.org/forum/ |
|
| Plug and Thermostat Recommendations https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34794 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Rick Covalt [ Fri Apr 10, 2009 12:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Plug and Thermostat Recommendations |
I am reassembling my sons dart with the peanut head mentioned in the other thread. It is going to end up with about 11.2 to 1 and he will mix race fuel if pump premium is not enough. Since it needs plugs and a new thermostat anyway, should I get a lower temp thermostat to help with any detonation issues? Looks like they are available from about 160-205 degreees. Or am I thinking wrong on this? Also any recommendations on the plugs for the same issue would be appreciated. Or should I just get whatever stock ones are called for? Rick Covalt |
|
| Author: | Dart270 [ Fri Apr 10, 2009 1:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Start with a heat range 2-3 colder than stock, and yes, I would probably use a 160 or 175 deg thermostat. Something like a Champion RN10YC or RN9YC if you can still get something like that, or an Autolite 63 or 64. I always use NGK plugs (GR4 or GR45 or GR5 are drool head numbers), but I don't know NGK part numbers for peanut head. The low thermo will probably hurt mileage a little, but that is probably not a big concern for you. Lou |
|
| Author: | Aggressive Ted [ Fri Apr 10, 2009 2:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
UR4 6330 or UR5 I use them.... |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Fri Apr 10, 2009 2:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Me, I do not recommend a low-temperature thermostat. Reduced mileage, increased oil contamination, greatly increased engine wear. I recommend waterless coolant instead (link takes you to most recent of three threads to read thru). Spark plugs: Use NGK. Stock heat range in their basic V-groove spark plug would be UR4; with such high compression I would probably try a UR6 for starters. |
|
| Author: | Rick Covalt [ Fri Apr 10, 2009 4:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Thanks |
That's what I was looking for. Thanks a lot. Rick. |
|
| Author: | blue62val [ Sat Apr 11, 2009 5:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: Me, I do not recommend a low-temperature thermostat. Reduced mileage, increased oil contamination, greatly increased engine wear. I recommend waterless coolant instead (link takes you to most recent of three threads to read thru).
G'day guys,Spark plugs: Use NGK. Stock heat range in their basic V-groove spark plug would be UR4; with such high compression I would probably try a UR6 for starters. well....I actually posted to this thread but for some reason it didn't list. No doubt my service provider cutting out AGAIN. ANYWAY....what i said was...... Such a shame I didn't read this thread 24 hours ago. Only today i changed my thermostat in the old Val. Recently the car was running pretty hot so i had the radiator cleaned out and thought I'd put in a new thermostat. The old one literally fell out mind you - rusted away. Today, a reputable Chrysler Spares place down here recommended a 160 Thermostat. I had a 180 on the shelf, but they recommended the 160 because "the old Vals can do with running a little cooler". My questions is.....would that be the case down here, due to the warmer weather ? Someone else said the 180 was generally the way to go. Peter Sydney, Australia. |
|
| Author: | 66aCUDA [ Sat Apr 11, 2009 5:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
G'day I live in a HOT climate in the US and I would go with the 180 (I am using the 195 here). I also have A/C in the car but havent run it yet. Do you have your factory fan shroud in place? If not you will be happier with using one. You may also wish to upgrade your fan depending on which one your OLD Val came with. Frank |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Sat Apr 11, 2009 5:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
G'day, Peter. You've been given a bum steer based on incorrect folk "wisdom". A 160° thermostat is just about never the best choice, no matter what the weather conditions might be. 180° is better, and 195° would be even better for engine efficiency and wear control, except on a carburetted vehicle you then get into fuel hassles related to high underhood temperatures. |
|
| Author: | blue62val [ Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: G'day, Peter. You've been given a bum steer based on incorrect folk "wisdom". A 160° thermostat is just about never the best choice, no matter what the weather conditions might be. 180° is better, and 195° would be even better for engine efficiency and wear control, except on a carburetted vehicle you then get into fuel hassles related to high underhood temperatures.
G'day dan,yep.........that'd be my luck. Thankfully I kept the 180 thermostat on the shelf. Since doing the radiator I've been considering pulling the whole motor out and actually pulling it apart with my 10 year old son. Never built a motor before, but I would like to give it a go and see what happens. The engine was last reconditioned 20 years ago, and whilst it's not had a million miles put on it, I really wouldn't mind pulling her down to see what makes it tick and tidy up anything along the way. one thing for sure - I could get the head done for unleaded. Peter |
|
| Author: | 1969ronnie [ Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
160 or 180... in your climate you will be fine... no half year winters to worry about. 180 is better. ronnie |
|
| Author: | 68barracuda [ Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I agree with Dan - Some twit over here in RSA spread the story that we don't NEED a thermostat because we do not have cold winters - I saw slants needing a 50thou overbore due to this. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC-08:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|