PDA

View Full Version : Gas milages...



Pontiac6ksteawd
12-23-2007, 07:35 AM
So as to not clog up the other thread about the mans dieing Ciera. I am starting this thread...

Yes, 30 MPG is POSIBLE with a A-body. I have owned 2 A-bods that got that type of gas milage. One was my 87 Pontiac 6000 LE 2.8 3 speed with a funcional TCC Solenoid, and 220+k miles. On that car, on the highway, we saw on average of 32 MPG. Not just once or twice, but routinely. When the TCC wasnt funtional, we were getting about 28.6 MPG. Routinely.

My 6000 STE AWD, 3.1, 3 speed, functional TCC, 90k miles, had one tank of gas that got 34 MPG. I had fueled it with pure gasoline. And not this ethanol blended crap. Most other tanks, with me driving, range about 24-28 MPG. Depending on how heavy my foot is. My wife on the other hand, gets about 12-14 MPG, but she also NEVER drives the highway, and has very short comutes.

Please discuss, and also, NO FLAMING! If you dont beleive what you are seeing, you dont have to defame a person because of it. We have debated this theory on other boards many times. And it always ends in a flame war. Please, NO FLAMING, and please discuss this...

dcjredline
12-23-2007, 01:26 PM
If I remember right the STE was getting in the 22-24 range last WINTER. Never got a chance on regular untainted gas YET. The 90 LE 3.1 auto was closer to 30 I believe it was getting 28.

BBrip84Oatsie95
12-23-2007, 04:01 PM
Like I said on the other thread(sorry) I get about 32 routinely if driven just highway. I once filled it up and took an hour drive to Kansas City and back w/o a/c in the summer going about 65-70 and, I kid you not, I got 36 mpg. That is my record. I'm sure it's because of the O/D tranny. I really like the way it works... I just wish I had cruise control that incorporated a feature to keep the tranny in O/D unless the brakes are applied... On the other hand, driving like an angel in-city, I only get about 21, but if I drive like a madman the whole tank, I have NEVER got below 18 except in the Colorado mountain highways where you have to keep it floored just to maintain your speed... I think I got 16 or something...:eek:

LordDurock
12-23-2007, 05:27 PM
im getting 35-36 highway but i have blowby from a porplay hooned cylinders. it what your saying its true i sould be able to get 40's easy in with my deisel

86euro
12-23-2007, 05:46 PM
In recent years, I haven't gotten to do much straight highway driving. It's usually a mix of city/highway, so I don't bother calculating milage. I remember my old '87 Celebrity duker would get consistent 30mpg on trips to Florida, and that involved a lot of full throttle trough the smokies. The best my last '88 2.8 3speed could muster was only 25mpg- one reason I sold that car. My current '86 coupe has no problem knocking down 30mpg, I'm sure it could be a little better if I kept my foot out of it. It's a 2.8 FI (gen1 cast iron headed) with the 440t4.

LordDurock
12-23-2007, 05:52 PM
.

Prospeeder
12-23-2007, 06:43 PM
My 6000 witha 3.1 V6 and 3 speed trans gets easy 30-32 mpg on on highway driving. I put new plugs wires, 02 sensor, and what not on it.

Tonglebeak
12-23-2007, 09:18 PM
My 2.8 th125c got 34mpg once when I did a lot of highway driving during a particular time period (going across two counties to meet up with chicks X_X), and that was driving 80+ the entire time w/lockup.

ochy38
12-23-2007, 09:31 PM
my celeb consistently gets about 19 with a mix of city/highway in the winter, but could def use new wires and an O2 sensor, plus i think the oil is a thicker weight this time around.. in the summer i consistently get about 23 driving the same route. I hardly ever go on long commutes so i have no strictly highway numbers, but last year i took a trip on a state route through the boonies, probably 200 miles round trip, and got like 26 or 27 if i remember correctly

BBrip84Oatsie95
12-23-2007, 10:34 PM
Heh, I just got done putting new plugs and wires on. My brother got performance plugs online for himself, ended up being the wrong ones, and coincidently worked with mine. He gave me them for free and I got lifetime wires from auto zone for 23-something. Can't go wrong w/ that!

Duke George V
12-23-2007, 11:15 PM
I have NEVER got below 18 except in the Colorado mountain highways where you have to keep it floored just to maintain your speed... I think I got 16 or something...:eek:
You must have had a leak or something, because on my trip home from Iowa I went over the Rockies—the leg from Aurora to Grand Junction netted me 32. Average over the whole 1500 miles was 28. Around Vegas I regularly get 20-21, even with freeway driving, but that's mostly because Vegas is poorly set up. And remember, I have the 3.33 FDR and 3.1 engine, so I'm turning a bit higher on the highway.

BBrip84Oatsie95
12-24-2007, 05:25 AM
Huh. Maybe it was higher, I'll record mileages this summer... Anyhoo... I have a new mileage low, 13. 115 miles. About half of that was actually driven, we just got like a foot of snow and none of the roads got plowed until today!!! I see another tranny flush this summer...

Pontiac6ksteawd
12-24-2007, 08:00 AM
Thanks guys for not letting this turn into a flame war...

Sounds like the 30mpg thing isnt just a feat of a single driver, cause I see alot of ppl here are getting that type of milage. We all know that driver car, and car condition play a role in it.

Keep posting!!

BBrip84Oatsie95
12-24-2007, 04:45 PM
I think that a lot of people assume that just because the car has older styling, it MUST have older technology. Truth is, they are just as up to date as any other car of the era...

Electra_T_Type
12-24-2007, 07:17 PM
My highest seems to be 28 at 80 mph. 3.8 with a 440t4. Usually seems to be around 26 though.
3.3/3spd Century seems to average 26.
All highway milage. dunno about in town.

Tuddi
12-26-2007, 11:59 PM
Here the latest vehicles, with the latest technology and fuel efficiecy from Chevy.

How 15 - 20 yo cars could exceed the best possible economy of today, makes no sense to me.
http://www.chevrolet.com/fueleconomy/?evar10=HP_promo_right_fueleconomy
http://upload.hraunfjord.org/files/30+mpgHWY.jpg

Me getting 8 - 21 mpg is in many ways understandable for a 22 yo car.

And on the notes of fuel efficiency: 300 mpg is possible:

http://www.aptera.com/

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4237853.html?page=1

Tuddi
12-27-2007, 12:49 AM
And in the other thread I came across this:


Have you got a pair of these?

http://www.freefoto.com/images/11/52/11_52_12---Glasses-Spectacles_web.jpg

Try them on this sentence:

Yes, if I back it down to around 35-40 mph, I might see 30+ mpg.


Last I knew, 40 mph and 30+ mpg are two different units of measurement.

To which I might add that if I put my car on a truckbed, while letting the engine idle, I might get a damn good mpg because the truck would be moving my car around.

MPG based on every day driving conditions is what means something. Making a lab test under the most optimal conditions has no meaning for anyone.

If someone here has a car doing 40 mpg on technology from the 80's or 90's, I would recommend them inviting GM technicians to study the car so they could make more efficient cars than the best they already have.

My car ranges from 8 - 21 mpg... averaging on around 15 mpg during any given month.

The best (21mpg) doesn't really matter, because that is not something the car does normally. If I go up a mountain, the car is obviously going to use a lot of gas. If I only calculate the trip down that same mountain, I'd be faking the numbers... even though it would be "true" that it got 100 mpg during the downtrip.

