Jump to content

Updated Thermal Bypass Valve Installed, still reaches 195 F

gmm43

By gmm43
in Engines & Drivetrain

 Share

Recommended Posts

gmm43 Enthusiast

gmm43

Posted
Posted (edited)

Just recently bought a 2018 Sierra 1500 4.3V6 with the 6L80, 91xxx miles. A week or so later I ordered my AFM disabler and the GM updated TBV. Normally my trans temps would be 190-210 city driving, 170-185 highway.. took a while for it to be delivered through snail mail but when it finally got here I went ahead and swapped it out. I noticed that the trans fluid would reach 180s about after 20 min or so of highway driving( its been high 80's here these past few days). It definitely takes longer for the fluid to reach these temps but I was expecting way cooler levels.  After driving on highway for half an hour(185 F), I drove around town  and parked at grocery store and watched the temp rise to around 193 F at idle, shopped for a few minutes and when I started the truck again it was down to 185 F and pretty much remained that temp for the 10 minute drive home stop and go traffic. 
 

only one previous owner and had excellent service history on carfax, regular oil changes and one Transmission fluid change at 45k miles. I'm waiting on my filter. gasket and fluid to be delivered some time next two weeks to change out the fluid myself. Transmission runs fine to me . 

any ideas why my trans temp is so high?? anyone else have a similar experience with the GM TBV update?

I should also mention the i went ahead and ordered the STL010 from Shift Tech, hopefully that continuous flow will give lower temps 

Edited by gmm43
rav3 Senior Enthusiast

rav3

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, TheRiver said:

"Active Grill Shutters"???

 

That would throw a code.

  • Like 1
rav3 Senior Enthusiast

rav3

Posted
Posted

Your transmission thermostat change only drops the 'open temp' by about 20 degrees, IIRC. the pill flip or thermostat delete is a constant open & cooling of transmission fluid. I did the pill flip 3 years ago on my 17 & I don't usually see it above 140-145 F. It cools fluid like the older 4L80 transmission. This transmission thermostat is GMs way of trying to get more MPG due to EPA at the expense of the owner when torque converter goes bad & takes out the transmission. IMO

  • Like 1
gmm43 Enthusiast

gmm43

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, rav3 said:

Your transmission thermostat change only drops the 'open temp' by about 20 degrees, IIRC. the pill flip or thermostat delete is a constant open & cooling of transmission fluid. I did the pill flip 3 years ago on my 17 & I don't usually see it above 140-145 F. It cools fluid like the older 4L80 transmission. This transmission thermostat is GMs way of trying to get more MPG due to EPA at the expense of the owner when torque converter goes bad & takes out the transmission. IMO

Wow really? honestly I chose the GM update only because of how easy it would be to just switch out the original one. But Im definitely going to install the STL010 kit I've got coming tomorrow. It basically keeps the the valves open to have the fluid go through the cooler all the time witch in turn is basically functioning as a delete. all I need is a pair of snap ring pliers ..
Thanks

rav3 Senior Enthusiast

rav3

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, gmm43 said:

Wow really? honestly I chose the GM update only because of how easy it would be to just switch out the original one. But Im definitely going to install the STL010 kit I've got coming tomorrow. It basically keeps the the valves open to have the fluid go through the cooler all the time witch in turn is basically functioning as a delete. all I need is a pair of snap ring pliers ..
Thanks

In my opinion you won't be sorry. I'm not. My 6L80 is a weak transmission or maybe the factory torque converter. Lowering the transmission temperature along with frequent fluid changes may increase its life.

