Jump to content

6L80E thermostat delete sure-cool cooler kit

Jdezee

By Jdezee
in Engines & Drivetrain

 Share

Recommended Posts

SierraHD17 Senior Enthusiast

SierraHD17

Posted
Posted

Nobody needs the thermostat... its something GM cooked up for fuel economy gains...  Even the HD trucks with 6L90es through 2019 for sure don't have one and neither does any automatic (including the exact same 6L80e) prior to 2014.  Good way to cook the oil when you tow.

  • Like 3
  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Grumpy Bear
Grumpy Bear

You do know you can just flip the "pill' upside down and do the bypass for free, right? 

SierraHD17
SierraHD17

Nobody needs the thermostat... its something GM cooked up for fuel economy gains...  Even the HD trucks with 6L90es through 2019 for sure don't have one and neither does any automatic (including the e

txab
txab

^^^^^^ +1

Posted Images

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, SierraHD17 said:

Nobody needs the thermostat... its something GM cooked up for fuel economy gains...  Even the HD trucks with 6L90es through 2019 for sure don't have one and neither does any automatic (including the exact same 6L80e) prior to 2014.  Good way to cook the oil when you tow.

Yeah but if if’s 20 degrees out and you’re not towing, your trans temp will be like 100 degrees. I’m sure there is a significant bump in fuel economy which I don’t mind at all.

 

Personally I’d rather have the trans thermostat at like 160. But i’m just going to assume the engineers know what they are talking about by setting it at 190

Mozzer Enthusiast

Mozzer

Posted
Posted



. But i’m just going to assume the engineers know what they are talking about by setting it at 190


This forum would be a very quiet place if that were the case [emoji1787]


The product that started the thread should achieve the lower opening temperature I believe.

2014, 5.3, 4x4, work truck

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, truckguy82 said:

Yeah but if if’s 20 degrees out and you’re not towing, your trans temp will be like 100 degrees. I’m sure there is a significant bump in fuel economy which I don’t mind at all.

 

Personally I’d rather have the trans thermostat at like 160. But i’m just going to assume the engineers know what they are talking about by setting it at 190

This is with water thermostats of 180 F and 170 F. 20F air temperature = @ 115 F ATF temperature between 50 and 55 mph. It's warmer if driven slower or faster than this. Heat up time is about twenty minutes of highway driving vs over an hour with the factory thermostat. If your running the factory water thermostat and with only the cooler in the radiator it will be about 25 to 30 degrees warmer. Remember a radiator cooled transmission rides on the water temperature as a fluid HEATER until the transmissions fluid temperature exceeds the tanks temperature then its a cooler.  This graph is data I collected over two years of experiments with Pepper. She's a V6. Your V8's have the cooler in the hot tank v cold tank for the V6 applications. Yours will be warmer. IF you have the max tow package you have a second cooler in the upper part of the AC condenser. I have no idea how that would play out. You will have to experiment for yourself on that one. Fact is I don't know if Max Tow even has a thermostat. 

 

Coolers for AT's have been in the cold tank for almost every one made for the last 75 years and NONE had a thermostat. 

 

TransTemp.thumb.png.026abb0e57c15a77d3ae332bdbbbfe88.png

  • Like 2
SierraHD17 Senior Enthusiast

SierraHD17

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, truckguy82 said:

Yeah but if if’s 20 degrees out and you’re not towing, your trans temp will be like 100 degrees. I’m sure there is a significant bump in fuel economy which I don’t mind at all.

 

Personally I’d rather have the trans thermostat at like 160. But i’m just going to assume the engineers know what they are talking about by setting it at 190

About as significant as running 5w30 oil versus 0w20 lol... negligible.  As mentioned your tube pass in the radiator tank acts as a heater anyway with any fluid temp below the cooling system temp.

Edited by SierraHD17
truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, SierraHD17 said:

About as significant as running 5w30 oil versus 0w20 lol... negligible.  As mentioned your tube pass in the radiator tank acts as a heater anyway with any fluid temp below the cooling system temp.

Yeah and any change in oil viscosity likely has a considerable effect on efficiency inside a transmission.

 

There’s a few reasons we get 25mpg+ highway, that’s one of them IMO.

Mike GMC Enthusiast

Mike GMC

Posted
Posted

I've been doing some searching, but I can't seem to find much.  Does the 8L90E have a similar thermostat?  Can it be bypassed or removed as well?

