hey. im completely new to the site. let me introduce myself. ive got a 98 1500 5.2L with five on the floor. the following are what ive put on it so far:
airaid cold air intake + 1inch tb spacer
heddeman headers
flowmaster 3" exhaust
hypertech tuner
160 degree thermostat
msd 6al2 with blaster coil and 8.5mm wires

my next step is gonna be a hughes fi airgap manifold. hopefully ill also be able to add a holley billet 52mm tb and accel 30# injectors.

my question was ive been hearing about these 4.7 injectors. whats the deal? are those a cheap upgrade? and my 160 thermostat, it seems to run good, but everyone teels me its killin my motor. why is that? should i go to 180?

 

First off, the Throttle body spacer? Pitch it, unless you have to have it for the air intake. It doesn't do chit for mileage for the newer injection method.
On the stat, it shouldn't be that big of an issue, but in the winter time, I could see it being a problem when you need heat. Most of us that run a colder stat did so because it's as low as we can go with out getting a MIL light.

Hopefully someone else will chime in on the injectors, but I don't see why you would need to change them unless you needed to deliver more fuel than you already are.

EDIT: Welcome to the forums.

 

The only thing a colder t-stat does is help prevent detonation. Once you start going colder than about 190 your engine wear increases considerably, I wouldn't go colder than 180.. I wouldn't be surprised either if the computer wasn't going in to closed loop when it's that cold. I'm running a stock 195* t stat with a Mopar PCM (requires 92 octane) and it's been over 90* out and approaching 100* this weekend and my truck doesn't ping.

Also the TB spacer is worthless.

 

i hear what everybody is sayin about the tb spacer. but its on there and its not hurtin. but why would the 160 increase engine wear? it seems like it should prolong engine life

 

http://www.carnut.com/ramblin/_cool3.html

Ford has done research on it too.

A member of this forums or Dakota-Durango forums also sent in oil samples while running different t-stats and found the stock 195* to show almost zero wear compared to the colder ones.

 

That's no worse than living in a cold environment. The increased wear is negligible.
You show me one motor rebuild that was the result of a colder thermostat. You won't see it, because the wear change is SO small, that it would take a person a hell of a long time to rack up the engine hours required for the wear to present an issue.

The main points for a colder thermostat being detrimental to your engine: Increased cylinder wash, oil won't flow properly, and fuel doesn't vaporise and burn at an optimum level.

Positive points for a colder thermostat: Decreased detonation, some claim that oil will flow better and fuel will burn will be optimized.

In truth, the effects of a colder stat albeit good or bad, is negligible. This isn't even enough to argue about. It's personal belief, and if you fall for what a ****ing car manufacturing company posts, your a major dumb ***, and enjoy getting spoon fed by them.

 

A t-stat regulates the MINIMUM temperature dumb ***. Cold weather has nothing to do with it!
Why do car manufacturers all use 195*ish t-stats if 160 is so much better?
Call it a personal decision all you want but don't call facts BS.
Hell take your t-stat completely out, what were car company's thinking? You don't need that junk

 

easy now boys. i see both points

 

i mean i have noticed a very slight decrease in fuel mileage but ive also seen the oil pressure rise and stay consistent

 

The t-stat does not regulate the minimum temperature. It simply lets the coolant flow to attempt to keep/regulate the temperature at 195/180. That is neither minimum nor maximum, its simply an attempt at temperature regulation, period.

One of the reasons they keep it at 195 is because in the upper regions of our nation, and in Canada, it helps you get heat faster during the winter. So cold weather does have something to do with it, although I am unsure about the wear and tear aspect.