1969 Mustang Supersite Web Forums 1969 Mustang Supersite Web Forums


Go Back   1969 Mustang Supersite Web Forums > Technical, General Discussion, and Project Progress > The Garage

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-26-2007, 11:03 AM   #1
69stang
v8 powered poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 219
69stang is on a distinguished road
Default Gas Mileage

I was looking at Stangnet and saw a member who had a signature reading:

Daily driver
1964 1/2 Mustang
BFR Red
5.0 roller motor 9.5:1 comp
GT-40 Cast iron heads
RPM Performer manifold
Comp 9000 89 Series Dist
mallory hyfire III <-adjustable rev limit on tach
600 CFM Carter AFB carb
dual Flows
13.89 105mph in quarter - I know a trip huh.

How and a daily driver 32-36 on freeway.

This really impressed me, is that kinda mileage realistic and how much horsepower/torque do you think he is making?

Also, is there a reason he used the gt-40 cast iron heads instead of aluminum (minus cost difference)?

I tried to PM him with no response, and I know the 64 1/2s are a good bit lighter than the 69's but it should be able to get similar gas mileage.

Thanks in advance guys.

Last edited by 69stang; 02-26-2007 at 12:04 PM..
69stang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2007, 11:41 AM   #2
Cupid
There is no spoon...
 
Cupid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 510
Cupid is on a distinguished road
Default

32-36 mpg?

*sigh*

That's probably the reason you didn't get a response!

I don't know man...lemme know if you find out that this is a true story. There's only a few 4 bangers that are out there that can register that kind of mpg.

If he's swingin' that then I need to do an engine swap!
Cupid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2007, 12:01 PM   #3
69stang
v8 powered poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 219
69stang is on a distinguished road
Default

Yea, I don't know if its true. I have been told that with a pretty power 302 can get 22-25ish, which i know is a huge difference, but figured i'd ask if its possible.
69stang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2007, 12:24 PM   #4
Ltnrisk
Proud Mustang Owner
 
Ltnrisk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 126
Ltnrisk will become famous soon enoughLtnrisk will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to Ltnrisk
Default

Well it says it is has a carb in it which makes that just highly unlikely. I would more likely to believe it if it was fuel injected and a nice setup. But that to would also be a long shot.
__________________
Hey I also own a stang of my own. Come see it at http://www.1969stang.com/gallery/My-Stang

Your a complete idiot if you say "Nice Impala" when your looking at a 69 Mustang Coupe. Man...that is annoying.
Ltnrisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2007, 02:28 PM   #5
351carlo
70 Grande
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 271
351carlo is on a distinguished road
Default

That's possible....

If it were idleing and being towed on the back of a truck. Our cars will rarely see more than 18-22 mpg
351carlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2007, 02:44 PM   #6
wantahertzdonut
♫ ┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐ ♫
 
wantahertzdonut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 361
wantahertzdonut is on a distinguished road
Default

I could maybe see 22-26, but not 32-36. Mine as it sits gets about 17-18 without overdrive with a lightly built 355W cruising about 65. With OD my hopes are for around 20-25. Of course city driving tends to bring that down since it's not proper to leave an intersection without leaving a mark!
__________________
-Jim

1970 Mach 1.
Tubular UCA/LCA's, solid strut rods, roller perches, del-a-lum bushings, KYB's, lowered, Tremec TKO600
SOLD. It was fun!
wantahertzdonut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2007, 02:56 AM   #7
bnickel
Moderator
 
bnickel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,517
bnickel has a reputation beyond reputebnickel has a reputation beyond reputebnickel has a reputation beyond reputebnickel has a reputation beyond reputebnickel has a reputation beyond reputebnickel has a reputation beyond reputebnickel has a reputation beyond reputebnickel has a reputation beyond reputebnickel has a reputation beyond reputebnickel has a reputation beyond reputebnickel has a reputation beyond repute
Default

i was able to get 24-26 on the highway with my old engine. 70 model 357w (.030 351w) flat top pistons with bone stock D0OE heads (around 10.5:1 to 10.75:1 compression) sealed power stock replacement cam advanced 4 degrees, stock dizzy with mallory unilite conversion still running stock advance curve, stock cast iron exhaust manifolds through 2.25" duals, e'brock performer intake and 600 carter carb with stock fuel pump and purolator fuel pressure regulator set at 4psi. trans was stock FMX with shift kit and stock 3.25 geared rearend with 275/50-15 rear tires (26" tall), cruise speed was 65-70 mph. i think the reason it did that good was a combination of the high compression, advanced cam timing and the fuel pressure.


i know of 3.8 turbo buick regals pulling down 30-35 mph on a regular basis but i seriously doubt that a 9.5:1 iron headed 302 is gonna pull that kinda mileage unless his speedomoter is in serious need of calibration.
__________________
69 GT coupe restomod in progress.

ERIC HATES ME BECAUSE MY CAR IS A GT AND HIS ISN'T !!!! LOL
bnickel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2007, 06:44 AM   #8
Max Power
Vintage Ford Mafia
 
Max Power's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Saint Paul MN
Posts: 1,098
Max Power
Default

He couldn't pull that mileage with an 80mph tailwind.

Albeit a bit heaver, new mustangs with computer controlled, fuel injected V6 engines don't even come close to it.

I would venture to say that it would be impossible to fill that large an engine at that gear ratio and still come close to that mileage, regardless of weight.
__________________
1969 Fastback


1970 Grande Project
Max Power is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2007, 06:52 AM   #9
70Mach03
Mustang owner since 1970
 
70Mach03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 588
70Mach03 is on a distinguished road
Default

That sounds a little too good to be true unless hes running a double overdrive 6-speed and some seriously lazy rear axle ratio. I am running a T-5 five-speed with 3.00 rear gears. My 351C-4V engine combo is fairly stock with the exception of headers, Pertonix ignition, aluminum intake with 670 CFM Holley and I have gotten 26 mpg highway running 55-60 mph. Running 70-75 mph drops me to 22 mpg. Of course around town where fifth gear is never used, I still get 11 to 12 mpg. When my car was new with a FMX auto transmission it usually got 11-16 mpg.
__________________

My 1970 Mach

Bill Hamilton
1970 Mach 1 in white with black stripes and 351C-4V and T-5 five speed
2014 Shelby GT-500 in white with red stripes and w/5.8 SC and 6-speed
70Mach03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.