MPG difference 350 and 455. Anybody have numbers?

The reality is that Ethanol contains almost exactly 2/3 of the BTUs of energy (heat) as does straight gasoline. In most places, Ethanol is blended with gasoline at the ratio of 1 part Ethanol to 9 parts gasoline (10%). If one does the math, this reduces the BTUs in a gallon of gasoline/Ethanol mix by about 3.3%. As Ethanol likes a different air/fuel ratio, in non-computer cars it might reduce total combustion heat by 5 or 6%. In a computer car, the computer will calculate the correct air/fuel ratio, and the car should get just about 3.3 % poorer fuel economy. If your car goes from 18 to 13 mpg with 10% Ethanol, it's something other then the Ethanol. BTW: I don't like Ethanol mixed with gasoline either, and am delighted to have found a station that will sell straight gasoline here in Florida (illegal in Massachusetts). The T will be running on real gasoline again as soon as I can finally drive it! Yay!! :TU:

 

what city in florida and what is the price per gallon?

 

Ripping around town in the 80's a 455 skylark would burn two tanks per day, do the math.

 

Back then, I was always pulling up to a gas pump and telling the attendant, "Give me a dollar's worth of High Test."

 

I remember full serve and self serve. Full serve was more money. I would pump $5 into my 77 SKylark hatchback and that was my weekend gas money. Took us pretty far.

 

Gas Wars... 28.9 for Shell regular. Then came the lines for 5 gallons. We'd hit the tollroad for a dime each way to get to the Oasis for unlimited gas. My dad told me about the depression era when gas was 9 gallons for .99 cents and ten for an extra penny. Achmed is rolling in his crypt by now! ws

 

Naples, Imokolee Rd. eastbound from I-75. I can't find my notes, but I think it was a Shell Station. $2.90/gal.

 

John, as I recall Model Ts were originally designed to run exclusively on ethanol. On a car of this vintage will running gasoline make a noticeable difference?

 

At least theres no rubber stuff in a Model T carb/fuel system. They'd run on kerosene too if it were heated Special carb with a heater from the exhaust inside), and the engine hot on gas first (2 tanks). ws

 

Actually they were an early multi-fuel car. They supposedly would run on Ethanol, Naphtha, Gasoline, and Kerosene. A few present T owners say that the T will run on Kerosene but starting it on the stuff is a bi--h. The Ethanol doesn't bother the T engine any, but particularly in the northern states where the toys spend their winters parked in a garage, the water absorption characteristics of Ethanol destroy gas tanks. For '26 and '27 Ts, the fuel tanks are not reproduced. In a modern car with a non-vented fuel system, this is not an issue.

 

What kind of numbers would you expect with this setup?

Thanks

 

What kind of MPG would you expect with this setup?

Thanks

 

Funny that this thread came back alive after all these years.

Just so you know, the convertible has a nicely built 462, switch pitch 400 and 4.10 gear. I have never checked the MPG. But smiles per mile are incredible! And it's quick enough to get tossed out of track for no roll bar.

And, I remember filling up my motorcycle for $.25. It only held a gallon.

 

What kind of MPG would you expect with this setup?

Thanks

 

What kind of MPG should one expect with a stock Stage 1 455/700-R combo?

Thanks

 

Around town I wouldn't expect any change over a TH400.

 

That would depend on how its cammed. If you do a setup with a 700R4 with a 2.56:1 rear gear with lets say a factory replacement type cam it would still get worse mpg forcing it to shift into O/D @ 45 mph.

When matching an O/D trans with a rear gear ratio you want to be around a 9.5:1 1st gear multiplication ratio. That means you take the 1st gear ratio of the trans, the 700R4 in this instance would be 3.06:1;

3.06 x 3.08 = 9.4248 which is close enough. With that ratio when @ 45 mph the trans can shift into O/D without "lugging" the engine down.(lugging would be like staying in 4th gear with a 4 speed at 10 mph) I would say not to go any lower than a 2.73:1 rear gear if you want to shift into O/D @ 45 mph with the same type of cam. And of coarse a numerically higher gear ratio would be no problem to shift into O/D @ 45 or perhaps even lower depending how much gear you chose but traction would be a different story though. :Brow:

There are RPM calculators that can be used to see where your RPM would be at a given mph with a given gear ratio. The 700R4 has a .70:1 O/D ratio, take that and multiply it with your gear ratio and that will be your final drive ratio. For example 3.08 x .70 = 2.156:1 final drive ratio. Plug that into the RPM/mph calculator and that will give you the RPM the combo would be spinning at the mph you plug in. With a 2.56:1 rear gear with a .70 O/D would give a final drive ratio of 2.56 x .70 = 1.792:1 final drive ratio. That ratio could even make the RPM want to be lower than idle speed @ 45 mph.

I hope this helped.




Derek

 

Derek have you checked out my Gear Ratio calculator? I have the 700 listed as one of the trannys to choose from and I can add whatever tranny you want if you know the ratios.

 

Why would you use a 700-4r on a Buick instead of a 200-4r is beyond me.

 

No I'm not familiar with that one, I usually use one of the many calculators here;

http://www.wallaceracing.com/Calculators.htm






Derek