How to build a muscle car for better fuel economy?

[Phoenix'97]

Originally Posted by BLSTIC

The 2.3 Ecoboost Mustang has a modern-emissions engine that is equal or superior to your 90's chev in every objective way. GM Probably has something similar somewhere if the idea of installing a four-letter-word engine doesn't excite you.

So there's that option, use a modern downsized performance engine in your early car that probably weighs less, especially with the engine swap. Ecoboost mustangs have run 11's down the 1/4 mile so they are definitely enough muscle, and the lighter engine would have to help handling.

Originally Posted by JSH

How could you improve emissions (and fuel economy) on your car? Do a true resto-mod and drop a current emission compliant engine into your car. Any competent tuner shop can do that. The rest is just pie-in-the-sky pipe dreams.

EDIT: I see BLSTIC beat me to it. Every engine in the current Camaro outperforms the engine in your Firebird, returns better fuel economy, and has much lower emissions. I would look at the 2.0 Turbo personally which is just as quick as your V8 and gets almost 40% better fuel economy. Even the 455 hp 6.2L V8 in the current Camaro SS gets better fuel economy than your car.

Originally Posted by BLSTIC

40%? That's a huge difference. As in, more than the gain typically seen when manufacturers go hybrid.

I'd almost consider doing a swap like that in my next project... If the idea of 260rwhp from a naturally aspirated 6-cylinder didn't excite me so much

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find...38848&id=38821

An engine swap is OUT OF THE QUESTION. Every engine needs a matching manual transmission and every newer engine needs an ECM to make it run correctly and that ECM needs to be wired to my 20-year old factory gauge cluster in order to work as expected, like it came from the factory. If the new engine uses electronic throttle then we have more customization to do!

It is much easier to keep my LT1 engine block and any other parts I can salvage and try to improve upon the block to gain that extra mile or two per gallon in the city, which is very possible with reduced friction parts and ceramic coating. If you look at the link, the 6.2L LS engine only has one mile per gallon better rating than my LT1. WOOPTIE DOO! This can easily be matched with the right modifications to reduce internal friction, the right lightweight components such as pulleys, and the right camshaft and parts for low RPM torque production to keep me driving in low RPM. Even the 6-cylinder Camaro mileage is obtainable if I make use of plug-in hybrid technology. As far as the turbo 4-cylinder engine, well, that is no fun and sure won't sound the same as my V8.

You guys don't understand why I am limiting myself to the LT1 and why I am trying to improve upon it. If I wanted a high horsepower race car or Corvette, I wouldn't waste my time resto-modding a 20-year old Firebird Trans Am. I told you, engine swapping is out of the question!

This has NOTHING TO DO with bragging rights as far as horsepower! It has EVERYTHING to do with tailoring my car to my driving style and saving more money by using an engine I already have versus transplanting another engine and spending thousands more for accompanying transmission and computer and other accessories, to get it to work right with my factory components.

[gumby79]

For those concerned about the math the ROI.
Let's do the math for a full-on race engine$10-80k+ and then subtract the difference in price for what this gentleman is trying to do now we had a positive Roi before he's even spent a penny the pieces and parts to install the Ecotec or any of the other moderns are going to far exceed the cost of what this man plans so it's going to take even longer than the impossible Roi you guys have already pointed out in order for the modern downsize to pan out. Not everyone is willing to ditch a metal car for a plastic toy that is just as heavy if not heavier than the old clunker.

Originally Posted by Phoenix'97

I told you, engine swapping is out of the question!

This has NOTHING TO DO with bragging rights as far as horsepower! It has EVERYTHING to do with tailoring my car to my driving style and saving more money by using an engine I already have versus transplanting another engine and spending thousands more for accompanying transmission and computer and other accessories, to get it to work right with my factory components.

Not to mention you have to go to the New York version of C.A.R.B.and get your transplant certified that you did it right. This is not cheap.
I don't mean to be picking at anybody but it sure seems like you guys would much rather he didn't consult anything on ecomodder and just built to Power House. Any reduction in harm to the ecosystem is a gain. Any reduction in fuel consumed is a gain. He could always just do a normal rebuild when this motor wears out and get the same as he had before. Instead he's trying to improve upon what he already has and you guys are telling him shame for trying to improve trying to improve is the spirit of ecomodder.
On the 79 Chevy in my signature the only thing that was stock where the valves the heads the block and the crank still Pass California emissions ran cleaner with an Edelbrock 1405 carburetor PCV valve Factory style air cleaner with the heat riser (off a 94 TBI 454 because it had a mechanical thermostat instead of a vacuum actuated thermostat )that was my complete list of emissions requirements three items heavy duty and Federal all the other crap was optional( as in some Vehicles had it some didn't mying didn't have a sticker stating what was required so it wasn't required due to a salvage title and Body Change that didn't match year make, only model pick up. This truck was almost flagged for running to clean the machine thought I was cheating plugging in a Geo Metro in place of my V8. The place I worked at the time was a smog inspection facility the boss wanted to know how much cleaner would my truck run with all the extra garbage on it so we installed and it almost failed the test because it was that much dirtier having all brand new emissions equipment on it. Just because it was thought to be a good idea does not make it a good idea. The emissions compliance has killed the era of the dreamer and the Builder because you don't turn wrenches or make improvements on cars you buy another one when this one wears out.

