Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Success Stories
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-03-2011, 03:37 PM   #31 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
analogkid455's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: va
Posts: 18

442 - '87 Oldsmobile 442
90 day: 26.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Actually the reason to have more low end torque is, to be able to run higher gears without lugging the engine down, causing wider throttle openings. And the higher gearing WILL give you a gas mileage increase.

AFA as running a different cam in my ROLLER engine, It would help me out. But I have calculated that higher gearing with headers and TRUE dual exhaust, I will pick up way more mileage than just switching cams.

The cylinder heads for 86-88 are swirl port which means they don't flow worth a crap but atomize the fuel better, for mileage. We know better ways of doing it now, but back then they did the swirl port stuff for better mileage.

The Olds swirl port head was the precursor to the famously known ch3vy Vortec head, and then the Fast Burn head.

AFA taking the smog pump off, it's already done, but unhooking the vapor canister will lower gas mileage because it is suppose to hold unburned fuel fumes and particles until you start the engine again. If you vent it to the atmosphere you are wasting that fuel.

Almost the same thing with the EGR valve. It recirculates unburned fuel into the combustion chamber to be burned as energy. It also cools the combustion chamber to prevent detonation. No reason to unhook it, since at WOT, it doesn't work. So it is not robbing power, it is just saving fuel.

Modern engine don't even have EGR valves anymore, since they are more efficient at metering fuel and varies ignition timing constantly to burn the fuel more completely.

Carry on.

__________________
1974 Olds Omega 11.85 @ 112 mph on 87 octane 3620 lbs

1987 442 bone stock 215,000 miles 26.7 MPG

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/829130/1974-oldsmobile-omega
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 09-04-2011, 12:47 PM   #32 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
roflwaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,490

Camryaro - '92 Toyota Camry LE V6
90 day: 31.12 mpg (US)

Red - '00 Honda Insight

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius

3 - '18 Tesla Model 3
90 day: 152.47 mpg (US)
Thanks: 349
Thanked 122 Times in 80 Posts
Based on what I've seen, modern engines do have EGR, they just may not have external EGR. In some cases VV schemes are good enough to keep enough exhaust in the cylinder, eliminating the need for an external EGR system, however these days manufacturers also want to increase output as well as FE so cooled EGR is preferred, which requires an external system.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2011, 02:25 PM   #33 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 2,442

2004 CTD - '04 DODGE RAM 2500 SLT
Team Cummins
90 day: 19.36 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,422
Thanked 737 Times in 557 Posts
Actually the reason to have more low end torque is, to be able to run higher gears without lugging the engine down, causing wider throttle openings

A V8 needs the highway cruise speed rpm to be at or preferably a touch under peak torque.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 03:11 PM   #34 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Smile Analog --- HELP!

Quote:
Originally Posted by analogkid455 View Post
Yeah, I plugged the torque converter up and advanced the timing. It was off by about 15 degrees. The moron that owned it before unplugged the converter lockup and the TV cable wasn't adjusted properly.

I also tuned it up with new wires, plugs, cap and rotor. Rebuilt the carb also.
Analog:

So, remember back in 2008 you were going to sell the 87 442 because your mileage was so piss poor. You were getting around 160 miles per tank. Can you tell me specifically what you did to make such mpg improvements? This would help a lot of 87 442 owners.

Also, I was very close to buying one from an old neighbor who still has it, but when I saw that you were only getting 10-13 mpg-- it kind of spooked me since gas in like 3.50 a gallon here.

Do you think that I could get 18 -20 average per gallon.

Your help is appreciated.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 07:03 PM   #35 (permalink)
halos.com
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 528

ECONORAM - '07 Dodge RAM 1500 QC SLT flex-fuel
90 day: 18.16 mpg (US)

the Avenger - '08 Dodge Avenger SXT
90 day: 27.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 385
Thanked 94 Times in 80 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to ECONORAM
Quote:
Originally Posted by analogkid455 View Post
Well, I don't have a Honda or other high MPG car, but for a v-8 I would say this is pretty good. Especially since it's carbureted, 24 years old, 191,000 miles on it, weighs 3700 lbs, has a frontal area of 20.6 and a Cd of .44.