That is why the mpg has to be based on normal every day driving over extended periods of time, and not some exceptionally favorable conditions during an hour or so.

And no, this is not flaming. Just explaining the "why".

LordDurock
12-27-2007, 01:17 AM
And in the other thread I came across this:



To which I might add that if I put my car on a truckbed, while letting the engine idle, I might get a damn good mpg because the truck would be moving my car around.

MPG based on every day driving conditions is what means something. Making a lab test under the most optimal conditions has no meaning for anyone.

If someone here has a car doing 40 mpg on technology from the 80's or 90's, I would recommend them inviting GM technicians to study the car so they could make more efficient cars than the best they already have.

My car ranges from 8 - 21 mpg... averaging on around 15 mpg during any given month.

The best (21mpg) doesn't really matter, because that is not something the car does normally. If I go up a mountain, the car is obviously going to use a lot of gas. If I only calculate the trip down that same mountain, I'd be faking the numbers... even though it would be "true" that it got 100 mpg during the downtrip.

That is why the mpg has to be based on normal every day driving over extended periods of time, and not some exceptionally favorable conditions during an hour or so.

And no, this is not flaming. Just explaining the "why".

yep a vw bug is good for 80mpg with out any of the indent places a 90 pound driver and bickical rims and tires........ i have to get that video.

mickstan_VR
12-27-2007, 04:07 AM
Dont believe that BS MPG rating stuff from GM. I have 2 NEW AVEOs, neither gets 34mpg. Many people on the Aveo forums will tell the same story. 28-30 max. 20 or so in the city. If you get the car over 45 mph, kiss those numbers goodbye.

What I find hard to believe, is that 20 years later, cars still suck the gas as bad as they do. You can't tell me they can't make them get better mileage. HOW can my VR get better mileage with a bigger engine, more weight, and faster speeds than my Aveos? The advertised mpg ratings for my Celebrity were 26-30 back in '88. And it gets it 20 years later. But my Aveo can't break 30 with one person in the car. An '88 corvette with the 6-speed manual will get about the same mileage as my aveos. Now thats screwed-up!

Tuddi, your car is carb'd also. The '87 and up fuel injected engines made a huge difference. Also, what is your normal altitude? I think our altitude here in Illinois is about 3 or 400 feet above sea level. Do you use ethanol, mix, or pure gasoline in your car. That makes a big difference too.

Tuddi
12-27-2007, 04:27 AM
Yes, a carbed model is generally thirstier. The altitude is generally some 100 ft above sea level, so that's ideal. The gasoline I use is pure.... lately using 90 oct. I am sure the ignition is way off the mark, but even if it ran optimally all the time, I'd be glad to have it doing 20 mpg.

Yes, the official numbers from GM are inflated, it is still not illegal to lie to consumers and provide fabricated numbers.... Of course it is possible to make cars more economical than 20 years ago... but the oil companies don't like such talk.... which probably explains a lot of the lack of cars with good milage. Japan and Europe manage to deliver economical, yet powerful cars... while most of the US car productions have fought against that tendency. They give promises and show off concept cars... and then nothing happens. It's just them playing politics.

mickstan_VR
12-27-2007, 06:59 AM
You got it. European cars seem to have much better mileage than our North American counterparts.

We have 10% ethanol in my area.

86euro
12-27-2007, 10:22 PM
We have 10% ethanol in my area.

Same here. It has been phased in over the last several years, and now I don't think there's a single station in central OH that sells pure gasoline anymore.

Jr's3800
12-28-2007, 12:04 AM
Same here. It has been phased in over the last several years, and now I don't think there's a single station in central OH that sells pure gasoline anymore.

Same here..

In general all of these cars that have the THM440-T4( 4T60 ) or 4T60-E should do pretty good on the open road..

The 2.8-3.1 should do well because of the smaller displacement and thats even with the GX3 3.33 Transaxle... Had a couple of friends that Pulled low to mid 20's in town with them and low 30's on the highway..

On every GM car with a 3800 that I have had or driven they were all capable of 28-32 Mpg on the road.. That with the 3.05-3.06 gear ratio... Its usually 32-33 with the 2.93-2.97 as long as you aren't making the M62-M90 Eaton scream... And then there is the 2.84-2.86... we have seen these pull down 33-35 on the open road due to the engine turning low revs even at 80 Mph..

So any of the 3800's, 3300's... 2.8-3.1, and 3100-3400 with the 4 Speed OD Trans should all be able to pull down 28-32...

I have done 31 with my 2.84 Ratio Bonneville... I was speeding in a not so nice way... I was shocked to pull down a 31...

I have Taken my 95 Bonneville On many trips... The worst I ever did was 26... My Right foot was enjoying its place near the metal.. Most of the time I do 32Mpg with the car loaded down, AC running and crusing 75-80mph.... The Virginia and west Virginia Mountains usually take me down to 29mpg..

I chatted with a neighbor that takes the same route I do to go home( they are from not too far from my hometown... They have a 2004 Sonata with the 2.7 L V6.... Best he could do was 30 Mpg and he was doing the speed limit... He asked what my car does for mileage and I told him to take a guess... He said " 25 Mpg ".... Then I told him I did 32 on my return trip..

So I do agree... I don't really see whats changed as far as mileage is concerned... My 95 was sticker rated 19 City and 29 Hwy... 99% of the time I beat those numbers..:)

Also its my opinion that GM could use the 3500 V6 and 3900 V6, attach these to a 2.93 Gear ratio and it would have great fuel economy numbers.... Maybe not that fast to 60( say 8.5-9 seconds )... But being able to say you have a good sized car with a Big V6 easily pulling down 35 Mpg .... Priceless

85_Ciera_Rebuild
12-28-2007, 12:41 AM
And in the other thread I came across this


MPH - Miles Per Hour

1 mph = 1.609344 kilometers / hr

Miles to Kilometers Conversion Calculator (http://www.teaching-english-in-japan.net/conversion/miles)


MPG - Miles Per Gallon

Miles Per Gallon (U.S.) to Kilometer Per Liter Conversion Calculator. (http://www.teaching-english-in-japan.net/conversion/miles_per_gallon)


40 mph (64.37 km/hr) is not the same as 30 mpg (12.74 km/l)

85_Ciera_Rebuild
12-28-2007, 12:45 AM
I don't think there's a single station in central OH that sells pure gasoline anymore.

Find one with a premium pump...no alcohol there...

In my state, as long as octane is correct (or higher if they choose), its OK; which means unleaded and mid-grade can both have E10 in them.

Tuddi
12-28-2007, 01:11 AM
MPH - Miles Per Hour

1 mph = 1.609344 kilometers / hr

Miles to Kilometers Conversion Calculator (http://www.teaching-english-in-japan.net/conversion/miles)


MPG - Miles Per Gallon

Miles Per Gallon (U.S.) to Kilometer Per Liter Conversion Calculator. (http://www.teaching-english-in-japan.net/conversion/miles_per_gallon)


40 mph (64.37 km/hr) is not the same as 30 mpg (12.74 km/l)

Have you got one of those?
http://upload.hraunfjord.org/files/HomerBrain.jpg
If you do, try to use it when you read the following which is found in the current topic ;) :


I kid you not, I got 36 mpg.


im getting 35-36 highway but i have blowby from a porplay hooned cylinders. it what your saying its true i sould be able to get 40's easy in with my deisel


The best (21mpg) doesn't really matter, because that is not something the car does normally. If I go up a mountain, the car is obviously going to use a lot of gas. If I only calculate the trip down that same mountain, I'd be faking the numbers... even though it would be "true" that it got 100 mpg during the downtrip.

