1987 442 26.7 mpg stock v-8 3700 lbs.

[analogkid455]

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.

[roflwaffle]

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.

[slowmover]

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.

[sszewczuk]

Originally Posted by analogkid455

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.

[ECONORAM]

Originally Posted by analogkid455

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....

[ECONORAM]

Originally Posted by slowmover

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.

[slowmover]

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" ?

[analogkid455]

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.

[sszewczuk]

Originally Posted by sszewczuk

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?

[analogkid455]

Mobil 1 10-30