|  Author | Topic: MPG's (Read 663 times) |
bige
New Member
member is offline
Joined: Oct 2009
Gender: Male 
Posts: 8
|  | Re: MPG's
« Reply #60 on Nov 6, 2009, 8:07am » | |
I read this post like I used to read in school...1st couple of chapters and sip to the end 
I agree that you can run most any size carb on any given engine set up properly and ignoring full throttle performance. Most guys take these carbs out of the box and never play with them and the CFM's is really the only way to describe the different carbs.
Anyway...silly question but was there a tire change somewhere along the line that would affect the odometer reading and make the calculation incorrect?
My kid thought he was getting unbelievable mileage on his LSC but the realty was he was running a shorter tire and the odometer was racking up more miles than he had actually driven.
When he want to a stock size tire tha mileage came down.
Just a thought?
ErnieR
| |
|
Meteorgirl
God
member is offline
![[avatar]](http://www.mts.net/~adrienp/Bettie%20Page%200031%20mrt.jpg)
Joined: Jan 2005
Gender: Female 
Posts: 713
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba CAN
| | Re: MPG's
« Reply #61 on Nov 6, 2009, 9:50am » | |
Roy, a hair off topic but I forgot to tell you we took your advice and went to Cathedral Grove on the island. Worth every minute of the drive. Absolutely awesome. It's like the Everglades with the moss hanging from the giant cedar trees. The day we went it was cool enough to see your breath and the cool humidity hung in the forest like a fog in a horror movie.
Thanks for the wonderful tip.
Back on the carb topic. A really excellent carb that lots of people use on small V-8's is the Holley 1848-1. Originally used by Ford in 1958-60 on 352's etc, it flows 465 CFM and comes with nbr 57 jets. The throttle response on a small V8 is excellent and is probably the best carb ever made for a 260, 289, 292 or 312 that is stock or mildly modified. Mileage is outstanding. 57 Ford with a 292, 24 MPG on the highway. 65 Fairlane with a stock 289, 26 MPG on the highway.
|
"Everything happens for a reason. Gimme a reason and we can make it happen"
Meteorgirl |
|
60sFordGuy
Senior Member
member is offline
Joined: Apr 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 448
Location: Fullerton, NE
| | Re: MPG's
« Reply #62 on Nov 6, 2009, 9:50am » | |
No "physical changes" during 260 OR 5.0 that would give misleading speedometer clocking. I was able to calculate speedometer data, using roadside mile markers and/or temporary radar trailers along side of the road, and was clocking 1.1 miles for each mile traveled on the odometer from the time I got the car, until I recently installed the correct speedometer driven gear. I now show accurate odometer readings for miles traveled/radar speed. Good thought, though. Just for more info, my 65 Falcon Ranchero NEEDS to have the gear changed for the same reasons. It also shows 1.1 miles for each mile travelled, so I (as I was doing with the Meteor) divide the miles driven by 1.1, and multiply speed on the speedometer by 1.1, which gives me the accurate/actual results. I have the gear, but just haven't taken the time to change it out. At age 72, I find it more difficult to lie on the floor under a car to make such a change, and have been "putting it off" until I find myself in the mood to make the change.
| |
|
60sFordGuy
Senior Member
member is offline
Joined: Apr 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 448
Location: Fullerton, NE
| | Re: MPG's
« Reply #63 on Nov 10, 2009, 4:58pm » | |
Update - I just finished re-mounting the P/S pump (after cleaning/new kit), blocked off the vacuum port that was servicing the cruise control, and will do some test driving to check out mpg's over the weekend. I'm in the middle of some medical problems, and need to have testing done in the next few days, so won't take the Meteor out yet. I'm hoping that the pump rebuild will solve the leaking problems (no evidence of leaks this PM with a short drive, and idling in the driveway), but have the parts needed to go thru the remaining P/S components if needed. I'm keeping my fingers crossed!!
| |
|
60sFordGuy
Senior Member
member is offline
Joined: Apr 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 448
Location: Fullerton, NE
| | Re: MPG's
« Reply #64 on Nov 15, 2009, 11:49am » | |
Changed back over to my carb yesterday, and went for a (planned ~ 60 mile) drive to calculate mpg's. After topping off the gas tank, I drove about 18 miles, and, all of a sudden MAJOR white smoke from under the car. Oil pressure and engine temp were normal, so I shut down the engine. Pulled the dip stick from the P/S reservoir - EMPTY!!!! I looked closely around the newly-resealed reservoir/pump, and all was dry. I came back home (no P/S), and listened for any noise from the pump, and was happy that all was quiet. I'm guessing that the smoke was from fluid burning off of the mufflers, so it seems that fluid was being blown back from UNDER the car, making me suspect hose failure. During the re-seal process, I didn't do anything to the rack components to disturb connections, etc.
I haven't looked under the car, but suspect a hose failed. I have the new shorter hoses for the control valve, so am hoping those will solve the problem. I also have another "longer" hose that may be the one that attaches to the pump, but will need to check to see if it is the right hose.
I'm wondering if the re-seal of the pump would increase the pressure enough to cause any of the hoses to fail.
I guess I won't be able to determine if the cruise control vacuum is involved with loss of mpg's until I get the P/S repairs done.
| |
| |
|
![[Home]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif)
![[Help]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif)
![[Search]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif)
![[Login]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif)
![[Register]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif)
![[Search This Thread]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/search2.gif)
![[Send Topic To Friend]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/sendtopic.gif)
![[Print]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif)
Logged