If I can't knock my neighbor's pictures off the wall and rattle their windows, I figure it's not worth driving.Do you go anywhere, though ??? LOL ... no seriously!
Gas price going up // Rethinking the new project car
- Thread starter ValerianMagnum
- Start date
-
- Status
Do you go anywhere, though ??? LOL ... no seriously!
Exactly ... I put around 15k on my Barracuda last year . It gets around 15 mpg but thats still a lot of premium fuel.
'68cuda416
Well-Known Member
Sure bud....LOL
What is it you're trying to say ?
..
ValerianMagnum
the little car that could
Just letting off some steam...i love the old la engines but cost $$$ parts , cores , paying a rusted 340 core for what it is..versus a 5.2 or a 5.9 magnum with roller cam technology, hate it if you want , im very old school but newer engines have roller cams , fuel injection, better machining overall , the cost of a v6 3.6 etc , a srt4 4- banger , v6 caravans ,chrysler turbo engine, even the 4.7 powertech are probably all killing every old stock muscle on the street , im not even talking about lx platforms wth their hemi's , im a big old school fan , but tech as come a long way , as strong as i love a good old 340 4 speed duster with a suregrip a new camry is gonna kick my *** all over the place...and we can hate it , we can piss at them like he said , but fuel consumption and quality is there..why is it so bad to make these swaps if people are able to do it , hard headed as i can be im pretty sure that i will keep the car have a lumpy cam in it and a good old v8 , but i have to find a way to have better gas mileage....my 2 cents
Colorado! And that's for mid range.
'68cuda416
Well-Known Member
You are good for a laugh with your Dodge Caravan engines cleaning up all over the muscle cars, LOL
Car builds/hot rodding is just an extension of that person's personality and persona, and maybe mentality at that point in time.
Just because I have no love for the rods built with toilet seats for buckets and all the other crazy chit they an do does not mean I can't tolerate such on my world!
And, as we grow older or tastes can change. Some guys that hated the Gremlin now 40 year later, see beauty there!!! Well maybe beauty is not the word!!!
Just because I have no love for the rods built with toilet seats for buckets and all the other crazy chit they an do does not mean I can't tolerate such on my world!
And, as we grow older or tastes can change. Some guys that hated the Gremlin now 40 year later, see beauty there!!! Well maybe beauty is not the word!!!
One option you might consider is emulating the Feather Duster, but with the vehicle you have. Get the hole saw out and start lightening the car. Stock slant six with a 32/36 progressive Weber 2 barrel. Good flowing opened up stock manifold. I've had three opened up to 2.5" now, so the meat is there to do it. Or an aluminum intake and steel tube headers would take more weight off. Get a nice quick curve in the distributor. Highway gears of course along with an OD 4 speed. That way, you'd have at least an engine that could have come in it and a transmission that's a very popular swap. I don't know your budget, but you could also consider a Ford T5 five speed swap. That's what I am getting ready to do to Vixen. I have a Ford 9" that's narrowed to stock A body width I plan to swap in too with 3.00 gears, but that's likely to change to 3.50 or 3.70 later on depending on how the 3.00 acts. It might surprise me, I don't know.
If you want to see how far you can go with the hole saw, check out Uncle Tony's drag race Dart build. He may have gone overboard for a street car, but he really took some weight out. You could also consider fiberglass replacement body parts. Doors, trunk lid, hood and fenders in fiberglass would take a lot of weight off.
This is just one idea to throw in the mix.
186 bucks round trip (at 15 mpg)
At 15mpg it's only 30 cents per mile
And that's going to stop you from going?
Bring a friend and split the cost.
so you were abused as a child? That would explain a lot.
'68cuda416
Well-Known Member
You guys are comical and that also translates over into into a lot of your builds if i'm being honest
MopaR&D
Nerd Member
Oh no, some random a-hole on an internet forum doesn't like my builds? What will I ever do to regain my dignity?
im 180 from carlisle. My electric has doubled in last 18 month, My rreal estate taxes double every 10 years, price of food is up. and my income remains unchangerd
>>>186 bucks round trip (at 15 mpg)
At 15mpg it's only 30 cents per mile
And that's going to stop you from going?
