Have you guys noticed that atleast stock engines give better performance @ 160-170*f than @ 200*f? Is this just a this that happens to me? I played around and removed the stat completly. The engine likes me more now but that was b/c my 190*f stat was jammed.

I mean the difference is more than noticeable.. it's huge. or then again something may be wrong with my engine.

Any thoughts?

-Crisis-

 

how much is gas/petrol there in Finland?

 

everybody asks

98 octaine (same as the us 93) its 1.049€ per liter...

damn expencive

 

I have done away with heat vs. performance concerns. I have datalogs and timeslips to prove that it isn't a problem. On the same night, same track, same chip I ran identical times with the car at 155* compared to 205*. Before I would make a pass, then let the car cool. This wasted precious track tie, so I decided to just start making back to back passes. Low and behold, the times remained the same. Actually, the 60' time became more consistent because the tires were staying hot. Each successive pass required less burnout. Now as long as I'm under 220*, I don't worry about the engine temp.

 

my car seems to like the 180 stat i put in. the 195 was ok but the engine stayed at 220 and went a tad over in traffic.