That is why the mpg has to be based on normal every day driving over extended periods of time, and not some exceptionally favorable conditions during an hour or so.

No, you did not say you were getting 40mpg, nor did I say you had claimed to. You were using an example of driving 40mph, which is probably not the normal driving pattern of most pre 90 year olds.

When we calculate fuel economy, it is based on extended period of time and several tanks of fuel used. That gives an accurate insight to the car's consumption.

So a single test where you drive around for an hour at 40mph is not representative for your car's fuel economy, UNLESS you always drive like that.

Don't take Homer's picture in a bad way. I am only trying to put a little laughing powder out into the discussion, as I think you were also doing with the picture of the glasses. No hard feelings, maybe a bit of misunderstanding on either side, but nothing bad I hope.

mickstan_VR
12-28-2007, 06:58 AM
Only 10% ethanol in IL. Indiana too, I think. Ran across some 100% pure gas in Michigan. The car ran much better on it. Wish I could have brought back a 55 gallon drum of it!

Also saw this at the same station:
http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/3773/highoctaneal2.th.jpg (http://img508.imageshack.us/my.php?image=highoctaneal2.jpg)

and look at the company name. Citgo. I bought gas in MI at a mom and pop gas station and the money ended up going to a nutball in Central America...of course, i guess most of my gas money ends up in the hands of a nutball somewhere....

a1veedubber
12-28-2007, 07:45 AM
I am pretty sure you can ge pure gas here in IA, I will check tomorrow. Here, the 10% Ethanol gas is 10c cheaper a gallon than the pure stuff though as the state taxes it less.
We have that racing gas here in Stuart also due to the fact that we have a racetrack. 5.89 a gallon! ANd it cannot be pumped into a car either.Gascan only.

Tuddi
12-28-2007, 07:46 AM
Is my buddy Hugo Chavez still being demonized in the US? Just because he doesn't do the bidding of US corporations and the US Federal government... and he doesn't speak respectfully of Bush in public or in private....

hmmm.... because of the above: OF COURSE he's being demonized.

And as to your comment on your gas money ending up in the hands of some nutball (referance to Chavez) ... the money Venezuela receives for it's oil, actually goes to the people of the country, in form of hospitals, clinics, schools and infrastructure improvements.

It is funny how he (Chavez) has been accused of "buying votes with oil wealth", when all he does, is to make sure the people of the country get what belongs to them, rather than to do what has always been the norm in Venezuela; let foreign companies take the national wealth away without paying taxes or otherwise make sure the people got what is theirs. Venezuela hasn't taken any new loans through IMF (International Monetary Fund) or the WB (World Bank)... and that has seriously pissed off the people/corporations behind those 2 very abusive "institutions". In fact, Venezuela has the ability today, to pay off it's entire foreign debt, should it choose to do so, and still have several billions of spare change to put into social projects.

How did they get there? Higher world oil prices (thanks to Bushco for starting wars) have definetely helped, but also the fact that Chavez' government has made sure that the oil companies operating in the country, paid back taxes they owed (and were never before asked to pay) and new taxes were applied as well, in order to make sure the national wealth would not continue to be robbed.

But of course... a self declared socialist who bears the wellbeing of his people in mind, rather than bearing the wellbeing of foreign multi billion dollar companies and abusive governments, must be made into the fork holding evildoer.

I know Venezuelans who don't like Chavez one bit... some are fanatical and accuse him of causing earthquakes, volcano eruptions and whatnot... while others are simply not liking the man, while they acknowledge the positive changes in their country since he came to power.

(Darn... did I fall into a rant hole again... typical... up comes the HINT of a political issue, and I can't (and won't) hold my bucket closed) :rolleyes:

Tuddi
12-28-2007, 08:18 AM
5.89 a gallon!

That's the price for unleaded 97oct gas here in Peru...

Prices of gasoline in March 2005 (http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/)

http://upload.hraunfjord.org/files/OilPricesMarch2005.jpg

Here a price example from Amsterdam 5 months later (http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2005-08-25-europe-gas_x.htm):


a gallon of gas in Amsterdam now costs $7.13, compared with just $2.61 in America.

Since then it's come down a bit (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/ene_gas_pri-energy-gasoline-prices&b_map=1).
In the Nationmaster (above link) you read the number as Dollars per liter. To get the price per gallon, you multiply the number with 3.8.

The US is #102 out of 141 on the list, meaning that gasoline is still very cheap there. Comparing a normal workers wages in Peru with a normal workers wages in the US, the Peruvian could buy 2/3 of a gallon of gas for his day's wages. US worker gets what... $7 per hour... times 8 hours... 56 dollars per day, which would buy him 18 or more gallons of gas in the US.

Imagine if you only got 2/3 of a gallon of gas for a whole day's work! Quite insane to think of.

85_Ciera_Rebuild
12-28-2007, 06:31 PM
No, you did not say you were getting 40mpg, nor did I say you had claimed to

Reality Check: from original post ( Via My Cutlass Ciera Kicked the Can thread)


How you would get that kind of milage out of your car is beyond me to fathom.

When these cars were NEW, the mileage was at BEST possible conditions put at around 25 miles per gallon. How anyone should get 40 miles per gallon 20+ years later out of them, should simply not be possible.


I never claimed 40 mpg, but claimed, "Yes, if I back it down to around 35-40 mph, I might see 30+ mpg."

PS: "Old, but still improving..."

You all from Australia, yes....were you involved with that Free Hugs Campaign (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr3x_RRJdd4)

85_Ciera_Rebuild
12-28-2007, 06:45 PM
The best (21mpg)


If you live in "hill-billy" terrain, your fuel economy will go down overall. If you have mostly a "levelized" driving terrain, you will see more realistic mpg as stated by OEMs, if vehicle's motor is still heathly.

I drive mostly in a levelized driving environment, with a few hill-billy hills...and with a 1986 Chev Caprice (305 cubic inch with Carb) with 4 - Speed Auto, and can average 21 mpg with a 160,000 mile vehicle in mostly rural/hwy driving....at 55 mph or less speeds

Internet Photo

http://i5.ebayimg.com/03/i/000/cd/5f/99b9_1.JPG

LordDurock
12-28-2007, 07:06 PM
yes tubbi but we has socal effects as well gas over sea is moslt regarded as a pleaser idea (like alochal and tobaco) tipcaly we allways see this ideams costing more and being being taxed more......
were here in the us is used to get use everyware. were line countrys like germany there are bus to get you everyware and there on time and go any ware.
riding the bus in fortcollions it takes and hours to get 5 block...........i can walk any ware in the city in 2 hours just about.

Tuddi
12-28-2007, 08:23 PM
Reality Check: from original post ( Via My Cutlass Ciera Kicked the Can thread)


I never claimed 40 mpg, but claimed, "Yes, if I back it down to around 35-40 mph, I might see 30+ mpg."

PS: "Old, but still improving..."

You all from Australia, yes....were you involved with that Free Hugs Campaign (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr3x_RRJdd4)

Reality check on your reality check; You can read whatever you want from my words, while I know perfectly well what I thought while writing what I wrote. If I can't convince you of my reality being mine, then that's your problem, not mine.

And no, I am not from Aussieland... unless you happen to be talking to my hat?

