Welcome to Club Hot Rod!  The premier site for everything to do with Hot Rod, Customs, Low Riders, Rat Rods, and more. 

  •  » Members from all over the US and the world!
  •  » Help from all over the world for your questions
  •  » Build logs for you and all members
  •  » Blogs
  •  » Image Gallery
  •  » Many thousands of members and hundreds of thousands of posts! 

YES! I want to register an account for free right now!  p.s.: For registered members this ad will NOT show

 
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By pro70z28

Thread: Cost-effective, high-mpg combo for SBC in 1500?
          
   
   

Results 1 to 14 of 14

Threaded View

  1. #7
    wireflight is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Crystal Springs
    Car Year, Make, Model: 94 Astro
    Posts
    6

    Funny. We were both stationed in central MS between 1987 and 1993; I was bragging on my 1989 SHO:

    32 mpg (cruise set @ 75) between fillups; best mpg (observed only twice) was 36 between fillups, using regular unleaded and the OE tires. 142 mph top speed (76 seconds per 3 miles); 28.3 mpg on a 388-mile round-trip made with 5 en-route stops in 4:05 (during which I discovered my cruise wouldn't set any higher than 125). Best 1/4-mile on the OE Goodyear Eagles was 14.30 @ 97.5 mph.

    At 10k miles, I changed tires to Kelly Chargers, which lowered my top speed to 135 and cut my mpg to 28 -- but they GREATLY enhanced adhesion. With the Kellys, my best 1/4-mile was 13.86 @ 101.0 mph. Lateral acceleration was similarly improved, but with less warning at the absolute limit than the Goodyears gave (which was OK, because I was a pretty good wheel man). Even with the Kellys, I got better combined overall fuel economy than the EPA highway rating for my SHO -- so I bragged on it.

    One day at the base, a guy from across the hall visited my shop while I told my latest results. He said his pickup got 28 mpg all the time; I said that's pretty decent for a Ranger, and he said it's an F150, and it's 4-wheel drive. I thought he was full of crap, and I said so. A group of us went on a trip later that year; he took his pickup. We cruised about 75-80 (almost all Interstate), and we all stopped together for refueling. I don't recall his exact number, but I saw the pump at each stop (I was gonna burst his balloon), and his overall fuel economy was well north of 27. Considering the loads and the speeds, it seemed amazing he wasn't getting a lot better than 28 at 65-70 mph.

    About a year later, I upgraded my habitation, and I tried making the move during my off-duty time using just my car. I had a pal that worked at U-Haul, and he was going to "cut me a deal" on a truck to move my furniture, but the guy with the F150 said I could borrow his truck (he saw how I cared for my car). It was a little awkward, but I agreed -- and WOW was I ever glad I did! The truck my "pal" had intended that I should rent was their largest in-city gas-burner: it got about 4 mpg for my best friend's dad when he rented it to move his family. The F150 got between 28.0 and 28.5 with me driving.

    [EDITED: I had the other details correct, but originally referred to the event by the wrong name.] That guy and I ended up being pals; we went on a trip to Louisiana to watch the NHRA Cajun Nationals; he had tickets, I bought the gas -- and his truck got a solid 29.0-something (very barely over 29) mpg on that trip -- basically unloaded, and speeds within about +/- 5 mph from the posted limit.

    With 199 dyno hp (his claim; I had no reason to doubt him, especially after he proved the fuel economy claim) at the wheels, I knew it wasn't 100-percent factory stock, but it wasn't radically altered, either. Pop the hood, and it looked (as far as I could tell) pretty much like it had just rolled off the assembly line.

    On long trips, my dad's 1997 Town Car got 32 mpg between fillups with the cruise set at 80; it got 28 mpg between fillups in normal city/highway driving. His 2003 Town Car L (Cartier) gets 28.0-28.3 mpg between fillups with the cruise set at 65, and better than 24 mpg between fillups when driven aggressively.

    On the other hand, I had a 1993 Crown Victoria LX with the sport package, handling package, leathered-out, etc.; its "210 hp" engine was exceedingly anemic, it had a 110-mph top speed (at which it was VERY aero-light), and its best fuel economy was barely over 16 mpg between fillups (it usually got between 12 and 14 mpg, and if I romped on it, my mpg fell to 8). I put a 150-shot on it, and that helped acceleration a little, but a 20-pound bottle was good for just over 2 passes -- YIKES!
    Last edited by wireflight; 05-29-2012 at 07:33 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Links monetized by VigLink