How to build a muscle car for better fuel economy?

[redpoint5]

I appreciate the volumes of knowledge required to build and tune an ICE to perform the way you want. However, if I were building a muscle car, I'd build it electric. What's more muscly than 1000 ft/lbs of torque? What's more simple than an electric motor, controller, and batteries?

Does the definition of "muscle" preclude the use of a turbo? I suppose that's more ricer territory. Are we limited to cam profiles and compression ratios then?

[freebeard]

Tesla drive trains come in 'small block' and 'big block' versions, can be controlled electrically two or three different ways, and could provide front or rear wheel drive, depending; but I suggested replacing the starter and alternator with an altermotor because it would be far less expensive and still provide 20hp over base-line with improved economy.

And changing oil (or not) is still an option.

[elhigh]

Originally Posted by Phoenix'97

I am not going to go crazy like that. It sounds dangerous and the constant starting will be too much wear-and-tear on the starter. I appreciate the suggestion though.

Disagree. I do engine-off coasting in my 1987 truck and while I have indeed had to replace the starter twice (so I'm on my third now), I've also owned the truck for 30 years and been doing EOC the whole time. In my experience the starter's life, if it is shortened, doesn't seem unreasonably short. The previous starters lasted 18 and 11 (no-name replacement, big mistake) years.

RE: lean burn. It won't cook your pistons when done right, you're leaning the engine so far past stoich it starts to cool off the chamber temps again. You'll need sensors enough to know if things are getting too hot inside but Honda did it and shoot, pilots using plain ol' knobs and gauges in piston engine aircraft can do it - no electronic engine controls at all. Just gotta keep your eyes on the head temps.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Even if the experience of improving the efficiency of this car doesn't effectively lead to money savings in the long run, it still sounds interesting to say the least, both in the environmental aspect and to provide knowledge about the usage of another alternate fuel that may eventually become a viable for other operators with easier access to it.

Originally Posted by elhigh

RE: lean burn. It won't cook your pistons when done right, you're leaning the engine so far past stoich it starts to cool off the chamber temps again. You'll need sensors enough to know if things are getting too hot inside but Honda did it and shoot, pilots using plain ol' knobs and gauges in piston engine aircraft can do it - no electronic engine controls at all. Just gotta keep your eyes on the head temps.

Sometimes I get the willing to pick an old carburettor-fed car and adapt some manual mixture control like the gasser (or ethanol) aircraft.

[elhigh]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Sometimes I get the willing to pick an old carburettor-fed car and adapt some manual mixture control like the gasser (or ethanol) aircraft.

In order to get to the mix adjustment screw on my carb, I would have to drill through a plug. I'm not saying I won't do it but I think I'd like to pick up a used carb and mod that.

[Phoenix'97]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I appreciate the volumes of knowledge required to build and tune an ICE to perform the way you want. However, if I were building a muscle car, I'd build it electric. What's more muscly than 1000 ft/lbs of torque? What's more simple than an electric motor, controller, and batteries?

Does the definition of "muscle" preclude the use of a turbo? I suppose that's more ricer territory. Are we limited to cam profiles and compression ratios then?

An electric motor is too quiet for my liking.

1. I won't be able to detect problems with an electric motor like I am with my good old fashioned internal combustion engine.
   
   
2. I won't really enjoy driving around in a quiet and dull electric car. Hearing the soothing sound of an internal combustion engine makes the experience so much more enjoyable.
   
   
3. I won't be able to gauge when I am losing traction in the winter time. If you are not detecting the rear of the car swinging out, then you have your tachometer and the exhaust sound to gauge if you are losing traction, spinning our tires, and need to slow down!

I consider a car using a blower to be cheating under the definition of muscle car, however that is my opinion! A car can be a muscle car by having the powerful motor and someone can add to the performance by adding a blower, but I regard the car as a muscle car with a naturally aspirated motor.

[Phoenix'97]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Even if the experience of improving the efficiency of this car doesn't effectively lead to money savings in the long run, it still sounds interesting to say the least, both in the environmental aspect and to provide knowledge about the usage of another alternate fuel that may eventually become a viable for other operators with easier access to it.




Sometimes I get the willing to pick an old carburettor-fed car and adapt some manual mixture control like the gasser (or ethanol) aircraft.

A part of me wants to keep internal combustion engines going into the future, and a part of me realizes that fuel such as n-Butanol and Iso-Butanol are much more environmentally friendly than electric cars that still rely on an electricity grid using coal plant produced electricity! Oh, and the process of recycling or disposing of all those batteries! The horror stories are not nice to know in the landfills! Furthermore, if you can produce Bio-Butanol from grass clippings , virtually any organic matter such as autumn leaves from trees, switch grass, even farm crop waste, you now have an INCREDIBLY eco-friendly and renewable fuel source that costs nothing more than to pay someone to rake up, collect, and have shipped to the processing plant! No drilling, no fracking, no real dangers to the environment, no real major source of carbon emissions to have done!

With respect to electric cars, we can always convert coal plants to burn biomass that would otherwise be used in the production of Bio-Butanol, we can convert coal plants to use Diesel Generators that burn Bio-Diesel, or somehow retrofit coal power plants to burn Bio-Butanol! This effectively aids in getting rid of nuclear power plants and drives more demand for Bio-Fuel!