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, gmm43 said:

Just recently bought a 2018 Sierra 1500 4.3V6 with the 6L80, 91xxx miles. A week or so later I ordered my AFM disabler and the GM updated TBV. Normally my trans temps would be 190-210 city driving, 170-185 highway.. took a while for it to be delivered through snail mail but when it finally got here I went ahead and swapped it out. I noticed that the trans fluid would reach 180s about after 20 min or so of highway driving( its been high 80's here these past few days). It definitely takes longer for the fluid to reach these temps but I was expecting way cooler levels.  After driving on highway for half an hour(185 F), I drove around town  and parked at grocery store and watched the temp rise to around 193 F at idle, shopped for a few minutes and when I started the truck again it was down to 185 F and pretty much remained that temp for the 10 minute drive home stop and go traffic. 
 

only one previous owner and had excellent service history on carfax, regular oil changes and one Transmission fluid change at 45k miles. I'm waiting on my filter. gasket and fluid to be delivered some time next two weeks to change out the fluid myself. Transmission runs fine to me . 

any ideas why my trans temp is so high?? anyone else have a similar experience with the GM TBV update?

I should also mention the i went ahead and ordered the STL010 from Shift Tech, hopefully that continuous flow will give lower temps 

 

 

 

Its because you have the 4.3.  

 

The 4.3 has the transmission cooler built into the right hand side tank of the radiator and that's it.  The V8s of the same year as yours, they have one cooler that is out at the front in the top of the AC condenser and do not send any ATF through the radiator at all.

 

Here's the line routing for the 4.3.  Out of the transmission, if I recall it should then be in flow to the bottom and then out from the top and then returns back to the transmission.  Being it goes through the radiator only, the ATF is still being exposed to the coolant temp in the radiator itself so it maintains a higher temperature.  A 2018 5.3 for example however would run 145-170F with the lower temp TBV.  Mine ran no more than 170F on a hot day romping on it.    

 

Your best bet to bring them down will be the SureCool bypass, but even then don't expect a larger drop.  You might see 10 degrees lower or so, maybe 15.  Your truck with the SureCool would operate temp wise like a 1999-2013 truck would as those all flowed through the radiator only on a V6 and V8s that did not have the heavy cooling, but even those that had heavy cooling (which had an aux cooler) still flowed through the radiator first.  

 

4.32014-2019.jpg.072cee2119d7b086676be2ae38a530c4.jpg

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted

@newdude nailed it. To get a lower temp without additional cooler you need to lower the water temp. I run and IPSCO thermostat housing and a Reische Racing 170 F thermostat. Plus Red Line D6 fluid which has both a higher thermal capacity and thermal conductivity. Not sure they still sell that unit but STANT still sells a 180F that fits this holder and Katech started selling a 174 F unit that fits the stock housing. Yellow line is the one I'm currently on. 170 F water and 70 C TBV, Ancillary cooler is in the works. 😉 

 

image.thumb.png.84d0deeb8d2d1bd208cf3cc81e0cdf21.png

 

Road speed is also a huge temperature driver both to fast and to slow.

 

image.thumb.png.5939a785e54ff4d674508afd930eb777.png

 

Sitting parked or in town when there is no flow over the radiator and water temp rises well above the water thermostat set point will still drive temps up. The fix for that would be additional cooler with a separate thermostatically controlled fan. 

  • Like 1
gmm43 Enthusiast

gmm43

Posted
  • Author
Posted
21 hours ago, newdude said:

 

 

 

Its because you have the 4.3.  

 

The 4.3 has the transmission cooler built into the right hand side tank of the radiator and that's it.  The V8s of the same year as yours, they have one cooler that is out at the front in the top of the AC condenser and do not send any ATF through the radiator at all.

 

Here's the line routing for the 4.3.  Out of the transmission, if I recall it should then be in flow to the bottom and then out from the top and then returns back to the transmission.  Being it goes through the radiator only, the ATF is still being exposed to the coolant temp in the radiator itself so it maintains a higher temperature.  A 2018 5.3 for example however would run 145-170F with the lower temp TBV.  Mine ran no more than 170F on a hot day romping on it.    