The free hugs campaign is helluva lot better than many other things handed out by people for free :)

My driving environment is very leveled, but the car does still have unresolved issues, plus the traffic here is normally terrible, and to move only 5 miles can take the most of an hour in the worst everyday periods.... that does of course highten the overall mpg.

When I had my Jeep Wagoneers, the 8cyl 360 cu.in. engines were more economical than the 6cyl inline 258cu.in. engined one... I never understood why the Waggies were made with the 6 cyl engine, so I understand perfectly well that you can get that good economy out of your 305 Caprice

The old rule of thumb of fuel economy (for pre-computerized cars) is: 1 liter for 100 kilos per 100 km's.

0,27 gl for 220 pounds per 62 miles. With computerized cars, the rule of thumb can be reduced with 15-20% on the gallons.

So a carbed car weighing 3000 pounds (including the driver ) should get an economy of 16,83 mpg on average, while a computer aided car of same weight/same engine would get 21,05 mpg

85_Ciera_Rebuild
12-29-2007, 12:10 AM
traffic here is normally terrible...

The old rule of thumb of fuel economy (for pre-computerized cars) is: 1 liter for 100 kilos per 100 km's.


I am not referring to city driving....but rural/highway driving....few stops...motor...motor...I can drive 45 miles with only one stop sign...and get 27 mpg in Winter Conditons (snow/ice roadways with dry pavement roadways).

Rule of thumb needs to include other factors, like Cubic Inch displacement also. An old GM 454 in one ton truck got about 7 mpg loaded on highways...maybe 9 mpg unloaded, if you were lucky.

If your 2.8 has a plain carburetor, this would explain your poor fuel economy....if your 2.8 has a computer controlled carburetor (not TBI), then this may explain your lower economy...but if your 2.8 had fuel injection, your fuel economy should improve in hilly terrain.

With the 2.8 in my 88 Beretta, on extreme type hills when descending, it will shut off fuel to the engine for short periods.....on descending hills not as steep, it will dis-engaged TC, and let engine come back to an idle while descending.

Most likely, your Carb-2.8 is dumping more fuel, and can not shut off fuel supply while descending steep hills, and/or dis-engage TC and idle motor...

PS: What's your native tongue?

85_Ciera_Rebuild
12-29-2007, 12:26 AM
unleaded 97oct gas here in Peru...


Find a MSDS Sheet (Material Safety Data Sheet) for where you get fuel; here is an example here (http://www.countrymark.com./files/documents/msds/Unleaded_90Plus_Super_w_eth_Prem_unl_0607.pdf).

Trade Names: for Countrymark Cooperative

Unleaded 87 Octane

Super Unleaded 87 Octane w / 10% Ethanol

Premium Unleaded 92 Octane

Premium Unleaded 92 Octane w/ 10 % Ethanol

Ninety Plus 90 Octane

Ninety Plus 90 Octane w / 10 % Ethanol

Mid-grade 89 Octane

85_Ciera_Rebuild
12-29-2007, 12:30 AM
riding the bus in fortcollions it takes and hours to get 5 block.

Taking old US-287 from Loveland to Ft.Collins use to take 10 minutes in 1980...now, during 5 PM traffic, maybe a hour sometimes, when I last did it.

Tuddi
12-29-2007, 01:27 AM
PS: What's your native tongue?

Icelandic is my primary language. then Danish, Faroese, English, Spanish, Norwegian, Swedish, German, Portuguese, French and a little bit of Indonesian and Somali... last two are almost extinct for me now due to not having used them on any level for way too long. French and German are borderline cases for me now due to the same lack of maintainance. When I lived in Denmark my job took me all over europe, and most of the jobs were done in Germany and France.

I may get my tongue wrapped around my neck in confusion from time to time (when speaking to a spanish speaker, but using Danish... or vice versa). I have also seen me changing from English to Icelandic on occation when writing. No failsafe here :)

Regarding the fuel economy; Yes, there are many factors that can play into the "rule of thumb" ... which is precicely why it is called a rule of thumb. It is not accurate for every engine or every car... but it serves as a measurement stick for most normal rides from the 50's to the 80's. Without knowing the exact consumption of the car, one could use that rule of thumb, add 30% to the fuel result, and be on the safe side before a trip (normally... and that does not include bored out big block engines with turbo chargers etc :) )

Tuddi
12-29-2007, 01:33 AM
And a PS for getting "Material Safety Data Sheet"

Nope... I won't even bother trying to find anything like that here in Peru. Probably doesn't exist. There have been cases of old engine oil from ships being used to add to Diesel tanks that sell diesel to consumers. That old engine oil is environmentally UNSAFE and is thick and gooey like syrup... and it costs the ship owners to get rid of it. So the bastards who buy it, get paid for removing it, then they add it to diesel fuel and it is sold again at the official diesel price, without people knowing (is really bad for the engines using it).

Gasoline could be under the same quality threat... but there is no way to know.

Anything goes here... until someone doesn't get bribed with enough money, and gives a tip to someone who can involve the authorities.

85_Ciera_Rebuild
12-29-2007, 02:02 AM
50's to the 80's....rule of thumb


Except for 1950s Studebakers (2699 lbs or there abouts), which could get a consistent 22 MPG (http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX?14@@.f0ca82a/157), and higher with overdrive tranmission... 2.8 L. (85-hp inline Six) (http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z12674/default.aspx) motor.

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/1953-1954-studebaker-champion-regal-starlight-starliner-1.jpg

85_Ciera_Rebuild
12-29-2007, 02:23 AM
Here the latest vehicles....fuel efficiecy


How about driving a HDT DIESEL MOTORCYCLE (http://www.hdtusa.com/) in Peru?

Here's an overview of their project (http://www.hdtusa.com/press/hdt_diesel_press_release.htm), but I don't know if they are selling internationally to consumers yet.

Tuddi
12-29-2007, 04:12 AM
Wow... bio diesel motorbikes!! Finally something logical in the motorbike field.... something that should not be difficult to mass produce at acceptable consumer prices.

Only military production for now... but this will hopefully make other brands start the same trend.

a1veedubber
12-29-2007, 06:04 AM
I checked on our gas here in IA, here in my town you can 5 grades of gasoline. The only ones with Ethanol are the Super Unleaded 89 octane w/10% (what most people buy due to the cheapness of it) and the Flexfuel 85% Ethanol fuel. The rest is Ethanol-free. I find this kind of strange since Iowa seems to be the Ethanol capital of the USA. IMHO its a dead-end tech here as we do not have the right climate to really get it to work well (such as Brazil has). Also, because of the high demand for corn, many farmers now plant MUCH more corn than before and there are a lot of chemicals from the fertilizer getting into the ground & water. Generally, if Corn is rotated every few years w/Soybeans it reverses this somewhat, but it isnt happening now. Google the Gulf Dead Zone for more info on the effects of this if you are interested....This is something that is going to need to be fixed...and soon.

As for fuel mileage for vehicles, there really isnt a rule of thumb, there are WAY to many variables. For example, the car can affect it depending on its aerodynamics, gearing, engine design & numerous other things. Also, climate and driving style can affect it also. My opinion about the pathetic MPG many new cars get is that until recently, many Americans have not even paid attention to what the MPG of their vehicle is. With prices on the way up people are FINALLY starting to take notice and demand better from the manufacturers. If there is no incentive to make there more efficient, they wont. And the recent CAFE change that Bush signed into law is a joke. WAY too many loopholes for the manufacturers. For me, I think the short-term solution is more clean-burning Diesels & possibly Diesel Hybrids instead of Gas Hybrids followed by Fuel-Cell powered vehicles. Until these start arriving, the American public is getting smoke blown up its you know what! And we deserve it too.

