One of the main reasons for taking the temps up to 200 in the first place
was due to Smog Control...good old EPA decided that a hotter running engine
produced less emissions. True...but at a sacrifice on power. Now, most of
the engines run at close to 200 without any problems...but run them a little
cooler (not too cold though) and you'll see slightly better performance.
Have I see any degradations in mileage even on my Dak...nope. Any on my
co-workers 5.2L Dak with the 180...nope (his actually got better).
Remember, the 180 runs normally at 185-187...not 180...and the 190 runs
around 195-197 as well. (Conditions vary obviously.)
I'm not that familiar with the principles you're talking about...I just know
what works from "real world" experiences.
----- Original Message -----
From: <SuperNagz@aol.com>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 1999 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: DML: Re: 180 thermo (hurts mileage)
> Well then maybe there were some other variables involved that somehow
managed
> to get you greater mileage.
>
> All I am saying that it is a thermodynamic principle that clearly states
the
> lower the temperature, the lower the efficiency of the cycle... and of
> course, the opposite holds true... the higher the temps, the better the
> efficiency.
>
> Keep in mind, I am talking about the operating temperatures... and not the
> incoming air temperatures... we all know the cooler the incoming air,
the
> more dense it is... the more dense it is.. the more oxygen it contains...
>
> This is not a flame in any way... all I am simply stating is that, "all
> things held constant... going from a 200 to a 180 degree t-stat will yield
> lower mpg"
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:14:03 EDT