 

Your best bet to bring them down will be the SureCool bypass, but even then don't expect a larger drop.  You might see 10 degrees lower or so, maybe 15.  Your truck with the SureCool would operate temp wise like a 1999-2013 truck would as those all flowed through the radiator only on a V6 and V8s that did not have the heavy cooling, but even those that had heavy cooling (which had an aux cooler) still flowed through the radiator first.  

 

4.32014-2019.jpg.072cee2119d7b086676be2ae38a530c4.jpg

 

 

 

Thanks for the diagram and explanation! will definitely install the Sure Cool

  • Like 1
gmm43 Enthusiast

gmm43

Posted
  • Author
Posted
17 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

@newdude nailed it. To get a lower temp without additional cooler you need to lower the water temp. I run and IPSCO thermostat housing and a Reische Racing 170 F thermostat. Plus Red Line D6 fluid which has both a higher thermal capacity and thermal conductivity. Not sure they still sell that unit but STANT still sells a 180F that fits this holder and Katech started selling a 174 F unit that fits the stock housing. Yellow line is the one I'm currently on. 170 F water and 70 C TBV, Ancillary cooler is in the works. 😉 

 

image.thumb.png.84d0deeb8d2d1bd208cf3cc81e0cdf21.png

 

Road speed is also a huge temperature driver both to fast and to slow.

 

image.thumb.png.5939a785e54ff4d674508afd930eb777.png

 

Sitting parked or in town when there is no flow over the radiator and water temp rises well above the water thermostat set point will still drive temps up. The fix for that would be additional cooler with a separate thermostatically controlled fan. 

very cool data! I guess for now my next step is an after market thermostat, after the Sure Cool mod. you would think that they would have the same tranny cooler on V6s as like the V8s since the V6s also come with towing package

  • Like 2
newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, gmm43 said:

you would think that they would have the same tranny cooler on V6s as like the V8s since the V6s also come with towing package

 

 

Less towing capacity, less engine to cool.  Even the older V6s didn't have a factory aux cooler.  

 

 

  • Like 3
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, gmm43 said:

very cool data! I guess for now my next step is an after market thermostat, after the Sure Cool mod. you would think that they would have the same tranny cooler on V6s as like the V8s since the V6s also come with towing package

 

I ran a "pill flip" before installing the 70C TBV. The blue and orange lines in the top graph. The 70 C TBV is a pretty comfortable 'floor' for temperature and has nearly zero impact on the hotter days. Sure Cool is like a pill flip and the insurance it provides is more smoke and mirrors than actual. If you plug that stacked plate exchanger in the cold tank you've already grenaded the transmission. 

 

170 F on the water requires zero tuning. A 160 F stat however does. Too cool anyway. 

 

Even if you faithfully duplicate my system you will still have days of high fluid temperatures. Stalled in traffic for example. Crawling for a hour on a hot day around a wreck on the I-80. Pulling heavy over a steep grade. Thing just needs more cooler to take the head off the snake. i.e. quicker cool down and more reserve. Just say'n. 

  • Like 1
gmm43 Enthusiast

gmm43

Posted
  • Author
Posted
21 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

If you plug that stacked plate exchanger in the cold tank you've already grenaded the transmission. 

 

 

could you say that in layman's terms?😅

I just installed the SureCool today after work. truck was still warm by the time I finished, trans fluid temp read 187. I ran a test drive to the  car wash going the scenic route. 10 min on the free way and plenty of stop and go city driving, letting her eat a couple of times.

 

Good news? It never hit 200...only went up to 199 and settled down to 194🤔. I'll keep an eye on it in during the morning commute to see what happens when starts from ambient temp.  

  • Like 1
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, gmm43 said:

could you say that in layman's terms?😅

 

To plug the cooler and REQUIRE a bypass it would have to be filled with trash.

You can't get the fluid cold enough to gel it. 

:P

  • Like 1

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,914
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    AidenVorpagel
    Newest Member
    AidenVorpagel
    Joined

  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 614 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...