As for gas prices in the USA compared to other countries, its really not a good comparison. Most of the difference between our price & most other (non oil-producing) countries is the taxes. Take the taxes out of the mix & the price is very similar...

And just for the record, the avg MPG in my vehicles is this:

86 Euro coupe 2.5l---------26.2 mpg AVG
87 VW Cabriolet 1.8l------29 mpg AVG (requires Premium th run right)
89 Ciera SL 3.3l-------------19 mpg AVG
06 Kia Spectra5 2.0l-------31 mpg AVG

The Ciera *might* do better when I get the fuel system sorted out, runnin a bit rich!
The Kia would definitely do better if it had a 6th gear in the manual trans...runs 3000rpm at 70 mph! It is great fun to drive in a spirited manner on back roads though!!!

Anyone know what a well tuned 4.3 diesel would get in an 85 A-body? I might be getting a real nice one in a couple of months!

Tuddi
12-29-2007, 06:42 AM
As for fuel mileage for vehicles, there really isnt a rule of thumb, there are WAY to many variables.


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rule%20of%20thumb
1. a general or approximate principle, procedure, or rule based on experience or practice, as opposed to a specific, scientific calculation or estimate.
2. a rough, practical method of procedure.

A useful principle having wide application but not intended to be strictly accurate or reliable in every situation.

So yes... a rule of thumb. Not scientific, not accurate... but a bucket of water thrown at an empty glass. Good enough for apprx. numbers.

On the whole ethanol thing I have a very clear opinion: In a world where 6 thousand children die from hunger every DAY (that's our world), it is pure madness to grow crops to feed our car engines! There simply is no rational excuse for doing it.

And yes, all the fertilizer and chemicals that poison waterways and water reserves... the human race is amusing itself to death.

Yes, taxes are a large portion of other countries high prices. But the "good thing" about it is that people drive less when the price is high. That results in less environmental poisoning and therefore better livingconditions for all living creatures. WHEN the taxes are used to improve public sectors such as education and healthcare, everyone is a winner. People who are well fed and healthy in mind and body, don't go out robbing and killing and such, simply because they have what they need. It's when they are lacking basic things, that they become criminals.... so paying taxes (even high ones) is a way of securing one's own living sphere.

But as always, there are pros and cons to every situation. I would love to have as cheap gas as people get it in Venezuela (less than 50 cent for a gallon), but I do also support high prices because it does limit how much people use their smog causing equipment... and thereby giving my children cleaner air and water.

Guess we can't always get what we want... to quote the Rolling Stones....

85_Ciera_Rebuild
12-29-2007, 04:04 PM
On the whole ethanol thing I have a very clear opinion: In a world where 6 thousand children die from hunger every DAY (that's our world), it is pure madness to grow crops to feed our car engines! There simply is no rational excuse for doing it.


Sidebar - Here's some corn market talk....you can't always get what you want...ethanol at high corn prices....

"More and more we are hearing of calls for much higher price targets (http://tinyurl.com/2l3v8c)
by next spring, something that usually would occur seasonally. But
also corn prices at $4.50 accompanied by huge discounts for ethanol
relative to gasoline could present some demand changes for corn.
Ethanol plants simply cannot make money at current price
relationships, with these numbers getting worse as you move into next
summer (corn at a premium price near $4.50 futures vs. $4.10 now).
Obviously, there would be some shutdown of ethanol plants sometime in
the next year if price relationships stay where they are at. If so,
corn ethanol demand or use could be cut significantly as we enter the
last half of the year."

BBrip84Oatsie95
01-01-2008, 07:32 PM
So..... I KNOW this isn't possible in my situation but I need help figuring how this could be so off I guess... This morning I filled up at the quiktrip down the street from my sisters and hit the highway north to home. The pump was a very fast one, and spit gas down the side of my car, btw. The weather: A nice, balmy 14 above with a 25-35mph wind from the north. Not ideal good mileage weather. I drive the 50 miles home, drop the fam off and go get gas again. I fill it up again. I calculate the mileage per gallon. Miles driven divided by gallons into the tank.

38.41.
I do it again. 38.41.
I recheck the odometer and the pump and try it again- 38.41.
Quite a shock when I was expecting a maximum of 10 mpg less than that... What is wrong? There is NO WAY that can be true given driving conditions, right? What am I overlooking? :eek:

LordDurock
01-01-2008, 07:52 PM
okay we need to know how many miles total you put on the car and howm uch you put in after the trip.

Tuddi
01-01-2008, 07:54 PM
Sounds too good to be true...

50 mile trip you say (80,47 km). How many gallons used for the trip? 1.3 gallons (4,92 liters)?

BBrip84Oatsie95
01-01-2008, 07:57 PM
It was 52 point something miles and 1.380 gal

Tuddi
01-01-2008, 09:18 PM
Your calculation is correct, so no worries there.

Did you hand fill the tank yourself both times?

If I have the tank filled for me, the sensor in the gas station's handle will stop pumping when the tank is "full".... After that I can fill it up with a gallon or two.

... and then I will give you the most unbelievable gas mileage story ever:

It was back in 1984 and I had been working all night long on one of my Wagoneers alongside one of my brothers, but we didn't manage to get the Waggy running.Early next morning we were expected to pick up my brother's wife some 180 miles away (300 km). So at 6 in the morning we left in my brothers Trabant. The fuel tank in that car is just a tank under the hood, and there was no fuel meter made for these cars. You'd have to physically open the hood and stick down a measuring pin into the tank pull up the pin and read from it how many liters were in the tank. A truly fail-safe system if there ever was one.

Before we left we checked the level. It stood at the 6 liters mark.

This would get us safely some 62 miles (100 km's).

And so it did. We stopped at a tankstation a little over an hour later, but it was closed, and would not open for another 2 hours. That didn't please us, since we had to be at the final destination on time. We stomped around for a few minutes... then we checked how much gasoline we had... thinking we could maybe make it to the next tankstation that might be open some 20 km's away.

The measure pin went in, then came out... and it read 7 liters left in the tank.

That's right. One liter MORE than was in the tank at the start of the trip some miles earlier.

Both me and my brother were totally dumbstruck. There was no way the readings could be wrong. It's just a pin that goes to the bottom of the tank, and one reads from the numbers of the pin.

We got back in the car, drove past the next tankstation without hesitation (it was still closed)... and we arrived at my brother's wife's pickup point on time, and there we checked the gasoline level again, and it was down to 2 liters.

So at first the car produced gasoline... I know, it's not possible... no way that it's possible, but it did it anyway. I can't explain it, nor can anyone else. The fueltank held in total 24 liters. The engine had only 5 moving parts, and to take it out of the engine bay, one only needed two keys and it weighed no more than a sewingmachine (and had similar dimensions).

The normal fuel economy of a Trabbi was 65-70 mpg... but no production of gasoline has ever been associated with these cars as far as I know (because it is impossible)....

So... crazy and unexplainable things can and do happen...

This very same car rolled over a few months later in an outward turning swing with me and my brother in it... we were both without safetybelts and got a bump on our heads. The front windshield fell out in one piece, we crawled out of the car.... sat on the road side while getting our senses again... and then I went into the car (a minute or so later) and turned off the engine that kept on running all the time, even when turned upside down.