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, truckguy82 said:

Yeah and any change in oil viscosity likely has a considerable effect on efficiency inside a transmission.

 

There’s a few reasons we get 25mpg+ highway, that’s one of them IMO.

I get about 25 mpg in the winter. 30 in the summer. My trans temperatures are as shown in the graph. 

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I get about 25 mpg in the winter. 30 in the summer. My trans temperatures are as shown in the graph. 

Well since you are the slowest driving human alive, I’d say your output data is skewed.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, truckguy82 said:

Well since you are the slowest driving human alive, I’d say your output data is skewed.

 

 

Hey there Mister, I passed someone yesterday. 

:crackup:

 

image.png.aacd1d05eee8741dd2fe83773180bfcc.png

 

As you can see I tested in 5 mph increments between 30 mph and 75 mph.

Then I chose to gather data were is was most efficient. 

So the data is  not skewed. It represents the coldest possible temperatures. 

And my good sir, that was the question that was being answered. 

Would removing the thermostat make it to cold. 

Mission accomplished.

NO!!

 

SierraHD17 Senior Enthusiast

SierraHD17

Posted
Posted
On 3/14/2020 at 12:15 PM, truckguy82 said:

Yeah and any change in oil viscosity likely has a considerable effect on efficiency inside a transmission.

 

There’s a few reasons we get 25mpg+ highway, that’s one of them IMO.

Wrong again... direct injection is one of your leading achievements... lol.  You keep believing you need that thermostat... but if you don't tow or do anything but just commute it won't really matter.. as much.

  • Like 1
truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, SierraHD17 said:

Wrong again... direct injection is one of your leading achievements... lol.  You keep believing you need that thermostat... but if you don't tow or do anything but just commute it won't really matter.. as much.

So you are saying it doesn’t improve efficiency and that it serves no purpose

 

Fact is neither you nor I have any clue how much efficiency it gains
 

So my options are -

#1 - believe gm engineers that the efficiency gain is worth it

#2 - believe sierrahd17 from the truck forum who  has zero data to support his claims

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Hey there Mister, I passed someone yesterday. 

:crackup:

 

image.png.aacd1d05eee8741dd2fe83773180bfcc.png

 

As you can see I tested in 5 mph increments between 30 mph and 75 mph.

Then I chose to gather data were is was most efficient. 

So the data is  not skewed. It represents the coldest possible temperatures. 

And my good sir, that was the question that was being answered. 

Would removing the thermostat make it to cold. 

Mission accomplished.

NO!!

 

Whoa whoa whoa, you got up to 75mph! 
 

Anyway thanks for the data.

 

Yeah that’s no too bad at all. I was more thinking like the northern states. In NJ the lowest we see is 0. I travel to VT a lot and we see probably -10 at the lowest. I was stationed in ND for a few years and we saw -25.

 

Should someone in ND remove the thermostat? Hell no. Should someone in VT remove their thermostat, no. Should someone in NJ remove their thermostat, eh maybe.


That was all I was trying to say.

SierraHD17 Senior Enthusiast

SierraHD17

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, truckguy82 said:

Whoa whoa whoa, you got up to 75mph! 
 

Anyway thanks for the data.

 

Yeah that’s no too bad at all. I was more thinking like the northern states. In NJ the lowest we see is 0. I travel to VT a lot and we see probably -10 at the lowest. I was stationed in ND for a few years and we saw -25.

 

Should someone in ND remove the thermostat? Hell no. Should someone in VT remove their thermostat, no. Should someone in NJ remove their thermostat, eh maybe.


That was all I was trying to say.

No you are just trying to argue based on using GM's engineering which we know is under constraint based off theoretical and usually laboratory fuel economy testing.... that's a fact.  It's a terrible idea for people that tow and running your fluid at the high end of the scale degrades it with time and any oil manufacturer can show you that.. that's a fact.  

 

Doesn't much matter anymore though lol.

Edited by SierraHD17
truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, SierraHD17 said:

No you are just trying to argue based on using GM's engineering which we know is under constraint based off theoretical and usually laboratory fuel economy testing.... that's a fact.  It's a terrible idea for people that tow and running your fluid at the high end of the scale degrades it with time and any oil manufacturer can show you that.. that's a fact.  

 

Doesn't much matter anymore though lol.

I have literally raced my friend while towing multiple times. I have never seen high temps in my trans.

 

I once towed a 15k lb dump trailer, i saw 205. Which is only 5 degrees over where it’s supposed to be.

