Early DG Thermostat 80 deg -vs- 87 deg

[airheadboxer]

I’ve been through several threads about changing the thermostat on an early DG and I’ve seen a couple of references to fitting an 80 degree thermostat instead of the usual 87 degree. These comments didn't seem to raise any debate that I could see.

The BW site suggests the 80 degree thermostat is for “Lower opening temperature of 80°c for modified engines.” My engine is standard but I like the idea of the lower temperature having read a number of comments/fears/experience about overheating and the consequences.

So…. is it worth fitting the 80 degree thermostat to an early DG? (I'm not trying to cure an existing overheating issue, I'm just trying to do the right thing)

Thanks, Brian.

[itchyfeet]

pointless imo
I did it because I had low oil pressure and wanted to make the oil run cooler in summer but in winter it never got up to temp.

Oil needs to get hot.

some people swap winter and summer but I can't be bothered.

[AngeloEvs]

I have the 80 though I cannot remember if it was an 82 that I fitted many years ago, I just prefer the way my DG feels with it on LPG and petrol. I don't do enough miles in the winter to change it but, when I do use it for an extended trip it seems to run as well as in the summer. But you are right there are differing opinions regards lower temp stats but 2 ton of camper van and just a 1.9 to pull it..........

[airheadboxer]

Thanks for your comments itchyfeet and AngeloEvs.

The winter/summer thing makes sense, but the thought of that job on the early DG doesn’t fill me with joy. And oil running too cold is a cause of the mayonnaise problem I believe, and I don’t want that.

The 82 degree option seems a compromise of sorts, and the comment “2 ton of camper van and just a 1.9 to pull it” sums things up

I’m a bit driven about this because of my flashbacks to mending my brothers early Hillman Imp years ago. That was another rear mounted, difficult-to-access all aluminium engine vehicle that was prone to overheating, head gasket failure, unexplained water loss, blocked radiators (including externally from road muck on that vehicle) and water pump failure. We had them all, always when it was cold and wet, no garage to work in (and I still don’t have a garage to work in) and no internet.

So overall there doesn't seem to be a compelling reason to go the 80, but I’m tempted with the 82 degree idea.

Thanks again, Brian

[Mocki]

In my thoughts sure it’s better for the engine to get up to temp quicker rather than slower , let’s face it in winter cold running isn’t good for the engine ( well I was always told don’t thrash a just started engine in the cold ) and in the summer it’s going to be running much warmer than that once the thermostat has opened and everything is up to working temp , and frankly I want the radiator and all the cooling system to working as well as possible once that gauge is up to the middle and the engine is up to working temp to keep it there

Thick oil maybe ok for a worn out engine , but it’s doing my Middle Age ( miles) engine no favours on a cOld start up and if it was better why did vw fit a oil warmer / cooler to the oil filter housing on the 2.1

[airheadboxer]

Thanks for your comments Mocki. I suppose another way to give some spare cooling capacity it to fit the bigger (thicker radiator) and use the normal 87 deg thermostat. Decisions, decisions.

Thanks again, Brian.

[Mocki]

You won’t have any choice with the rad , only the bigger ones are available these days , and they do make a hell of a difference , swapping out a 30 year old rad for a new one fantasticly improves cooling .

[123-jn]

I run an 80 thermostat due to the rad being a bit blocked up, it is great in the summer but in winter it doesnt let the oil get above 80/85 which is too cool for oil and the heater is not its best either . I now have a new rad and at some point we are going back to 87 but I need to take out the lpg tank to get the rad swapped. Need to get psyched upfor it first!!!