We put the windshield in the back (station model) drove to my brother's workshop, I put my back on the front seat, pushed the top up in the front, my brother fit the window in there, I released the top, and it was a perfect fit in less than 30 seconds.

One morning I was driven into by a Mazda coming from a side road. The Trabbi jumped on the road by being hit... I stopped it and saw how badly crumbled the front of the Mazda was looking, and thought the Trabbi had been badly damaged on the side. Once out of the car, I could see my fear was totally unfounded. The dirt on the body had been scraped off over some 2 ft x 1/2 inch area, ending at the front of the rear fender, where the fender "flare" had chipped a little bit (half of your little finger nail's worth of chipping). The mazda had lost it's whole front bumper, grille, lights, hood was bent up and driver side fender was totalled.

Magical car... and then one day it didn't want to start and my brother just abandoned it on the spot.

Here some basic info on Trabant:
http://listing-index.ebay.com/cars/Trabant.html

Remembering this car and what it did, should have me to shut up about what is and what isn't possible when it comes to fuel economy... so... let me stop here.

.... anything is possible :)

86euro
01-01-2008, 11:26 PM
Wow, tuddi, that was one amazing car! To bad it was abandoned after one little problem.
On a side note, not a bad looking little car. That's quite a production run too.

Back on topic, I think on the second fill up, the tank just wasn't completely topped off. For such a short distance, a small amount of gas can throw the figure way off.

Tuddi
01-02-2008, 01:57 AM
Yes, it can throw it off... which is why you would have a higher mpg next time you fill it up.... and in 5-6 times having filled it up, you will have a good average mpg figure.

85_Ciera_Rebuild
01-02-2008, 02:26 AM
So a carbed car weighing 3000 pounds (including the driver ) should get an economy of 16,83 mpg on average, while a computer aided car of same weight/same engine would get 21,05 mpg

Your base assumption here is someone driving the "norm," whatever that is. US Fuel Economy Site (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm) does not indicate what test procedures they use...but, one must assume they are driving "highway speed(s)" and "city speeds with traffic control devices."

When I lookup my 88 Beretta ( 2.8 L ), they suggest:

City/Highway

18/24 with higher speed limits here (60-70 mph)

20/26 with 55 mph speed limit, years ago

But, when this vehicle is driven at around 40-50 mph over rural/highway surfaces with long distances ( 45 miles commute ) and few stops in Winter time, it can average about 27 mpg....when wet traction conditions (snow, mud, ice) do not exist, and no strong winds exist this is the average mileage.

In Winter time, with temperatures ranging around 9.5 °F / -12.5 °C in the morning, it takes about 8 miles to bring this engine up to operating temperature, which means there is extra fuel burn involved. In warmer weather, I know it can get a small pinch better.

BBrip84Oatsie95
01-02-2008, 04:31 AM
I filled it up both times. I really filled it up both times, too. I just don't think it could be so high... On a similar "holy crap" note, A) My car takes on average 4 minutes to warm up to its operating temp. ( 90% 35-45mph, 10-20F) And, B) crazy again, I let my car idle in the parking lot of wal-mart after about a 1.5 mile drive for HALF AN HOUR and figured I would go check on it after reading 3/4 of Motortrends' Caddy in Europe article... The temp gauge hadn't moved a millimeter! I figured it would be hovering in the Fan-on zone, but it was just a hair over the very first dash. I really couldn't believe it... I shoulda finished reading the mag! :D

Tuddi
01-02-2008, 03:57 PM
When I lookup my 88 Beretta ( 2.8 L ), they suggest:

City/Highway

18/24 with higher speed limits here (60-70 mph)

20/26 with 55 mph speed limit, years ago

So you are using someone else's rule of thumb... even though they and you call it something else.

Whatever rocks your boat.

Cheers.

85_Ciera_Rebuild
01-03-2008, 06:45 PM
Whatever rocks your boat.


This will get my boat rocking: Fashionable condoms (http://inquirerbloggers.net/baberepublic/2008/01/01/fashionable-condoms/)

Tuddi
01-03-2008, 07:05 PM
This will get my boat rocking: Fashionable condoms (http://inquirerbloggers.net/baberepublic/2008/01/01/fashionable-condoms/)
Are you ok... or in need of some help?

85_Ciera_Rebuild
01-04-2008, 12:55 AM
Are you ok... or in need of some help?

Humor....

Tuddi
01-04-2008, 01:17 AM
Humor back at you... "in need of some help" was reference to whether you needed help putting on the condoms.

a1veedubber
01-04-2008, 04:39 AM
Humor back at you... "in need of some help" was reference to whether you needed help putting on the condoms.

I was all "WTH????:confused::confused:????" until I clicked the link. Then it was all ":D:D:D"

LordDurock
01-04-2008, 05:38 AM
Are you ok... or in need of some help?

+1 that was scary and thouse are the UGLIYS girls i seen..................yuck. and the CREEPY faces...............*sivers* he need help. in the form of glasses.

85_Ciera_Rebuild
01-05-2008, 03:21 AM
yuck. and the CREEPY faces

Is Sadie (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YamDoDK71Ds&feature=related) more your style?

Only 60 miles away from you:eek:

LordDurock
01-05-2008, 05:55 PM
okay you spend to much time look at girls on the net...................
this i my girl friend of 2.5 years. half jappness have hispacnic (mexcain ogaians)
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb167/lorddurock/ohwow.jpg
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb167/lorddurock/thatsmygirl.jpg

the fashnobale condoms girls lets say it a curse and a blessing to be and "exsotic" girl. becuase becuase i've noticed either there exstremly buifail or just way usgly (not trying to be rude thats just whati tend to see).

Tuddi
01-05-2008, 06:52 PM
You've got good taste in cars.... and women! :)

LordDurock
01-05-2008, 07:00 PM
why thank you! the best part is she's total crazy about me. her being dead gourgus just makes it over the top!

85_Ciera_Rebuild
01-05-2008, 11:04 PM
you spend to much time look at girls
on the net...

Oh no...video

Rodrigo y Gabriela (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNc5o9TU0t0)

base jumping (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttz5oPpF1Js)

Pontiac6ksteawd
02-12-2008, 06:24 PM
Well, just got back from a road trip in the AWD. Had to take the wifes cousin home after getting discharged from the military. So taking him home, 3 people in the car, his 4 large and heavy duffle bags, cruise set most of the time at 80mph, netted me 22.1mpg. On the way back, with none of his crap, or him. Just me and the wife, cruise set again at 80 mph netted me 28.2 mpg. So the weight did drag me down some on the way down, but thats ok..

85_Ciera_Rebuild
02-12-2008, 09:35 PM
So the weight did drag me down some on the way down...

Since CAFE requirements, overall motor vehicle weight has been reduced.

If you drive 18 Wheelers, from being empty to fully loaded varies your mileage by upto several miles per gallon (6 vs. 9 mpg).

If you took a 1971–1977 Chevrolet Vega (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Vega)and dropped a small block chevy in it, with auto, you could get twenty miles per gallon or more. With a standard transmission, you could get more.

With a 1964 GTO, which was about 2,999 lbs, you could get 17 mpg with big block 389 motor...on highway.

You loose mpg with that extra weight....trucks/cars, all the same.

Techfizzle
04-14-2008, 08:25 PM
any one out here with a 2.5 iron duke what doi they get? Mine should get 32 trip acording to epa. So Im thinking a good long trip I should get 38?