 

i tow frequently and have never had an overheating problem with the trans thermostat active

 

please show me any data that suggest running modern gm trans fluid at 190-200 degrees (where it is with the oem trans thermostat) degrades it’s life. This is the basis of your arguement.

 

i already know the answer, you can’t find it. There is zero data to prove that it’s bad for the fluid. You are just guessing. I know all about the trans temp debate.

 

lab fuel economy testing lol. As if gm gives a shit about lab testing that doesn’t apply to the real world. You think they would spend a single extra penny on a trans thermostat if it wasn’t effective? If you don’t know the answer proven with data, and that’s where we are at, it’s naive to assume you know better than an army of engineers.


The only thing we know for sure is, the truck is built for all climates, so some modification to suit your particular climate is probably justified. Hence why I said the trans thermostat is more than useless if you live somewhere that you don’t see very cold temps.

Edited by truckguy82

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • tjonesdfw
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By tjonesdfw · Posted

      Whoever greenlighted the work truck matte black front bumpers on every trim but the AT4X should be fired!  I was hoping that was an AI mistake, but just realized they were on every model of the 2027 Silverado too.     Some parts of the interior do look premium, but the Denali Ultimate dashboard looks like an afterthought.  At least they appear to have lost the microfiber the high end Silverado models showed, but the '27 High Country dash looks better than the Denali.  
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      New member here. I am researching a read-first event-recorder concept for late-model GM V8 trucks. This is not a sales post. There is no product link, price, preorder, or mailing list. I am trying to determine whether the underlying problem is real before building anything.   Has your truck ever had a brief problem such as: - rough running or a momentary misfire - an oil-pressure warning or unusual pressure event - reduced power or a brief stall - a U-code or lost-communication problem - a symptom that disappeared before the dealer or independent shop could reproduce it   If so, I would appreciate the following details: - year, model, engine, and mileage - what happened and under what conditions - whether a DTC and useful freeze-frame data were stored - whether the shop was able to reproduce it - what the eventual confirmed repair was, if known - what additional information would have helped the diagnosis   The concept being evaluated is a removable leave-in recorder that continuously retains a rolling window from before and after an event. It would not tune, reflash, clear codes, or change the vehicle calibration.   I am also not claiming that it could predict lifter failure or see every internal ECM variable.   The real question is whether continuous event history would add enough useful evidence beyond freeze frame, GDS2, and existing scan tools — or whether it would simply be another unnecessary gadget.   For owners and technicians, which problem would make something like this genuinely useful: 1. intermittent misfire or AFM/DFM-related behavior 2. oil-pressure events 3. lost communication or electrical faults 4. none of the above Please be blunt. Negative feedback is just as useful as positive feedback.
    • Atlas
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Atlas · Posted

      No tears over the SLE and SLT trim levels disappearing but I kind of loathe the "Elevation" name. It's a truck--skip the elegance.   The slab-dashboard design is decidedly different. Almost has a Hummer flavor to it. "Professional Grade" seems to be leaning very white-collar, tech-driven these days moreso than blue-collar, functional design.   The Silverado would be my choice between the two new trucks. Pleased with the engine lineup in both. The GMC is a little "too much" for a truck, IMO, and the Denali borders on ridiculous - but I do know there are buyers for luxury trucks out there. It's just not my speed.
    • GMCustomerService
      Electrical problem

      By GMCustomerService · Posted

      Your safety is of utmost importance, @joshua1221, and we understand the importance of having all your lights working in your truck. If you have not already, we highly encourage you to bring your concerns to the attention of your local GM dealer. They are in the best position to diagnose your concerns as well as confirm the compatibility of the mirrors with your truck. Additionally, we would like the opportunity to explore any way we may be of assistance. When you have a moment, please visit: https://s.gm.com/support-request and fill out the support request form with all pertinent details. This form helps our team gather the right information and ensures your request is routed appropriately.
    • newdude
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By newdude · Posted

      - I like the outside but not as much as the Chevrolet.  They ICE'd the EV styling and it works, but I think exterior goes to Chevy on this one.     - SLE and SLT dead = Not.  Surprising.  Fits into the rest of the GMC lineup like this which (aside from Pro) matches the rest of the family.  Elevation, AT4, Denali.     - Interior.  Sophisticated Malaise era.  Why do I say Malaise?  Drawn with a ruler.  Rectangles everywhere.  Looks very premium though.    

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...