You could probably go through the local emissions test without telling them that you're not running the right stuff so long as it looks right from the outside and you don't run so clean that the machine says you're cheating as in the technician didn't put the probe in. Then you're probably golden
In regards to emissions equipment in place testing this was attempted in California back in the early 2000s at which point they threatened the smog Tech with $100,000personal fine the business the tech worked for with a $250,000 fine and of course the driver for $100,000 if at a random roadside inspection they found you were missing any emissions equipment no sniff test involved Purely is the part in place inspection this was overturned as the smog Tech has no control over whether or not Joe public goes home after his picture perfect emissions test and places that picture perfect emissions engine on the stand for another 2 years putting his Blown Alcohol engine back in his street car. Growing up I knew several individuals who had one engine that got smog tested 5 to 6 times a year different car every test but that's what it was built for it was a test mule there's 10 to 12 cars had race engines in them it was kind of like a co-op you pay the dude some money you borrow his motor you go test to come back to his house you put your motor back in.
Then there's always just register in a county that doesn't have emissions Mariposa county California has 10 to 15 cars per person including minors this county is exempt from emissions testing because what will pass on this side of town won't pass on that side of town due to altitude changes in excess of 3000 feet starting at 3000 and going up to 8 or 9,000 feet

[JSH]

Originally Posted by Phoenix'97

... I told you, engine swapping is out of the question!

I know. Everything that anyone has recommended that could actually work has been out of the question. That is why I said it was pie-in-the-sky dreaming.

You are planning on spending thousands to rebuild your ancient technology motor, put on wider tires, do no aero mods, refuse to change your driving habits, pay a crazy amount for alcohol fuel delivered by the drum (which has lower energy density then gas) and expect to get better fuel economy.

FYI, the Camaro automatics get better mileage and are faster than the 6 speed. You could likely buy a wreck with everything you need for less than you are planning to spend on your engine rebuilt. BTW, what is the price tag on this proposed rebuild?

The 6.2L auto does 2 mpg better in the city than your car which is a huge when the starting point is a dismal 15 mpg. MPG gains are not linear.

[gumby79]

Originally Posted by JSH

The 6.2L auto does 2 mpg better in the city than your car which is a huge when the starting point is a dismal 15 mpg. MPG gains are not linear.

So you mean the 6.2 is a -1 mpg at 17mpg when hes starting from 18mpg.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by gumby79

So you mean the 6.2 is a -1 mpg at 17mpg when hes starting from 18mpg.

Nope.

His V8 Firebird is rated at 15 city / 24 highway / 18 combined
The 6.2L V8 auto is rated at 17 city / 27 highway / 20 combined

[freebeard]

You guys don't understand why I am limiting myself to the LT1 and why I am trying to improve upon it. If I wanted a high horsepower race car or Corvette, I wouldn't waste my time resto-modding a 20-year old Firebird Trans Am. I told you, engine swapping is out of the question!

You paint with a broad brush. I'm a big fan of 36hp racing, based a case (not block) that hasn't been OEM since 1959. "Vintage-Volkswagen based Land Speed Record Racing"

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=palemoon&q=36hp+vw&ia=web

So...what do you think about isotropic superfinishing? A good place to save weight is in the valvetrain. The savings get compounded through all the way to the [rear] wheels.

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=palemoon&q...rs&ia=products

[Phoenix'97]

Originally Posted by JSH

I know. Everything that anyone has recommended that could actually work has been out of the question. That is why I said it was pie-in-the-sky dreaming.

You are planning on spending thousands to rebuild your ancient technology motor, put on wider tires, do no aero mods, refuse to change your driving habits, pay a crazy amount for alcohol fuel delivered by the drum (which has lower energy density then gas) and expect to get better fuel economy.

FYI, the Camaro automatics get better mileage and are faster than the 6 speed. You could likely buy a wreck with everything you need for less than you are planning to spend on your engine rebuilt. BTW, what is the price tag on this proposed rebuild?

The 6.2L auto does 2 mpg better in the city than your car which is a huge when the starting point is a dismal 15 mpg. MPG gains are not linear.

I have had disagreements on other car forums with members who insisted they had the correct solution for my desired build and that other options I was willing to try were wrong.

Even so called "ancient-technology" can be given a new lease on life when mated with newer technology. Just because something is brand new does not necessarily make it better than it's predecessor. I have enough suggestions from you guys on how to achieve the desired results I seek in balancing engine performance and "fun factor" with fuel efficiency, along with non-related mods to help further extend the life of the engine. So there I have it.

[Grant-53]

"What is measured gets improved." - John Lawhon from 'The Selling Bible'. Every ecomodder should remember the basic rules and not be a purist. I can put anyone on a streamlined bicycle as the ultimate eco ride. When some one doubles the fuel mileage of a tractor trailer we cheer. When someone doubles the fuel mileage of a Honda Civic we applaud the effort. Better aerodynamics, higher compression ratio, and matching the gearing for lower RPM is the formula for more efficiency. Nothing wrong with restoring old vehicles. I have a 1967 Huffy 3 speed that is getting a make over to a 12 speed TT style bike with an Outlaw aero package that may come in at less than $100.
Enjoy!

[freebeard]

My Trans Am is already a 6-speed.

Maybe there was more description, but I missed it. I'm starting to wonder what this car looks like. What color is it?

I can understand why you might not want to post a picture because someone could social engineer the license plate or picture background, but DuckDuckGo can find a picture of one like it. Or with just the year and color [and T-top or lack thereof]. One of these ones:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac_Firebird

Does it have the screaming chicken?

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by Phoenix'97

Even so called "ancient-technology" can be given a new lease on life when mated with newer technology. Just because something is brand new does not necessarily make it better than it's predecessor.

Gotta have to agree on that. Look at the same basic OHV layout which is retained in the current generation of the GM small-block, or in the Bentley Mulsanne. Depending on the circumstances, even a flathead might retain some advantage for specific applications