well it did have the cast iron trans, but i didnt do it buy the gauge, we both filled up at the same gas station at the same time, and when i got to ct we filled again he used a couple gallons less than me... i figure im keeping my foot almost on the floor the whole time just to keep up with traffic and he proly bairly has his foot on the gas to do the same speed
My '62 Biscayne had the original 235/3.36 rearend gears in it for the first 6 years that I've owned it. I drove it with the 235 to Goodguys Indy (from the St. Louis area) 4 years, for three of those years with the 3 speed the forth year with a wide ratio Muncie 4 speed. The 375-400 hp 454 I have in it now backed by the Muncie and the stock 3.36 gears got better mileage (14-15) with the gasbucket Holley 750. BTW I changed to a 9.3" Pontiac/Olds rear with a 3.42 posi and mileage seemed to pick up a bit, the 454 is happier with alittle more RPM I guess. I like those stovebolt 6's, but they are not the "Thrifty-Six" they called them in the day, at least not on fuel. M. McFly
My thoughts exactly. Even the 235 stock was a 16 mpg in a stock 55 chevy. Anyway, that old chevy would be great to drive like you say and super easy to maintain!
I'm getting a lot more response than I expected. Which is very nice, thanks guys. getting kind of a mix here. which just strengthens my current position, unfortunatly that possition is "stradeling the fence" I'm really being pulled neither way at this point. I have access to a 4 dr 72 nova from which I could harvest the rear & even the subframe if I wanted. which leads to another question. does anybody do subframe implants anymore?
I'd never swap out my 6 for a couple MPG. If I'm driving it I'm generally not in a hurry. It will do 65 just fine with no stress.
Just had this converstaion with a neighbor, he ***umed better fuel mileage was tghe reason I traded my 350 V8 1988 Chevy truck for the 215 6 equipped '53 Ford F100 I have now. When I told him those old sixes didn't really get good mileage and that the Chevy probably got just as good or better MPG as the old truck would he wanted to argue with me - "back in the day I had a 66 Biscayne with a 283/pg that got 25 mpg" Which I figure is both apples to oranges and ********.
I saw a 59 Impala at a show last year; he had the stock inline 6 retrofitted with a tbi setup from a 4.3 V6, a five speed and 3.55 gears. Not very much $$ to set it up but started right up everytime, plenty of power, and 25+ mpg on the highway. He got everything from a junked S-10. Very cool setup!
I've got a 66 chev caprice with a 327 p/g & i've run it with a rochester 2GC as well as the current edelbrock 600 cfm 4bl. I've had the car for years & you have to try really hard to get 20 mpg out of it. My late cousin & best friend had the same car with 283 p/g he got no better than me, just less power. so yeah, I think your buddy is full of it. interesting info about the 6 with the tbi. were is everybody getting these 5 speeds for these old 6's? (I confess, I've been out of the bow tie group for a long time, kind of a blue oval guy at heart)
I guess I don't really know. you're happy with the stock ifs on yours? drive & handle pretty well? I have no reason to believe they shouldn't. it's actually always nice to hear comments in favor of the stock equipment i guess.
Rebuild the stock front end, it works great. Put a disc brake conversion on it if you need to spend some money. My '54 hardtop blew the 'Glide, I put a '55 OD 3-speed and 4.11 rear in it. Got 2 MPG better in direct than OD! That's on gravel roads, highway was a little better in OD. Cruise speed went up a bunch, though, and this was the '70's so nobody really cared about high gas mileage.Got a 350/700R4 ready to put in now.
There were a bazillion s10/s15/blazers made, and they can be bought cheap. the tbi is really simple, if you take away the extra ****. I have a 90 350 tbi complete setup, minus fuel pump and lines, waiting for a buyer. same as a 4.3, differnt intake and dizzy.
Here's a link on how to set the TBI up if your interested. I set one up on my son's 69 Chevy truck and he loves it. http://www.bustedjeep.com/projects/junkyardtbi.asp
It does what it is supposed to do. I don't think you will notice any real improvements with an early 70's suspension. Not for the work anyways. I suppose if you go the V8 route and discs one could argue that the work is equal. The stock suspension is up to the tasks of everyday driving at everyday speeds though. 70 mph on the interstate is no problem. (of course as long as everything is tight) You can modify the stock stuff so that if anyone ever wants to go back full stock it would make it far easier. I'm not some absolute purist either. It's just that the stock stuff works fine. I'm not into replacing just for the sake of replacing. If the car has a rusted out frame or something, use whatever is available.
My '53 with a '58 235 with dual Stromberg BXOV-2s on a McGurk intake, '54 Corvette exhaust manifold with dual gl***packs, and a vintage Mallory dual point got exactly 20 mpg on a 450 mile trip that was mostly 70 mph freeway driving, and that was with the stock 3 speed and 3.70 gears. The old speed manuals said that a properly tuned dual carb setup would get better mileage than the stock single setup on these engines, and I guess they were right. The BXOV-2s have adjustable main jets on them, and I tweaked it as close to perfection as I could before the trip.
'53 Chevy truck with '60 261, Howard F298 cam, progressive tripower with 235 Roch. B's running a 54 jet in the center carb. Fenton headers w/2" gl***packs, "848" head ported, stock HEI from a 250 converted for use in the 261, V8/S10 hybrid T5 ******, '57 car rearend 3:55 gears. Cruises around 2000rpms at 65mph and gets 22mpg and the speedo is acurate.
Just to go back to the suspention again, the 53-54 chevy front end was used on the 'Vette's till 62 or 63, whenever the big change was. They road raced them and kicked-*** with a front end that Chevy gave up on in p*** cars in 54. They gave up this design for ecconomy, the 55 design is a lot cheaper to manufacture, a lot less parts. New bushings, and pins one time. And grease every 1000 miles it's a good front end. Frank
I get 15-22 out of mine, it's got a 57 235, dual carbs, Fenton headers, Pertronix ignition, 4 speed Saginaw and a 3 somthing rear end.
Ill put my two cents in the gas mileage info. On my previous 53 with auto trans which I drove frequently on long trips over a 100 miles I got aprox 20 too 21 mile a gallon once I got the carb rebuilt. I usually cruised at 58 miles an hour with it on the freeway comfortably. I hope my Beliar gets as good as it did.
I forgot to add that I had split manifold on it with flowmaster exhaust. That had to help also I would think on the gas mileage.
I think there's a point where the car has a hard time "getting out of its own way". With the V8 there's so much torque, you get momentum and the car gets rolling quicker with less fuel. The sixes obviously don't have nearly the same amount of torque needed to haul the car around, so you hafta keep your foot in it more to keep the momentum up- which uses more fuel.
You're gonna be a lot happier driving it with a SBC than the 6, and mileage will be fairly ****py compared to a modern car no matter what you do. Swap out the diff for 2** and an a 700R4, you might get a few more mpg fwy. It'll never be good on gas. Buy an import and drive that to work if its what you want, or else just drive the chevy and don't look back. Gas is the cheapest part of owning that car. Plus it costs more to look cool
The Jalopy Journal
