Demon 408
Well-Known Member
Now you're getting scientific and ****...:thumleft: (I'm with ya dude).
Why deal with facts when it's much easier to argue on emotion based decisions.
Who is BS'ing who?
- Thread starter cuda67
- Start date
-
- Status
Now you're getting scientific and ****...:thumleft: (I'm with ya dude).
Why deal with facts when it's much easier to argue on emotion based decisions.
1wild&crazyguy
Banned
I did, i mention timing/curve/carb tune to the almost lean side, and rpm range of the cam which can have major effect despite what any blowhard loudmouth on here says.
run under cam and watch ur milage hit the shttr.
Try running at 20 mph in 4th ger all day and tell me how great it is...lol
360 w/350hp/400 tq. xe268h cam, ld340, 750dp, 904/2500stall hughes converter, 3.00ish gears, 245/*60/14 (short tire).
Drove it to Spring Fling running around 60-65mph. Filled tank to the top before leaving, 175 miles round trip. Got home, filled tank to top, took 8.8 gallons. You do the math...
If you tune the carb properly, not the ultra rich set up they usually have on cruise, you can get some significant gains in fuel economy.
Drove it to Spring Fling running around 60-65mph. Filled tank to the top before leaving, 175 miles round trip. Got home, filled tank to top, took 8.8 gallons. You do the math...
If you tune the carb properly, not the ultra rich set up they usually have on cruise, you can get some significant gains in fuel economy.
1wild&crazyguy
Banned
@cafercr and you're name isnt einstein or newton lol
caferacerx
BAND MEMBER
getting BAD mileage is easy! :burnout:
it's getting good mileage that takes some effort ](*,):violent1::coffee2:
caferacerx
BAND MEMBER
fortunately I am able to benefit from their experience and knowledge :happy1:
demon seed
The Original Demon Seed
This thread is just a curly one away from getting personal gentleman, continue on but be careful, step back from the brink.:hello2:
needsaresto
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2004
- Messages
- 7,603
- Reaction score
- 265
K so your in the correct rpm range at 80 mph. Our A bodies are like barn doors aerodynamically.
72DartCustom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2010
- Messages
- 130
- Reaction score
- 4
Ill just say my car gets 15mpg at 80mph. I just know I don't get 17 or more mpg going 60. Perhaps its the way my carburetor is tuned? Or it being out of tune? I know I have a vaccume leak under the hood somewhere because I can hear it, but it doesnt effect the way the car drives so I dont bother with it. Maybe that is it? But im not going to bring up silly things like perpetual motion as Caferacerx did. If you'd like pictures of the fuel guage before and after one driving 80mph and one driving 60mph after each trip, ill be happy to do it.
needsaresto
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2004
- Messages
- 7,603
- Reaction score
- 265
Hey good for ya,getting 15 mpg at 60 is pretty damn good for a high performance carbed engine.
caferacerx
BAND MEMBER
at least you are not claiming you get better mileage at 80 than at 60
the difference in MPG between 60 and 80in an average car is about 30%
so if you get 20 MPG at 60 MPH you will get around 14 MPG at 80 MPH
you are probably getting a little better at 60 and a little worse at 80 but you are close in your estimate
Bulldozer
free ice cream sandwiches
im extremely happy with the 8 mpg my charger is getting 360/727/holley 650 lol and as far as the duster 225/3 speed/1 barrel ,im happy with the 15 mpg that is getting lol and i if i was at all concerned about fuel mileage i sure wouldnt be driving anything OLD . even my fuel injected jeep cherokee is getting 15-18 mpg .if fuel consumption is really even an issue , the local haundai or honda dealer is only a phone call or click away . and if really that bad , mongoose makes a nice mountain bike .......IMO
dodge freak
Well-Known Member
if gas was a buck a gallon i would care less what the mpg are but when $40 goes for fuel in a weekend and you still don't drive it as much as you like to, its sad.
if i drove my 11 mpg car everywhere my fuel cost would be 2--3 times as much. Gas was $1.50 or so for so long and wages seemed higher back then
if i drove my 11 mpg car everywhere my fuel cost would be 2--3 times as much. Gas was $1.50 or so for so long and wages seemed higher back then
valianator
Active Member
My Valiant ('65, stock 225, t-flite) can get over 24 MPG, no BS.
