Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-10-2014, 09:42 PM   #1 (permalink)
Eco Rodder
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
Posts: 105
Thanks: 25
Thanked 52 Times in 34 Posts
35 MPG 1966 Chevelle

I'm new here and thought I would share my project. I know that a 35 MPG goal pales in comparison to some of your achievements, but I think it's a pretty aggressive goal for a old Chevy.
My project started out as a 283 V8/2 speed auto, 2 door Malibu. I weighed it with very little fuel in it prior to tear down and it weighed 3,172 lbs.
I bought an all aluminum 3.8L/220 CI V6 and a 6 speed double overdrive automatic transmission from a 2013 Camaro. The Camaro shows that it weighs approx 3,850 lbs. I never got to weigh the actual doner car.
My goal is to bring the finished project in at around 2,850 lbs. The new engine/trans is a lot lighter then the old iron V8, I have added lighter suspension and brakes, will use lighter weight seats, aluminum radiator, aluminum wheels, fiberglass hood, etc. I don't think the 2,850 lbs will be tough to reach.
The Camaro's EPA rating on the highway was 30 MPG. I believe that my car being approx. 1000 lbs lighter, lowered 2" from stock, a front air dam, and whatever other tweaks I can add, 35 MPG is a realistic goal.
What do you guys think?

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 12-10-2014, 09:50 PM   #2 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Growing up we had a 4 door 1960 Chevy Impala, 2 speed powerglide and 283 v-8, that routinely achieved 20-21 mpg, with 4 people a trunk gull of suitcases at 60-65 mph. Good luck with your project
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2014, 09:52 PM   #3 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
Sounds like a nice goal but your aero and frontal area are substantially worse. You might be able to out-mpg the Camaro in stop-and-go traffic but out on the highway I doubt it. Of course you can do some aero modding, subtle things like a behind-the-grille partial block, airdam, and whatnot that won't radically alter the appearance.

My '59 Bel Air with 283/'glide gets about 21 but that is at 55 mpg cruise, but more town driving than is usual for me (cruising).
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2014, 10:53 PM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Missoula, MT
Posts: 2,652

Dark Egg - '12 VW Touraeg
Thanks: 300
Thanked 1,176 Times in 806 Posts
On the highway the weight doesn't matter as much as the aero and I'd think the 2013 Camaro is more aerodynamic then a 66 Chevelle. Even though the 2013 Camaro is rated at 30MPG on the new highway test, the actual raw, uncorrected, old standard, highway rating on it is 41.9 MPG. So driven with a mild foot and kept under 60 mph the v6 2013 Camaro can break 40mpg.
The 3.6 with the 6 speed auto weighs about 550 pounds and an all iron smallblock and powerglide weigh about 750
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2014, 11:25 PM   #5 (permalink)
herp derp Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lawrence, KS
Posts: 1,049

Saturn-sold - '99 saturn sc1
Team Saturn
90 day: 28.28 mpg (US)

Yukon - '03 GMC Yukon Denali
90 day: 13.74 mpg (US)
Thanks: 43
Thanked 331 Times in 233 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67-ls1 View Post
I bought an all aluminum 3.8L/220 CI V6 and a 6 speed double overdrive automatic transmission from a 2013 Camaro.
assuming 3.6L from the 2013 camaro? or a different 3.8L, and the 2013 camaro trans?

While the weight would be great for performance, mpg wise, im thinking that lowering 2" from stock, and front air dam will have a greater benefit than lighter suspension, brakes, seats, aluminum radiator, aluminum wheels, and fiberglass hood. If mileage is of more importance, i would try to keep the lightweight goodies on a tighter budget, and spend more time and money on the aero tweeks. droolable belly pan maybe http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ect-29902.html

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com