i agree, he ain't gonna change his push rod length to get better gas mil or install a set of heads with a better spark plug location, something as simple as changing the shift points and what gear you select for cruising speed will help, I drove my stang fairly hard and got 10+- mpg.OP might be a tad bit overwhelmed with all these responses.
Wel that is nice to hear that. Good for you, it is not always possible to have performance and efficiency but will try reach a compromised point.My carbureted 1989 gt convertible with an E303 camshaft and 3.73 gears got a verified 26mpg on the highway cruising at 72 mph. It got better mileage than almost anything we've owned. So, I'd say, with modifications, you can beat the factory fuel ratings published for our mustangs.
Thank you,I did not read every line but I take it we're no further along?
I saw some talk of octane rating... With your setup N/A, I'd run 89 non-ethanol straight for two tanks and take accurate measurements.
That aside, it may be time to invest enough equipment to data-log from a wideband O2 meter.
This approach is going to tell the tail even if the car doesn't want to spill the beans.(I know, that was horrible)
Thank you,The lobe sepration of the camshaft and the pushrod length are important too...Twisted wedge heads although say works with stock pistons really doesnt as you want the flame kernel dead middle on the piston and non-dished pistons with pistons below deck height cannot achieve such a task.....
Plus on street engines to maximize efficiency you need atleast 10:5:1 compression and the pistons shuld be flush with the deck or a max of .045" out of the hole to help with flame kernel shape too...
A longer stroke and longer rods help alot too because with longer rods and larger stroke it alleviates the thrust stresses on the piston tops that shorter strokes exhibit...A neutral balance helps out heaps too...My 410w idles and runs as smooth as a european made engine....
I built a 347 stroker and put a Vortec V1 and of course it was tuned as anything built out of the normal needs to be tweaked especially the MAF transfer but once everything was tuned and Wideband 02 controller hooked up I was getting 18mpg...........
In the twisted wedge instructions on the last page theres this and a thing most overlook also to mention theres alot more to rocker arms and rocker arm geometry than meets the eye and is more critical than you realize and just as critical as choosing the right LSA for your camshaft based on the setup as theres alot more to choosing a proper camshaft than meets the eye too........,,.
The difference between running pushrods tht are .100" too short is a loss difference of 23hp and 31ftlbs of torque plus the torque dropped off faster with the shorter pushrods too..........
Good Luck
Thank you,stage 1 cam requires some timing... 12 degrees isn't going to do it and I would definitely think about running a better octane fuel than 87 with that combo.
Thank you,OP might be a tad bit overwhelmed with all these responses.
A/F ratio [and] rpm at a minimum. You would discover quickly that it's otherwise useless.Wel that is nice to hear that. Good for you, it is not always possible to have performance and efficiency but will try reach a compromised point.
Thanks for sharing
Thank you,
For now I will just keep checking my fuel consumption the topically way, but absolutely agree with you on data logging at least my A/F ratio. For this I’m thinking on installing a dual wide and gauge to monitor both banks for easier and more accurate tuning
I agree, I would like at least to know at least what is my mixture at idle and under load. I think it will be very useful.A/F ratio [and] rpm at a minimum. You would discover quickly that it's otherwise useless.
Thank you,i agree, he ain't gonna change his push rod length to get better gas mil or install a set of heads with a better spark plug location, something as simple as changing the shift points and what gear you select for cruising speed will help, I drove my stang fairly hard and got 10+- mpg.
Not 'lugging' the engine around in 5th gear can help more than you think.
KISS!
Keep it Simple Stangers.
On another note I think I understand what you say that that could be a waste. So I will evaluate my situation. Because where I live we don’t have the luxury of a dyno tuning, which really sucks!I agree, I would like at least to know at least what is my mixture at idle and under load. I think it will be very useful.
Thank you
Have to say that I still have really lawsy MPG despite all the changes I've made. Today I checked my mileage again and got 7.73 miles to the gallon, and started a new test but this time I went back to my stock 55mm MAF tube and sensor and reset the ECU, will find out if I see any changes.On another note I think I understand what you say that that could be a waste. So I will evaluate my situation. Because where I live we don’t have the luxury of a dyno tuning, which really sucks!
Thanks again
Sounds like the sensor was bad.Here’s an update on this issue. I removed the 70mm MAF tube and sensor for a new MPG test and the results were astonishing. Filled up my tank took my odometer reading. Spent almost the whole tank and refilled again with 13.3 gallons and compared the latest with my previous odometer reading and…
Latest reading: 9,459.5 miles
Previous one: - 9,231.4 miles
Miles ran: 228.1 miles
228.1 \ 13.3= 17.15 miles per gallon
So did 70mm MAF tube and sensor decreased my MPG by 50%? Same driving habits and all…
At this latest refill will start the test again to confirm or debunk my numbers, but 50%??? I’m stumped!
Comments? Suggestions on these results?
My sensor is an AA, I borrowed a “Known” good sensor from a mustang which is A2A and had the same high fuel consumption…Sounds like the sensor was bad.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?