Techfizzle
04-14-2008, 08:27 PM
and mines a too door so it should wiegh 300 pounds less then a 4 door.

Jr's3800
04-14-2008, 10:13 PM
any one out here with a 2.5 iron duke what doi they get? Mine should get 32 trip acording to epa. So Im thinking a good long trip I should get 38?

You might get 32 if you are lucky.. Chances are you will never see 38... I would say yes to this if you had an overdrive gear like .7xx to 1, but I don't think the Tech 4 has enough to to twist that OD gear..

I have run up hill with my 3800 in OD TCC Lock at 1400 Rpms... But keep in mind I am making almost 2x's the torque to be able to turn that OD gear with a 2.84 overall gear ratio..

and these cars are known to do 31-34 on the open road..

even a 3.1 V6 Vin T( iirc ) will make a good and stout 185 Ft lbs and at a good low RPM.. Which gives it the ability to turn the 3.33 gear ratio, same goes for the 2.8... I have heard of both of thes having good numbers on the road as well..

If your EPA estimates 32, I'd say a little more will be possible..

My 95 3800 series II is rated at 29 hwy, I normally do 32..... And is rated 19 City, I typically do 20-22 in town...

jinxtigr
04-14-2008, 11:08 PM
I got a solid 33 MPG once in my '93 Century (3.3L) and I'm still trying to beat it. I use a trip to my Mom that's about two hours each way, fill up the tank, and then fill it again afterwards to get my gallons number and note down the odometer- real scientific! ;)

I kinda suspect I'm going to top 33 MPG the next time- such major modifications, including drastic weight reduction. But the wider tires might steal a bit of that.

87Cutlass Ciera
04-15-2008, 12:06 AM
Alright, this one is for Tech, just cause I was keeping track of my mileage for 3 months and gas purchases and such, pretty much from the first of October until the fourth of December (which was the last fill up before the car quit, and that tank of gas is still sitting in the tank) So in that time I put 475.267 Litres in the tank 125.552 Gallons and I traveled 4525 kms 2811.7miles so, doing the math that gives me a poor number of 22.39MPG. Now lets see if I can rule this out.

My driving terrain is hilly, quite a number of large hills.
I drove the car at speeds no slower than 130 for 3hours per trip (that means the 2.5 was spinning pretty fast)
I usually had my luggage plus 2 other people and their luggage
The car had been missing when under loads (usually going uphills) for about a month prior to dropping the bomb.
But that is my average, it may be possible that I missed something, It actually should be a little higher, because I didn't add on how far I traveled before it died, so lets say I drove 150kms extra, cause thats pretty much how far it was, that puts it up to about 23.1MPG, so don't look for amazing fuel economy! I guess 25-30 is a good number if driving under 130km/h with less weight in the car. Also I had changed the Tranny fluid/filter at the beginning of August, and the plugs, wires, oil and filter at the beginning of July, and when my car started missing under loads I replaced the wires and plugs again with no change. So when I get the Olds back on the road with a different Duke, and the T440 transmission in place of the old TH125, I'll let you know what I start averaging.

85_Ciera_Rebuild
04-15-2008, 04:17 AM
that tank of gas is still sitting in the tank

There is a fuel test lead near firewall (above windshield wiper and to the right as you look at it) on driver's side...I think its a gray colored wire...but you put 12 Volts to it, and your pump will run....

I hooked a hose to the fuel line, and pumped it into gas can.

87Cutlass Ciera
04-15-2008, 12:36 PM
Thanks 85, I'll do that when I get done here at University. I mean dad could always just siphon it out, but I'm not sure that the gas is going to turn to varnish in 5 months, cause I really hope to have it back on the road in May. But 5 month old gas is still old gas. So better to take that out and run it in some of the mowers that don't mind, and get some new stuff when I finally get the new heart in.

85_Ciera_Rebuild
04-15-2008, 07:45 PM
get some new stuff when I finally get the new heart in.

If you listen to fuel pump run, and watch the flow rate, you will know when to turn it off; run pump dry for a short period, several seconds or so, will not hurt it.

Btw, do you have Volvos in your local salvage yard...1984 vintage...2.3 motor?

87Cutlass Ciera
04-15-2008, 09:17 PM
I'm not sure if there are any Volvos around I haven't looked, I'm not a volvo guy, why do you ask?

85_Ciera_Rebuild
04-16-2008, 02:34 AM
why do you ask?

In 1984, Volvo was equipped with a side draft carb in Canada, instead of fuel injection (US).

If my fuel injection shot craps, and the price was not out of range, I thought about converting over to a Canadian version (intake/carb) or use computer/fuel system from my 1987 Ciera.

Just an idea at this time...if you ever came across an intake manifold for a side draft carb (B21A or B23A motor), I would be interested in it. I thought I might be able to use the fuel injection system (computer too) used on 1987 Ciera and mount it into this Volvo I have.

87Cutlass Ciera
04-16-2008, 03:01 AM
Well I will keep my eyes open, but I doubt they're going to see anything. If I ever get to a junkyard I will see. Not too many U-picks here in Nova Scotia, there are a few in PEI but it costs 50 bucks to drive across the bridge! Volvo 240 had this engine right?

Techfizzle
04-16-2008, 03:14 AM
Well I will keep my eyes open, but I doubt they're going to see anything. If I ever get to a junkyard I will see. Not too many U-picks here in Nova Scotia, there are a few in PEI but it costs 50 bucks to drive across the bridge! Volvo 240 had this engine right?

50 bucks! Talk about highway robbery!

85_Ciera_Rebuild
04-16-2008, 07:03 PM
Volvo 240 had this engine right?

Yes....21A or 23A motor....should be ID in motor compartment.

Volvo 240s were a good vehicle if maintained....I picked this one up from Pizza Hut; it had been sitting there for a month, and bought it for $150.00 with good set of front tires.

Normal engine temperature: oil pressure:

25 psi Idle
55 psi at 2,000 RPM

Compression good across all cylinders: 170 psi COLD

I will have about $700.00 total in it when I finish putting in parts (including shocks)...but it will be roadworthy.

I suspect it will get around 27 mpg Highway.

I installed a 4-wire O2 sensor in it, which should help fuel mileage.

87Cutlass Ciera
04-16-2008, 07:37 PM
I installed a 4-wire O2 sensor in it, which should help fuel mileage.

So how does the O2 sensor help with fuel mileage? Does it sense if the car is running too rich, and then slacks back on the amount of fuel being consumed? And how many versions of O2 sensors are there?

Jr's3800
04-16-2008, 09:22 PM
So how does the O2 sensor help with fuel mileage? Does it sense if the car is running too rich, and then slacks back on the amount of fuel being consumed? And how many versions of O2 sensors are there?

For GM you have the single wire, 3 wire and 4 wire O2 Sensor...

The single wire will heat up with the exhaust stream temps... With the 3 wire and or the 4 wire, they are heated... You turn the ignition on and the Sensor starts to heat up right away... It won't be at or get to full operating temps, but the little heater will help get you there quicker... This is both better for emissions and fuel economy...

The bad part is that you still won't enter closed loop any faster than you do currently... So for example if you have a 1990 with a 3.1 and a 4T60( 440-T4 ) you will still not hit TCC lock until the engine temps are in the correct range( I believe its 150F )....

On my 95 Bonneville this is different... It uses the 4 wire heated sensor... And as soon as you ar at the right road speed you can hit Overdrive with TCC lock even with the engine cold...

