Something different Building for MPG.

-
When I was getting rid of my 92 Dakota I was thinking about putting the 3.9 into a 65 dart. Fuel injected and with a A-500 automatic, tall gears in a 7.25 rear axle. It would be close to 30 MPG.
 
There are tricks to getting great milage. They work even on new cars. You need a combination that is matched to the driving you do. You nee good tires, inflated to max pressure. You need a good front end and alignment. You need to know how to drive for milage. (I dont mean hypermiling..) If it's tuned perfectly, and matched correctly, and driven correctly, you will get mad rewards. My Neon averages 34mph on low octane. It's got over 160K, has a ported head, and is a '97. I have custoemrs getting over 17mpg in musclecars driven hard with big motors. For an engine, I would use a Magnum 5.9L like Dave's (DGC). No need to stroke it for an A body. I would run a 3.91 gear, and an A833OD. (Dave, really, think your car, with 3.91s...lol) The engine would be cammed for peak torque (a flat curve) around 2700rpm. A dual plane intake, and any Edelbrock/Carter carb in the 750 range. With careful building, and tuned right, I can't see much of a problem way exceeding EFI V8s and many modern V6s. Running no vacuum advance is the single worst milage killer on a muscle car. You want one in place if at all possible.
 
moper said:
There are tricks to getting great milage. They work even on new cars. You need a combination that is matched to the driving you do. You nee good tires, inflated to max pressure. You need a good front end and alignment. You need to know how to drive for milage. (I dont mean hypermiling..) If it's tuned perfectly, and matched correctly, and driven correctly, you will get mad rewards. My Neon averages 34mph on low octane. It's got over 160K, has a ported head, and is a '97. I have custoemrs getting over 17mpg in musclecars driven hard with big motors. For an engine, I would use a Magnum 5.9L like Dave's (DGC). No need to stroke it for an A body. I would run a 3.91 gear, and an A833OD. (Dave, really, think your car, with 3.91s...lol) The engine would be cammed for peak torque (a flat curve) around 2700rpm. A dual plane intake, and any Edelbrock/Carter carb in the 750 range. With careful building, and tuned right, I can't see much of a problem way exceeding EFI V8s and many modern V6s. Running no vacuum advance is the single worst milage killer on a muscle car. You want one in place if at all possible.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you on all those points. In fact the ultimate plan for my '70 Duster is a high-compression (~10.5:1) 360 Magnum (maybe ported Edelbrock heads if I have the $$$) hooked up to an A-833 OD with a 3.55:1 rear end. Along with a cam with peak torque around 2800 RPM and either an Edelbrock AVS 650 or Holley Street Avenger 670, I should be able to max out at around 25 MPG.
 
If I couldn't afford $4.00 gas I don't think I could afford to build a duster.

On the other hand gas is $1.93 in Nebraska right now!
 
Back to basics:
I don't know at what ratio you are injecting the alc. But keep in mind you are paying $6.32 per gallon if your $.79 is for a pint which is usally how it comes.

As far as the thread goes- Friction is your biggest enemy, whether mechanical, aerodynamic, or fluid. The complete consumption of the fuel to its component parts oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen is the next hurdle.

With the advent of after market anti friction coatings, and roller accessories alot can be done about internal mechanical friction. As far as rolling friction goes there is some interesting work being done with magnetic fluids. These are lubrecating fluids with partial magnetic properties that will keep a wet surface around a shaft with a permenent magnet inbeded in the shaft. The research is primeraly being focused on wind turbine bearings right now. This might some day also be applied to our stuff.

In the mean time we also have aerodynamics to consider. I know as far as my build is concerned (73 Duster) I just enter the standard coefficient for a kenmore side by side into the equasion.You superbird guys have it made.

When I had my Duster on the street it hed a 3.23 rear and got 18-20 miles/gal on the highway.

With the new buld I'm shooting for 25 MPG.

The final thing that can be done is to weld shut the secondaries on your carbs.
I know good luck.
Andrew
 
Are the aerodynamics on Dusters really that bad? I figure they're still better than any truck or van.
 
I thought about doing an electric conversion to the Falcon. I'm not too concerned about performance in that car and I don't mind cutting up a Ford. The problem is it's just not cost effective right now. I'm sure in a few years once the technology evolves this type of thing will be a viable option.

http://www.electroauto.com/index.html

One more thing... about 5 years ago I put a high quality synthetic fluid in my Swinger's differential (8.75 with 3.23 gears.) With that single upgrade I immediately improved the highway fuel economy by 6%.
 
blue missile said:
Back to basics:
I don't know at what ratio you are injecting the alc. But keep in mind you are paying $6.32 per gallon if your $.79 is for a pint which is usally how it comes.

Andrew
Click to expand...

I do not have specific numbers right off hand, but the amount of the alky injected is minimal, but since it atomized, it kills 2 birds, so to speak. It takes heat out of the intake charge, and it is flamable, so it burns in the cylinders.

