Originally Posted by basslover911
How would it not be an economical engine? I mean, I know it wasnt tuned for economy, but if it was wouldnt it be a heck of an economic engine? (higher compression can equal much better combustion and thus much better economy right?)
Well I honestly don't know how to answer this question other than to tell you about the setup.
Junkyard 350 shortblock. Burnt almost as much oil as my tdi does fuel; no, seriously in operation it used about 1 qt every 100 miles, but those were very hard miles.
Big cam required 1100+ rpm for decent idle, but sounded awesome at 900.
performer rpm airgap intake (high rpm)
kept it rich all the time.
Cold thermostat (ward off detonation)
Cold plugs that would frequently foul (more ward off detonation)
Turbo 350 with 3000 stall (no lock up)
MT ET Streets
Car was dirt cheap to build (~$1500 all inclusive) and was fun at the track, but efficient it was not.
Could that much compression be efficient? I think so. But gasoline may not be the appropriate fuel.
For some interesting reading google up the octane test engines (variable compression) and Saabs variable compression engines.