I believe that with a cold engine the TCC will not lock in 3rd gear till 44-45 Mph and Overdrive will not lock till 55-56 on a cold motor... I can cold start get to 55-56 and bam 4th gear with TCC lock on a cold engine.. All of these things make a difference in both economy and emissions...

87Cutlass Ciera
04-16-2008, 11:11 PM
Ahhhh very insteresting! I might look into a more expensive O2 sensor when I put the new motor in. It needs a valve pan gasket, and I think I'm going to drop the oil pan to make sure all is good, I thought about doing a head gasket too, but I'm not going to mess with that, unless you all think it's a good idea. Then I'm going to put new plugs and wires on it and mate it to a 440t4 tranny and hope for the best! I've got a new fuel filter for the car too, it was supposed to go on long before the motor even gave up, so that will get changed too.

85_Ciera_Rebuild
04-17-2008, 02:20 AM
The bad part is that you still won't enter closed loop any faster than you do currently...


Refinement - I know a number of GM vehicles will enter closed loop if water temp is around 100 degrees plus, with O2 sensor giving good readings.

Also, for those doing city traffic light driving, your vehicle may enter Open Loop when motor is idling.

If vehicle was driven in more colder environments with stop/go traffic, I would highly suggest a heated O2 sensor. I have heard of 2 mpg gains in more colder environments.

Sidebar - In past several days around here, there has been a pinch warmer weather, with highs around 70 F. My 88 Beretta is getting around 29 mpg, instead of 27 mpg...in other words, with warmer weather, I get a pinch better mpg than in cold weather...I'm sure the internal friction in motor/transmission/wheel bearings is much higher in colder weather.

85_Ciera_Rebuild
04-17-2008, 02:37 AM
....more expensive O2 sensor
...

Mine cost nothing....I asked salvage dealer if I could have an O2 sensor off of any junk newer motors, and he said yes, no charge...I had to pick it.

2000 Chrysler motor (2.7 I think) is what I cherry picked it from...I looked at it to see if it had been working...also, it does not have the factory color code on it, which means it was replaced with after market O2 sensor.


And how many versions of O2 sensors are there?

Most all are "narrow bands," and only a few newer vehicles use a "wideband."

Narrow band sensors work within 1 Volt range, where as WideBand work within several volt range...wideband will only work with computers setup to handle them.

I've been following a thread over at TurboBrick Forum, and this person who lives in Sweden notes:

I made an increase of almost 2 liters / 100km.

Down from ~16.0 to ~14.0 liters per 100km. (http://www.forums.turbobricks.com/showpost.php?p=1705824&postcount=32)

He is using a newer Bosch sensor, which the guys over there are trying to figure out US part number for it.

As noted before, if you have a single wire O2 sensor, live in a colder environment, and do stop/go traffic daily, it will make a difference, imho.

Since my AC don't work in that Volvo, I used the AC wire to feed 12 Volts to it.

87Cutlass Ciera
04-18-2008, 03:52 PM
So now, lets talk about some ways to increase fuel economy.
I've found a few resources and ideas.
Adding just 3 ounces of Acetone to every 10 Gallons of gas is said to raise fuel economy by 25%!! But just 2 ounces for every 10 gallons of Diesel for about 15-20% So this is interesting.
Also while searching ebay for car parts I come across this quite often Tornado Fuel Saver (http://cgi.ebay.ca/Save-Fuel-31-Gas-Saver-PONTIAC-MONTANA-SAFARI-6000_W0QQitemZ370041836162QQihZ024QQcategoryZ42604 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem) and this is supposed to swirl the air and improve gas mileage. Sometimes I wonder...
And I've also seen this Water4Gas (http://www.water4gas.com/2books.htm) Aparatus. I understand what it does, It's using electricity to create Hydrogen, and then it's being burned with the gasoline. But I still dont see how this little contraption can double mileage.

Techfizzle
04-18-2008, 04:07 PM
Adding just 3 ounces of Acetone to every 10 Gallons of gas is said to raise fuel economy by 25%!! But just 2 ounces for every 10 gallons of Diesel for about 15-20% So this is interesting
NO! NO! NO! :rant::rant::rant:
http://i28.tinypic.com/i4ik4n.jpg
Do not belive everyhting you read on the web. Acetone is used to disolve paint! It is higly corosive. It will eat all the rust out of your tank and instantly plug up your fuel filter. It will also eat any rubber or plastic gaskets, rings, etc. It reminds me of these people that sold water4gas claiming it can sepereate hyrogen from water and run it in you tank. :rofl:
So hands down.. dont ever put acetone in your car unless its a death wish.

Techfizzle
04-18-2008, 04:08 PM
Drive Sensibly

Aggressive driving (speeding, rapid acceleration and braking) wastes gas. It can lower your gas mileage by 33 percent at highway speeds and by 5 percent around town. Sensible driving is also safer for you and others, so you may save more than gas money.

Fuel Economy Benefit: 5-33%
Equivalent Gasoline Savings: $0.16-$1.07/gallon

Observe the Speed Limit

While each vehicle reaches its optimal fuel economy at a different speed (or range of speeds), gas mileage usually decreases rapidly at speeds above 60 mph.

As a rule of thumb, you can assume that each 5 mph you drive over 60 mph is like paying an additional $0.20 per gallon for gas.

Observing the speed limit is also safer.

Fuel Economy Benefit: 7-23%
Equivalent Gasoline Savings: $0.23-$0.74/gallon

Remove Excess Weight

Avoid keeping unnecessary items in your vehicle, especially heavy ones. An extra 100 pounds in your vehicle could reduce your MPG by up to 2%. The reduction is based on the percentage of extra weight relative to the vehicle's weight and affects smaller vehicles more than larger ones.

Fuel Economy Benefit: 1-2%/100 lbs
Equivalent Gasoline Savings: $0.03-$0.06/gallon

Avoid Excessive Idling

Idling gets 0 miles per gallon. Cars with larger engines typically waste more gas at idle than do cars with smaller engines.


Use Cruise Control

Using cruise control on the highway helps you maintain a constant speed and, in most cases, will save gas.



Use Overdrive Gears

When you use overdrive gearing, your car's engine speed goes down. This saves gas and reduces engine wear.

Tuddi
04-23-2008, 11:38 PM
Fizzle. You should read a little bit about the things you comment on before slamming down some outlandish statements.

There is talk of putting no more than 3 ounces to 10 gallons. That is not going to do anything at all to your gastank or whatever rubber parts it may pass through.

Many octane boosters do contain.... acetone... because it does work to a degree. I have tried running on acetone blended gasoline for a few months. In the beginning there was absolutely an improvement... probably due to dirt being washed away, but I saw no change in fuel economy.

There are a lot of people who have tried and gotten good extra milage, and none of them have wound up with a gastank torn apart after extremely aggressive acetone that eats through 3ft of steel as if it was cheese.

When you can safely buy octane booster that contains acetone, you should not worry about putting it on your car in small quantities. Once I overdid the blend, and the engine ran like crap until the tank was empty. 1.5 - 2 ounces per 10 gallons is what I used, if I recall.

So... go ahead and try it... or don't. I have tried it and will probably do it again in the future. If you have oxygen sensor on your engine, you would be better off NOT using Acetone in your gasoline... or octane booster with acetone.

So.... just as you said yourself: Don't believe everything you read on the net. Personal experience is a lot better than most heresay one can come across online.