Notice I said "can get". No way does it get that kind of mileage puttering around in traffic. I checked it on a trip where I mostly cruised at about 55mph on mostly flat terrain. I used yhe round trip figure to take wind direction and overall uphill/downhill out of the picture.
That's about the ideal driving conditions for MPG, which is what I use for comparison. If I just figured the mileage for any given tankful, it might be 20 or it might be 10; just because driving conditions vary so much.
My mother bought a 2000 Buick Century new. Not long after, she thought she'd see what kind of mileage it got. She was quite surprised and disgussted to come up with something like 14 MPG! "OK", I said, "but how much stop and go traffic, idling, sitting in Mickey D's drive-thru, etc. didja do that week?" She checked it again on a highway trip and came up with almost 29 MPG!
Use the "ideal" figure to comepare one car to another, but don't expect to get that all the time.;)
Notice I said "can get". No way does it get that kind of mileage puttering around in traffic. I checked it on a trip where I mostly cruised at about 55mph on mostly flat terrain. I used yhe round trip figure to take wind direction and overall uphill/downhill out of the picture.
That's about the ideal driving conditions for MPG, which is what I use for comparison. If I just figured the mileage for any given tankful, it might be 20 or it might be 10; just because driving conditions vary so much.
My mother bought a 2000 Buick Century new. Not long after, she thought she'd see what kind of mileage it got. She was quite surprised and disgussted to come up with something like 14 MPG! "OK", I said, "but how much stop and go traffic, idling, sitting in Mickey D's drive-thru, etc. didja do that week?" She checked it again on a highway trip and came up with almost 29 MPG!
Use the "ideal" figure to comepare one car to another, but don't expect to get that all the time.;)
cuda67
Well-Known Member
Thank you Brian you got the point perfectly.
rayer:Here is my info. may not have all you need but I will give you what I have.
Car: 1967 Barracuda vert.
904 tranny with a shift kit and 3000 stall converter
8.75 rear 3:23 sure grip
rear tires Nexen radials 275/40ZR x 17 (don't have height}
Stock manifolds with Flowmaster exhausr 2inch
Speedo gear 36 teeth (not calibrated but checked accurate with gps.
Holley 4150 Street Avenger 770, primarie jets 72, secondary jets 75
6.5 power valve
11 inches of vacuum
*P5153475 360 Magnum Crate Engine — 390 Horsepower, 420 ft.-lbs. Torque Magnum Block Thermocycled .020" Overbore
Specifications:
• Thermocycled Block Is Bored to +0.020" Oversize
• New Magnum R/T Big Valve Cylinder Heads
• Mopar Cast Aluminum Valve Covers
• High-Strength Stainless Steel Valves — 2.02" Intake, 1.62" Exhaust
• Heavy-Duty Valve Springs
• Hydraulic Roller Camshaft — 288°/292° Advertised Duration
(230°/234° Duration @ .050") 0.501"/0.513" Lift
• Pistons — 9.0:1 C.R.
• Single Plane, M1® 4-bbl Aluminum Intake Manifold (Includes Bosses for MPI
Conversion; Taller than Stock — Check Hood Clearance)
• Double Roller Timing Chain and Sprockets
• Center Sump Oil Pan Similar to Commando Engine (Fits Passenger Cars;
Pan Swap Required for Truck Use)
• Mopar Performance Electronic Ignition Kit with Distributor
Hwy miles 9
1wild&crazyguy
Banned
what timing are you running?
vac advance?
what shooters?
vac advance?
what shooters?
cuda67
Well-Known Member
11 initial not sure of total, I don't really understand that process nor how to acheive it. I believe that at 2000 rpm it was around 52*???? I am aware that it should be somewhere around 30-34, at least that is what I have read here. I am going to change to 68 or 70 jets this week. It is running on the rich side. The shooters are 0.025 (pump discharge nozzle) Vacuum advance. Listen, I don't want to offend anyone but as I have stated in the past, I can pull engines, install engines do brake conversions and a few other things but I lack the knowledge to fine tune. I have tried to get help and have had limited success. I am getting to the point where maybe I need to go to somebody who knows what they are doing and quit my guessing and hitting and missing.
