View Single Post
Old 04-09-2014, 11:44 AM   #17 (permalink)
Superfuelgero
Too busy for gas stations
 
Superfuelgero's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: The intersection of TN/MS/AL
Posts: 460

Turtle - '92 Honda Civic Vx
Team Honda
90 day: 67.09 mpg (US)

Rolla - '10 Toyota Corolla Le

Beast - '91 Chevy V2500

Bus - '01 VW Eurovan MV

Speed - '93 Harley bored and storked Harley w/ turbo/ nitrous
90 day: 53.09 mpg (US)

Cal - '68 Ford Mustang GT/CS
Thanks: 87
Thanked 176 Times in 114 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay635703 View Post
A manual transmission does make a big difference if you EOC a lot, leaning a car of that vintage up (if you can) makes a bit of difference if done correctly.
Could check out the hundreds of dollars EFI systems floating around.

The diesels with a manual transmission (5speed variety) should top you out near 30mpg on the highway at low speeds. That is regardless of 5.7 or 6.2, also the 5.7 diesel can be reliable if proper precautions are taken, later goodwrench varieties could live a long time without even a fuel water separator, so one with a fuel water separator would likely be better.

Only benefit to the 5.7 over the 6.2 is if you get it free and because it drops in without motor mount work, beyond that it gets roughly the same FE (if your 6.2 if configured correctly) and is harder to adapt to a MT.

Cheers
Ryan
6.2 is SBC mounts, and bellhousing. It will directly bolt up to what he has. They're dirt cheap as military drop out from the CUCV and HMMWV's. I've seen the come up several times on CL for 150-200 as complete drop outs. I almost went with a F-body 6.2/T-56 build instead of my VX.

OP- Not sure what's involved in the rear glass swap, never done it personally.

TBI is better at MPG than TPI. Smaller runners, and tuned for MPG.
__________________
Shooting for 600 miles of range at 65-70 mph out of a vx.

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Superfuelgero For This Useful Post:
101Volts (04-10-2014)