The info I read is the the reduction in the basic fuel that you run, far outweighs the cost of alky, over the time. Said another way, it is cheaper to run the alky, that injects a certain boost pressure, to keep detonation at bay, then to have to run race fuel the entire time, (or 91-93 Octane if built for street) for the few times you get into the throttle.
I personally would build it for 87 Octane, so I can step to 91/93 when desired, and then top it with alky or water injection, so boost pressure could be turned up without going to race gas.
 
MOPEkidD-3 said:
Are the aerodynamics on Dusters really that bad? I figure they're still better than any truck or van.
Click to expand...

I would not think a Dart Sport / Duster / Demon would be too bad, with the swept line portion of the rear roof. The Swinger / Valiant / Scamp would be a little worse IMO since they are a little more boxy, and less smooth coming off the rear glass and trunk area.

Granted, the nose are is pretty significant, but in a max MPG effort, there would be some aero modifications made, full or partial grill block, under belly pan, etc. However, if a absolute max MPG build was the plan in the first place, then the person would not have started with an old school mopar...
 
dgc333 said:
My 360 powered 68 Barracuda is getting 17-18 mpg around town and 22-23 mpg on the hiway, the same as my v6 powered 4x4 Dakota pick-up. It's also the same mileage I got when the Barracuda had the hotrod \6 in it.

The engine is a 10.6:1, magnum headed LA360 with a Comp XE268 cam, crosswind dual plane, 670 Street Avenger, headers, A833OD and 3.55 gears. The car gets this mileage while still running very traction limited 13.7 sec @ 102 mph quarters. This equates to approximately 370 HP.
Click to expand...

SHOW US THE TIME SLIP.

And heres a site to 'equate' your hp.
http://www.wallaceracing.com/Calculators.htm
 
I've noticed after trying about 6 different calculators that there are two distinct fomrulas being used. One that IMO is stingy, and one that seems to jive with the Moroso slide rules that always proved so accurrate at the track. Not surprising because it's just math and what order of operations is used can affect the outcome. One can only conclude that somewhere in the middle it the true output. I typically use the Moparts calculator because for my car, and several others, the results match the chassis dyno results we got. Or are at least within say 10hp of the result. The Wallace one (and the other similar "stingy ones" are coming up 60hp lower than the chassis dyno results. That's a little off IMO. In any event, Dave (dgc333) has always been a very straight shooter and not a grandstander. His car does run that well.
 
Really?
how much HP do you say this equates too?

Photo 160.jpg


Photo 164.jpg
 
AdamR said:
Those 60fts kinda stink. How much does the car weigh ? elevation ?

You know as well as I do that it takes more then just hp to run fast ets.
Click to expand...

Thats called major tire spin with 25'futura 235-60-14.
The car with all it's luxury weighs 3352 w/driver.
The elevation was 1455ft and was dry and warm till later in the day, but didn't run it.
Yes it's a 4spd and did not hook till 3rd.
Yes I know setting up the car is most important and it does have a few things like.... SS springs, drag shocks, frame connects, but is a daily driver and I was only base lining it to see it's potential and also shut up a few braggart's around here that thought their cars were 12 sec rides.
 
Daves car has the same size street tire a 4 speed and 355 gears. I dont know how much his car weighs but my guess is your making about the same power.

Who cares, Its a thread about building a strong running car that doesnt kill you at the pump. Not my car makes XXXhp and runs XX.X X Ets
 
moper said:
There are tricks to getting great milage. They work even on new cars. You need a combination that is matched to the driving you do. You nee good tires, inflated to max pressure. You need a good front end and alignment. You need to know how to drive for milage. (I dont mean hypermiling..) If it's tuned perfectly, and matched correctly, and driven correctly, you will get mad rewards. My Neon averages 34mph on low octane. It's got over 160K, has a ported head, and is a '97. I have custoemrs getting over 17mpg in musclecars driven hard with big motors. For an engine, I would use a Magnum 5.9L like Dave's (DGC). No need to stroke it for an A body. I would run a 3.91 gear, and an A833OD. (Dave, really, think your car, with 3.91s...lol) The engine would be cammed for peak torque (a flat curve) around 2700rpm. A dual plane intake, and any Edelbrock/Carter carb in the 750 range. With careful building, and tuned right, I can't see much of a problem way exceeding EFI V8s and many modern V6s. Running no vacuum advance is the single worst milage killer on a muscle car. You want one in place if at all possible.
Click to expand...


This is the type of advice I was looking for Dave. Sounds like I should stuff some 391s in the Dart and drop on a Eddy AVS 800. The only thing that bugs me about the motor is the old Torker intake on it. I actually picked up a stock 71 TQ intake for it figuring the TQ would be great for throttle response and millage but I really dont want to cut the intake to fit.
 
I would think a carb on the small side and a multispark ignition along as much initial timing it'll take cobbled with vacuum advance would be a good start.

Dual plane, vacuum secondary of corse, aired up skinny tires, electric fuel pump and manual steering [if?]
lighten the car
After that put some slack in the throttle cable adjustment.
 
3404spdvaliant said:
Adam, are you talkin from scratch=motor build?
Click to expand...

Doesnt really matter. I was just looking to get a different topic going. This thread is actually a few months old.

Im pretty sure no matter what I do the Dart will be better on gas then the 8 or 9 mpg my Ram gets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top