Bring a friend and split the cost.
>>>186 bucks round trip (at 15 mpg)
At 15mpg it's only 30 cents per mile
And that's going to stop you from going?
Bring a friend and split the cost.
How light could you get a 64 Dart or Valiant using an aluminum OD and bell housing , aluminum radiator, keep the 7.25 but run 3.23s or 3.55s , aluminum slots etc...? Base curb weight is 2550ish lbs and all the alloy parts would shave 200 off maybe ?
Would a 318 with aluminum heads and intake be close to a slant in weight ?
Maybe fuel injection ?
Seems like you could get into the 30s for mpg with a max effort efficiency build and still have a fun car .
Would a 318 with aluminum heads and intake be close to a slant in weight ?
Maybe fuel injection ?
Seems like you could get into the 30s for mpg with a max effort efficiency build and still have a fun car .
goldduster318
Overzealous Car Modifier
If you wanted a light engine with good fuel mileage, good reliability, and a respectable amount of power, the Pentastar is it. My friend's wife has a 2011 Caravan and that gets about 27 mpg hwy and its both heavier and bigger than an a-body.
It will out MPG a Slant Six and make double if not more power. While weighing 330 lbs. myduster360's car ran 14.32@99 which is in the neighborhood of a stock 70 340 Duster.
It will out MPG a Slant Six and make double if not more power. While weighing 330 lbs. myduster360's car ran 14.32@99 which is in the neighborhood of a stock 70 340 Duster.
harrisonm
Well-Known Member
I disagree strongly. Why are you always so upset any time someone does something to their car that alters its originality. Relax. It is their car and their money. Is that a black fiberglass hood on your car? That is not correct. And does your car have a 416 in it? That is not original. Don't get me wrong, I think 416s are badass, and I really like that hood on Barracudas. If I saw your car at a car show, I would politely introduce myself and tell you what a nice car you have. I would not worry about its departure from stock. I have a 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee that weighs 5,000 ponds and gets great gas milage in town and on the highway with a V6. I think that same V6 would be a great engine for someone who wanted a modern, fuel injected and reliable engine in a car they planned to drive a lot. Plus, as peppy as my Jepp is at 5,000 pounds, I can only imagine how peppy (quick) a 3,000 pound would be with that same engine.
Ironracer
Gearhead
Back in the day, I'd roll home from the bar (s?) After 3 am. All my neighbors loved me. They Knew it was me coming, and I was just coming home. Never an issue... Drag pipes on the bike, and Flowmaster 40s on the cars...
Ironracer
Gearhead
That is what diesel is here, so.e places. Crap gas is around 3.50
Me too. 1987 D150. Last year for the slant. My dad bought it new and I still have it......No rust and it was a daily driver for 20 years.
The best would be a 273 and your 833 O/D and 3.23-3.91 gears. How far are you from Pittsburgh or Carlisle? Do you go to Carlisle? Second best would be a 318. Get your compression up to about 9:1 and quality machine work. Cam in the 260-268 range, quick curve dist, TQ carb, 1967 273 HiPo single exhaust, jet hot coated exhaust manifolds, and a performance indicator (vacuum gage). We used to be able to pull down mid to high 20's mpg cruising steady on the highway with a 273. Next in line would be a 170 slant six built the same with the factory super six intake and 2 barrel carb. I could get 30 mpg with that setup and the little 170 would wind up nicely as a bonus.
AJ/FormS
68 Formua-S fastback clone 367/A833/GVod/3.55s
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2014
- Messages
- 24,943
- Reaction score
- 12,295
I bumbled thru the first page of responses, but not really wanting to sift thru all the off-the-wall stuff, to see if anybody got to the meat and potatoes........ so:
There is a simple solution to your dilemma, namely; overdrive.
