View Single Post
Old 10-11-2009, 02:24 AM   #76 (permalink)
JoeBob
EcoModding Lurker
 
JoeBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lancaster, CA
Posts: 10

Former Barbershop Sign - '91 Geo Metro Funky old car edition
Last 3: 42.15 mpg (US)

Oklahoma Rust Bucket - '83 Cadillac Eldorado Stuck in gridlock on the 405 suspension
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I know this is ancient history now, but so is the story of a friend of mine's Pinto station wagon.

1974 Pinto wagon, 2.3 liter engine, automatic transmission.
With timing set per factory spec, about 9 mpg. With timing set just short of pinging, about 18 mpg. The car was < 4 years old at that time, probably under 50k miles. He kept a gas log on the car at that time. I was the person who adjusted the timing on the engine, so I know how it was set. I remember the situation well because it seemed like awfully low mileage.

Two caveats: One - he WAS a rather, uh, shall we say, "enthusiastic" driver. As enthusiastic as one can be in a 2.3 liter Pinto with an automatic. He was always on "assigned risk" insurance, paying through the nose because of speeding tickets, etc. Two - He did replace the timing belt at some time previous to our setting the timing...I can no longer say for certain that he had the valve timing set right. I think he did, but it's been over 30 years ago and I've forgotten many things that were more important to me than that...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
Who knows?

I've been trying to track down something trustworthy re: Pinto fe but as of now what I put up is what I got.

I haven't even found the original C&D article. I want to see that, not filtered by all the recent coverage of it. I did see someone's comment that the car in question had the 2.0 with a/t.

Almost regardless of what I or anyone finds, I simply don't remember little '70's cars, rotten old-school automatic transmissions or not, getting fe THAT terrible.
  Reply With Quote