View Single Post
Old 07-07-2016, 04:59 AM   #26 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,735

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: 1,571
Thanked 3,508 Times in 2,195 Posts
Don't get me wrong, I find the results believable and awesome, but I'm just thinking: if all the V8 is ever- or mostly- called upon to do is putter around at sub-1000 rpm speeds, it is generating very little hp and torque down there and those hp and torque requirements could easily be handled by a smaller, lighter engine that doesn't have to be shut off and coddled as much. Could a six or even a four move that wagon around with the same acceleration rates and cruising speeds? A Suzuki G10 probably could!

Also I believe there's an optimum operating speed range for engines as witnessed by BSFC charts and if operating below optimum rpms some efficiency is being compromised by relatively more heat loss to the cooling system. But I suppose that mainly counts at steady and/or prolonged operations at certain rpms, not simply pulsing up to speed.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
ChazInMT (07-22-2016)