I like what @66fs said , and anyone else that is on track with him.
Every time I offer opinion, people jump on me, so I'm not gonna do that this time. Instead I'll tell you what I actually already did.
Like my Avatar shows; final iteration is 367/A833/3.55s
I chose each of these components with fuel efficiency as the primary consideration, and modest power as a secondary.
I had at least One example of every LA SBM, in my shed.
I had at least One example of every transmission that would bolt up to any LA, both automatic and manuals.
I had at least One example of every A-body rear-end, except a Dana, and
I had at least One example of nearly every rear gear from 2.45 to 5.13 skipping; 3.73s and 4.56s
These were my options.
I chose the manual trans for efficient power transfer, to gain mpgs, so I could run a bit more cam.
I choose the 8.75 for it's easy-swap pumpkin.
I chose 3.55s for their dual-purpose versatility
Knowing this would be a modest performance combo, and
knowing that the 367 could fall together cheap at near-zero deck, and
being desirous of the 1.7 r/s ratio for piston dwell time at TDC, and
knowing that a longer stroke would allow a lil more cam before loosing cylinder pressure,
I choose a 360..
To run a smaller cam, I reasoned that this engine would need some extra cylinder pressure. To get some Power back, due to the loss of valve duration, I choose a better-flowing head. To take advantage of the piston dwell, I reduced the cruise rpm drastically with overdrive. To get out of the rut of a crappy starter gear, I choose a trans with a 3.09 low in it. To get low-ET back, I installed a Gear-Splitter.
Did it work?
Hell yes!
on a certain Daytrip-test, she pulled down 32mpg USg
At the track, she went [email protected] on 245 street tires@3650 pounds/me in it.
This is what I have already done.
this is not imagination,
not puffed up keyboard tickling;
this combo sits in my carport as we speak.
And you can come to my house with a trailer and a bag of cash and take her home. Or if you wait a few weeks, I'll change the gas and oil, and then you can fly over and drive it home.
If you want details;
some most excellent fellow FABO member bought me a Gold membership (thank you whoever you are), so I now have lots of room for Conversations. I am semi-retired so I got lots of time to talk.
Consider that your car needs a certain amount of horsepower to cruise at a certain roadspeed. Various chassies have various power requirements, but our ancient Bricks generally run between 40 and 50 hp.
This requirement can be converted to pounds of fuel per hour.
Lets say your chassis requires 40hp, that converts to about 20pounds of fuel per hour at WOT AFR, which is 20/6=3.33gallons per hour.
But you don't run at 12.5 AFR, maybe you run at 15.0 AFR and the requirement is reduced to say 2.7gallons. At 60 mph that is 60/2.7=22.2 mpg. This is what the typical A-body chassis will require.
The car does not care how it gets its cruise requirement.
You can run a big engine at a low rpm,
or you can run a smaller engine at a higher rpm,
So long as it meets the power requirement.
Or you can throw rpm out the window and convert the power requirement to cfm. Now; you can gear the rear end to vary the throttle-opening to meet the cfm requirement.
See how all that works?
No? Ok well the 318 in a late 80's tank of a NewYorker, is known to get very close to or just over the target 22.2 mpgs by gearing it down with 2.45s, a loc-up A999, and tall tires to....65=1900rpm. Therefore you know that 22.2mpg is a good target.
We know that if this New Yorker hauls a hard-shell camper, the mpg will plummet. Why? Because the hp requirement has changed.
Now, you can put a 400hp 360 in there and NEVER achieve the target. Why?
Because this type of engine, at 1900rpm is not very fuel efficient.
But you can take that 360, and pull that monster cam out of there and swap in a 318 cam, and with 200psi cylinder pressure, again creep up to the target 22.2mpgs. In fact, if you build the 360 right, you can exceed the target. Why?
Because the 318 at a modest 130psi cylinder pressure, was not very fuel-efficient to start with.
Edit; And it burns 87E10 full-time, with full-timing.
Last edited:
- Status
-