805moparkid
Slant and AFX Guy
and you badger people who get better milage than you LOL...
but besides that the 9:1 comp is hurting you with the duration of 230 @ .050... yes it will work but it would be happier with 9.5 or more...
also loose the 3.23 gears... i bet you would pick up a couple mpg and ET just from those to a 3.73 or 3.91's...
1wild&crazyguy
Banned
stock jetting is basd on sea level, so if you're higher than sea level...jet down, google a jet program...or it's 1 jet per 2000ft so holley says...but it could actually be 1 per 1000ft.
you could run more initial timing imo
U should raise the initial up, it bring low speed snappyness and better milage, see if you can raise it to 24* while warm and start it, if so....cool, limit the mech advance to say 8*...so 24*+8*=32* + vac adv=52*
around 30-34* total w/o vac advance is good with a closed chamber...but raise it higher if it likes it..
the vac adv sounds good where it's at.
you could run more initial timing imo
U should raise the initial up, it bring low speed snappyness and better milage, see if you can raise it to 24* while warm and start it, if so....cool, limit the mech advance to say 8*...so 24*+8*=32* + vac adv=52*
around 30-34* total w/o vac advance is good with a closed chamber...but raise it higher if it likes it..
the vac adv sounds good where it's at.
inkjunkie
Well-Known Member
My statement about my bike was not based on emotions, just 100,000 miles of facts, or should I say riding it. Not trying to argue with any Einstein that is present. No point in saying anything more for me, the only way to prove my statement would be for the doubters to ride the bike and verify what I have said....and the bike is long gone...
roadrunnerh
Well-Known Member
Interesting thread. As for me, whether it's my '68 383/727/3.91 Road Runner, or my '75 225/904/2.76 Scamp, I couldn't care less what kind of gas mileage they get. They are not my daily transportation. If they are running well, all is good. I drive them for FUN! Just my 2 cents.
cuda67
Well-Known Member
If these muscle cars got that good of gas milage, why did people start buy Hondas? LOL
Just think if you guys were around with this knowlage in the late 60's and early 70's they might not of stopped making them, just think, someone could of got 30 MPG out of a 426 hemi!! LOL
Just think if you guys were around with this knowlage in the late 60's and early 70's they might not of stopped making them, just think, someone could of got 30 MPG out of a 426 hemi!! LOL
inkjunkie
Well-Known Member
Was not 30 out of a 426 but 14 out of a 725 hp 572" HEMI........
caferacerx
BAND MEMBER
OK lets try this again
it doesn't matter if the bike is long gone or out front with a full tank I don't NEED to ride it (although it would be fun) to disprove something that is a factual impossibility
to increase speed you open up the throttle
when you open the throttle, you "give it more gas"
when you give it more gas you USE more gas simple as that,
if it could go faster using LESS fuel you would have to close the throttle to speed up
so you are telling me when you give it less gas it goes faster?
now do you see how utterly ridiculous that sounds?
in order to increase speed you need to increase power
in order to increase power you need to increase the amount of fuel you give it,
and when you increase the amount of fuel you give something it uses more fuel not less
what is actually happening is your bike was geared at a much higher range than the average car, I am guessing around 20 MPH more combined with the much lower wind drag of a motorcycle, the amount of fuel it used to go 75 MPH was only slightly more than the amount of fuel it used to go 55 MPH giving the illusion of better MPG, in fact the difference in fuel economy was minimal, but in order to maintain 75 you need to crack the throttle open a bit more than you need to maintain 55 correct? :coffee2:
- Status
-
