Lately, I've been thinking about building a pre-1960 daily. My pre-planning stage idea is for another truck to replace my 160k mile F150. It needs to be fun, safe (seat belts, good brakes, etc), reliable, and hopefully not a gas hog. Now, most of that stuff is self-explanitory, but the fuel-efficient part kinda throws a monkey wrench in the works. I'm pretty set on a Ford truck and was thinking I'd like to build another FE motor. My last one seemed to love gas and I don't think it ever got enough. I'd also like to stay 60's traditional with it. So what would you run for an intake/carb/injection setup? Can multiple carbs run efficiently and sip gas (relatively of course... a 428 probably will never be more fuel efficient than a 305 sbc) at cruising speeds? What about Weber/Delorto setups? Mech Injection? Bench "racing" here...
OK- here's the deal. There's only a couple ways to build a truly fuel efficient FE-powered anything. The latest dual-plane intakes like Edelbrocks Performer are really well-designed from an efficiency standpoint. Fuel distribution is really good, especially when compared to other intakes available for the FE. With a 600-625 cfm vacuum-secondary four-barrel, this could be a fuel-efficient setup. Your other option is a tri-power, six-pack, three-twos setup. These have the potential to be fuel efficient because they normally run on the center carb only, unless you've got your foot to the floor. Since the outboard carbs open either by mechanical linkage or vacuum pot, when they open is adjustable to your tastes. Normally, enthusiasts have these outboard carbs open as soon as they possibly can without bogging the motor down, but if you delay the opening, you'll get better gas mileage. With regard to other multi-carb setups or mechanical injection, remember what those systems were desgned for: Racing performance. Getting more fuel to the engine was the goal, and they do work. So, for fuel economy, I'd stay away from either. You'd also be well served to back this engine with an overdrive transmission. O/D is how many modern cars and trucks knock down good highway mileage, and it'll be an immediate benefit to your fuel economy while also increasing the worth of the vehicle. That's my two cents. Set up a good efficient modern four-barrel, or tweak an old-school tri-power to function on the center carb most of the time, and keep your foot out of it. Add on O/D trans (a good selection of both automatics and stickshifts are available - I'd recommend a dirt-cheap T-5 from a Mustang 5.0), and you're set. These mods will definitely increase the efficiency of your ride, and will probably offer more useable power too. Scotch~!
Thanks Scotch... I ran the vacuum secondary/Performer intake combo on my last FE. I didn't relly like the way it ran. I think the engine wanted more like a 750 carb than the 600 it had. I didn't drive it long enough to really gauge what the fuel consumption was. My plans definately include an auto/overdrive... What do you think the best compramise is between efficiency vs performance? Like what engine/intake combo is the best? Or what's a good MPG rating for a performance oriented driver? I'd like to broaden the discussion to get more opinions/ideas, so lets brainstorm. I had a 327 with a holley 650 vacuum secondary carb, on a 327 that got pretty good mileage through a 350th. What're you running and what do you think of the Performance/efficiency?
Just off the top of my head I can't think of a mech injector setup that would be a streetable and a sipper. Bill Mitchel Racing makes a setup called an Injectorator, its a mechanical injector setup that uses a gutted Holley carb for an idle circuit and throttle body. I don't know anyone that has run one but it would be worth looking into. I'd like to give the Del Orthos a shot myself, but I wouldn't expect to get any milage out of them. A 3x2 properly tunned could get you some moderate milage. You have to set it up so at cruise you're only running on one carb. You can do the same with a single 4, just set it up so the secondaries are not open at cruise speed. I'm running an Edelbrock/Edelbrock/Edelbrock setup on my 390 and get consistant 14-16mpg. That's not considered good compaired to a an SBC but its good for the FE and the tank it pulls around. Here's a place to start looking for Bill Mitchel info. http://www.theengineshop.com/
You are correct UNK! I probably should prefface this by saying that I'm not dreaming of 30 mpg. I'm more looking for a reasonable compramize for our brick-like hot rods and customs.
Searching for a fuel efficient FE is like searching for the fountain of youth! If yer gonna have a big block, HAVE a big block! My 428SCJ used to get 7mpg in town & 9mpg on the road. It was cheaper to fly round-trip to/from college than drive one way 430 miles. But DAMN it was fun! From a standing start on dry pavement in 4th gear I could smoke the N50s! Cruising at 60mph I could stomp the accelerator & it would break loose going sideways! The 4.30:1 gears didn't help the mileage, but it definitely helped the smileage! All you can do is strangle an FE in a vain attempt to get something resembling gas mileage. If you can get it into the low/mid teens, you're about as good as it gets. IF you manage to get better mileage, you're killing power... You're right about them not ever getting enough gas - I kept putting larger carbs on and it just kept getting stronger! The best was an 830 annular discharge double-pumper - mine loved that.