I plan on lowering it, block off the grille some, put a Hurst Olds air dam on the front and a belly pan. I would like to do something about venting the air under the hood, also. Maybe some air extractors.

Anyway, thought you guys might like to hear about an old hot rodder and drag racer getting good MPG's with a muscle car.
I want to say congrats. That is some good FE for that size aero brick. I always liked the 442s....
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ECONORAM For This Useful Post:
analogkid455 (10-18-2011)
Old 10-13-2011, 10:06 PM   #36 (permalink)
halos.com
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 528

ECONORAM - '07 Dodge RAM 1500 QC SLT flex-fuel
90 day: 18.16 mpg (US)

the Avenger - '08 Dodge Avenger SXT
90 day: 27.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 385
Thanked 94 Times in 80 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to ECONORAM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowmover View Post
Actually the reason to have more low end torque is, to be able to run higher gears without lugging the engine down, causing wider throttle openings

A V8 needs the highway cruise speed rpm to be at or preferably a touch under peak torque.
Dumb question, is it worth hiking up the CR, say half a point or a whole point (ie from 9 to 9.5), to improve low end torque? I can get some pistons to hike my CR from 9.5 to 10.5 static, which is probably 9 to 10 dynamic...for $750.

Sorry about the hijack.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2011, 01:04 AM   #37 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 2,442

2004 CTD - '04 DODGE RAM 2500 SLT
Team Cummins
90 day: 19.36 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,422
Thanked 737 Times in 557 Posts
The most compression -- cylinder pressure -- without detonation. Not easy to achieve without electronics for fuel and spark delivery. A ragged edge. As to dynamic, is it also in consideration of "quench" ?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2011, 06:58 PM   #38 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
analogkid455's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: va
Posts: 18

442 - '87 Oldsmobile 442
90 day: 26.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Certainly quench helps and also swirl and tumble. That is what Olds was trying to do with the swirl port heads. They work pretty good.

The cam they put in the VIN 9 engine is to big for the CR so bumping compression won't hurt you, but since they programmed the timing to be 60 degrees at cruise, you may run into detonation with 87 octane. But increasing the CR will no doubt increase fuel efficiency. You can always re-burn the chip to have less timing or run 89 or higher octane.

The DCR is so low that I think you could still run 87 octane with 9:1 with the stock cam. Stock CR is just under 8:1.

AFA, having fuel injection to not have detonation, forget about it. A properly tuned carb ( especially a lean burning computer controlled carb) you don't need EFI.

Thanks ECONORAM for the congrats. I am still working on it.
__________________
1974 Olds Omega 11.85 @ 112 mph on 87 octane 3620 lbs

1987 442 bone stock 215,000 miles 26.7 MPG

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/829130/1974-oldsmobile-omega
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2011, 07:50 AM   #39 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sszewczuk View Post
Analog:

So, remember back in 2008 you were going to sell the 87 442 because your mileage was so piss poor. You were getting around 160 miles per tank. Can you tell me specifically what you did to make such mpg improvements? This would help a lot of 87 442 owners.

Also, I was very close to buying one from an old neighbor who still has it, but when I saw that you were only getting 10-13 mpg-- it kind of spooked me since gas in like 3.50 a gallon here.

Do you think that I could get 18 -20 average per gallon.

Your help is appreciated.
What type of oil do you use?
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2011, 10:14 AM   #40 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
analogkid455's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: va
Posts: 18

442 - '87 Oldsmobile 442
90 day: 26.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Mobil 1 10-30

__________________
1974 Olds Omega 11.85 @ 112 mph on 87 octane 3620 lbs

1987 442 bone stock 215,000 miles 26.7 MPG

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/829130/1974-oldsmobile-omega
  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