Well, consider that your V8 is actually less "stressed" than the 4, with
considerably fewer HP per liter displacement (it's not rated 190HP, is
it? I thought not). This leads me to suspect it generates less heat per
liter as well, and one would expect the internal cooling capacity to be
proportionate to the displacement (rather than the specific output).
But that's neither here nor there. I guess my main point would be, why go
to great lengths to run the engine at a lower than "normal" temperature
just because the weather could conceivably get hot? That seems to be what
is going on with changing to a 165 degree thermostat for the summer, and
the benefit is not apparent to me.
But I think I've rattled on long enough on this subject...
Paul Hunt had this to say:
>If the radiator cannot dissipate the heat of the engine then we are indeed
>in agreement. But I do find this surprising, since not even my factory V8
>suffers from that, while cruising, when the temps are in the 90s.
>
>Cheers,
>PaulH.
>
--
Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the red one with the silver bootlid.
|