I can get 20 MPG if I really try on the road. 390 factory tri-power, F-1, 3300lbs, C-6, 3.00 gears. Usually about 11 MPG the fun way to drive..........OLDBEET
A fuel efficient FE, eh??? You sure know how to pick a CHALLENGE for yourself!!! My FIRST thought would be to tell you to run a late model smaller engine (V8 or V6) in the truck with an overdrive tranny and maybe 3.08 gears. Won't be fast, but it'll motor around town without needing to refuel at every other gas station! If you GOTTA run an FE, then I'd say headers and duals are a must, along with an Edelbrock or stock dual plane 4v intake topped with a box stock 600cfm Holley VACUUM SECONDARIES four barrel. Run a heavy secondary spring and a good open element air cleaner. Next, run a vacuum advance electronic distributor with the advance unit hooked to a MANIFOLD vacuum port and the motor timed accordingly. Use a clutch fan or electric fan and moderate (3.0 to 3.5) rear gears and you should be able to obtain mileage figures in the 10 to 15mpg range with a 390 or 360 engine...possibly better if your daily grind doesn't involve alot of stop and go driving and you have an easy right foot! Myself, I only have a six gallon gas tank in my 49 Chev, so it's getting a VEGA four cylinder for the summer...a super geeky econo-custom ala 70s style!!!
There's a guy on the moparts.org forums that has a big truck, a 383 6-pak and an A833OD that claims to get 26mpg, and I believe it. I have basically the same truck, but with a 110hp slant six and it gets roughly the same mileage, maybe a bit less. My guess is because on the highway, his truck is running on a 2bbl carb too, but the engine is tuned so well that it's probably cruising at like 1000rpm. Really, I think it's all about proper tuning of the drivetrain (which is a mystery to me). In the last R&C Asphalt Ego-Rama, the huge Chevy gasser won the 1/4 mile test AND the gas mileage test. With a 6-speed manual trans and an engine apparently designed to work right with it, it was faster and more fuel efficient than both the cars with more power and with less weight.
My 63 1/2 Galaxy with 4 bbl 427 got 6 mpg in town and 11 or so on the highway. It had a 4 speed, 3.90 gears and it was burnin' Sunoco 260. That stuff was over 50 cents per gallon!!
[ QUOTE ] What about Weber/Delorto setups? [/ QUOTE ] Yes! Absolutely. I put a lot of miles ( Km's actually, It was in Europe )on my English Ford tow car that had webers. All the experts told me it could not be done, but I put a Weber setup on a bone stock engine. I put in the smallest Venturi's I could find ( they were 27 or 28mm ) And I built a 4 into 2 into 1 Header for it with long tubes. The thing ran nice and had lots of torque ( for a 1.6 litre ) and was really good on gas. I lived a couple of miles away from the Soesterberg Airbase and my little English wagon surprised a lot of big cars at the stoplights.
hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!! Fuel efficient FE?!!! hahahaha!! Come on!! you have the wrong engine for economy man...
If you plan on rebuilding the engine and not just sticking a running motor in there, I would pay attention to the "squish" region where the piston gets close to the head at tdc. If you keep it close to .040" you will get a very well mixed air/fuel mix that will require less gasoline to make the same power as an engine with less quench.
A heretical and miscegenous suggestion: Swallow your racist ideals and use a QJet carb, tiny primaries and huge secondaries. The common 750 one can be worked to flow MUCH more than that with STOCK venturis. Get Vizard and Roes stuff on working it over, set final drive so car can cruise on primarys, set secondary tip in a bit slow so you have to deliberately put your foot into it to get there. Yes on good use of quench, and when you get it going spend some time with a curve kit and thoroughly flog cent and vac advance for best results. PS: Ford actually used the Qjet on one of the 429 engines, so it's ALL RIGHT. Run the thing at various RPM levels in high and study engine behavior for best mileage/vacuum cruise RPM, then choose your final drive so you can cruise at that RPM at your chosen speed level.
Heck yeah, Bruce!! Them Q-jets looked funny on top of early 70s 429s, but they worked pretty good...and if our guy here is working on a BUDGET, they're dirt cheap...so there's ADDED incentive!!
[ QUOTE ] ...use a QJet carb, tiny primaries and huge secondaries.... [/ QUOTE ] What he said...I was gonna say that this morning but he beat me too it. Use one off a similar size Oldsmobile 98. Just make sure you dont fuck with the stock power valve spring!
Fuck with the linkage to the secondaries though. I believe it's olds (not chevy, maybe pontiac?) has a "three step" linkage for opening the secondaries. Chevys had a single, and a two step. By step, I mean the little tabs on the cam part that pushes on the linkage at different spots, to make the butterflies open at different rates. I modified one once to open the secondaries slower, and it made a serious difference in performance. Instead of it just dumping, going rich, and then leaning back out, it would dump in much smoother, giving the motor a chance to burn the fuel. I really like q-jets, great carbs once you figure them out.
In the late 60s, Ford started building some of the 390 motors with two barrel carbs (in the early 60s, the two barrel motors were 352s). These motors got decent (about 18 mpg in a Galaxie) mileage, and very credible torque. Of course, it looks a little silly, with the little carb on top of a big motor, but I suppose you have to compromise somewhere.
Although your question was specifically about induction, here are a few related comments: 1. You want max engine efficiency at the lowest possible RPMs. With that in mind, go with a short duration, medium lift cam with minimal overlap. Think "RV grind". 2. Higher static compression ratio is better than lower. However, this will be limited by timing and gas quality. 3. I'd use an MSD ignition (or other electronic ignition of your choice)... Not purely traditional, but no one else needs to know and it'll get you a little more MPG. 4. Get a vacuum gauge and use it. See related post. Hope this helps.
[ QUOTE ] ...use a QJet carb, tiny primaries and huge secondaries.... [/ QUOTE ] My thoughts exactly. Can't beat the sound of those secondaries kicking in. And the primarys are actually smaller than most 2 barrels.
Funny thing is, I was looking at Offy intakes and came across the Q-Jet intakes... I was thinking the same thing. I will definitely (if this "Idea" even makes it to the road) start with a rebuild. Building engines is fun and I can't understand why people don't do it more! Fully blue-printed will be the way for me. I like to start fresh. I will give further thought to rear ratios when the truck? is on the road so I can play with it. And again, fuel efficiency is relative as far as this discussion goes. I just want to hear how people are doing in their rods. I'M NOT EXPECTING HONDA HYBRID MILEAGE OUT OF AN FE MOTOR!!! There, that should clear out the cobwebs... Also, I didn't intend to limit the discussion to FE Fords. I'd like to hear what others are running and what kinda EFFICIENCY their getting. And again, efficiency is a ratio of performance/fully-expended fuel. Not just a measurement of how little gas a car uses. I'd like to here HP/fuel consumption type info if at all possible. But I like what I've gotten so far, so keep it coming! What exactly would you do to the internals of a given engine to ensure you were getting the best bang for your buck?
I have a 289 in my Fairlane. Edelbrock performer intake manifold, Holley 600 CFM vac secondaries, stock 221 exhaust manifolds (eek), dual exhaust with thrush mufflers.....nothin' fancy. Last summer I was gettin' 16-18 mpg. I don't think thats too bad considering I have a 3 speed manual tranny with 3.50 gears in the rear. Doing 70mph I'm running around 3500 RPMs. I've switched to an Edelbrock 500 cfm carb now and have learned to tune a little better....Hopefully I'll get better gas mileage this year. By the way, the Edelbrock on that 289 really WOKE THINGS UP. I mean that thing PULLS like crazy. The Holley just didn't seem to work as well with the 289......FWIW.
[ QUOTE ] Also, I didn't intend to limit the discussion to FE Fords. I'd like to hear what others are running and what kinda EFFICIENCY their getting. [/ QUOTE ] 1950 CHEVY PICKUP. 350/350 with a edelbrock performer intake, 4/11 rears and a quadrajunk carb. Plenty of horsepower. haven't been beaten from the line yet. Mileage.... approximately 16-18 mpg when I'm not into the secondaries.
[ QUOTE ] Also, I didn't intend to limit the discussion to FE Fords. I'd like to hear what others are running and what kinda EFFICIENCY their getting. [/ QUOTE ] My stroker 351W (374") is running a pretty agressive cam (I think .498"/290*) w/heavily worked 700dbl-pmpr Holley on a single-plane intake. I make up for the single-plane w/2" 4-hole spacer & K&N stub-stack & all fired w/Mallory unilite. The heads are heavily ported D0OE castings & I'm currently running shorty headers. The engine has been in many vehicles & currently resides in an '83 mustang w/a later model T5 & 3.50:1 rear. On the road, it gets between 20-22mpg! Around town it gets 14-15 pretty consistently.
The Jalopy Journal