[Phoenix'97]

Originally Posted by Ecky

What instrumentation do you have? Generally, the largest improvement comes from having driver feedback.

Do you use the garage's fuel log? Data is useful, and by logging your tanks, you can get an better idea of how weather, conditions and modifications affect your averages.

A lot of methods being recommended here are tested and proven. I understand that you may be skeptical of some of them, but the data is here if you want to know.

I understand you're not, you're just looking for ideas, but if you have a difference in opinion about something and would like to recommend it for others to try, having data to back up your assertions lends credence. I hope I don't come off as harsh, but I'm highly skeptical of (as an example) running exotic fuels and doing 6-8x as many oil changes as a method of saving money over time.

I record my fuel use on the EPA fuel mileage site. I have used this site on a few occasions to diagnose problems when my mileage was too low for the very conservative driving I was doing!

Unfortunately I can't use my data as "proof" for an experiment since it is only my car and the weather conditions are varying! However, it gives me a ballpark idea of whether or not I am operating within the EPA estimated mileage for my vehicle. However, I feel I can bump my mileage up a tad more and my goal is not just to improve the highway mileage but how can I improve my city mileage to match the 6-cylinder EPA estimates for my vehicle. There has to be a way to do it while bumping up my power production a little more.

So far I have the compression ratio on my mind, low end torque and driving in low RPM around town, and then finding ways to reduce internal friction in the motor with the new engine ceramic coatings they use and parts that further reduce internal friction like the often not thought about true roller timing chain. It is all racing motor technology but it does help street motors in terms of fuel economy!

[Phoenix'97]

Originally Posted by Daschicken

Well, if you are going to continue to throw away real lab test results and only trust color...After those 10K miles and 19 months my oil was a dark amber color.

Oil is one of those things that people adopt the "If it works for me, that must be the ONLY way to do it" style of thinking. Try to expand that thinking a little, AT LEAST get an oil analysis and see what they say.

The heads from my factory LT1 were as pitch black dirty as that in the image attached!

I was using a 1-year interval oil change, using an Amsoil oil filter and Signature series 0W-30 motor oil. Honestly, there is no way that an 18 month oil change interval can yield heads that look like they have at most a 6 month oil change interval. The motor oil I changed was pitch black after one year and it smelled of stale gasoline.

I change my motor oil every three-months and the color is dark brown, or that amber color you mention. So, lab data or not, I am reluctant to ruin another motor, even though this Jasper motor needs some additional refurbishing from how I received it.

Originally Posted by Daschicken

Not sure if it is possible to add it or possible to have it on a manual car? Newer cars all have decel fuel cut off, but your car is of an age that it might not have it.

Well, in the world of resto-modding, maybe I can have it added to my 6-speed, IF it is possible.

Originally Posted by Daschicken

It really depends on the situation, but generally the moment you start touching the brakes (ASSUMING YOUR CAR HAS DFCO), you should have been in gear and cutting off fuel. I assume you have read the 100+ hypermiling tips link at the top of the page, and know how to ACTUALLY time traffic lights.

I read this page a long while ago. My driving style developed from what I took away from it. I am always looking for ways to improve my motor based on the suggestions, and I even considered what type of aerodynamic modifications I could make to my car, but at some point I have to give up. I love the styling of my car and I refuse to ruin it for some very marginal gains. If anything, weight savings, drivetrain and the motor are the biggest areas to focus on.

Originally Posted by Daschicken

I have looked into the gearing of your car, with 3.42 rear end gears and the six speed manual, and 235/55/16 tires it looks like you can do 1535 rpm at 70 mph in sixth. Is that right? If so, that's some seriously tall gearing, so use that to your advantage.

I have the WS6 option with 275/40/17 wheels. I do have plans to throw on bigger wheels, 225/60/15 front, 295/50/15 rear. Yes, the wheels will be a smaller size but I like the look of having more tire surface area. The bigger rear tires should have my 3.42 gear ratio behaving like a 3.23.

Originally Posted by Daschicken

When I am stuck in traffic or have slowly accelerating people in front of me I will use high gears to get me around 900-1000 rpm when not accelerating. Do you do this? Especially since you've got a big(comparatively) honking V8, you should be able to run it between 1000-1500 rpm most of the time, excluding acceleration. I do that with my 3.0 V6. You should be shifting based on load, not necessarily rpm, so when you need to accelerate, feel free to rev it to 2500 rpm, but when you are cruising, feel free to shift up. When I am putting around in traffic, I rarely exceed 1200 rpm. When I do, it is only to accelerate because traffic is clearing up, or if I am at a speed/gear combination that would require lugging the engine to accelerate the slight amount that is needed. For example, in traffic I am in 3rd gear at 10, 4th at about 15, 5th at 20, and 6th at 27.

If you are going to run the engine at low rpms, it is important to establish where it would be lugging, or where it runs rough. This is where it is awesome to have a scangauge or equivalent that can tell you your engine's load percentage at that rpm. I have established that I can use up to around 45% load between idle and 1300 rpm, 50% load at 1400, and the full house 1500 or above. If I exceed those load limits at those rpms the engine will feel and sound rough. Try to go and find your load limits for your engine so you can find out how you can operate it safely at low rpms.

The problem is, my motor is optimized for higher end RPM torque and while I can safely cruise around town at no less than 1500 RPM without the sensations of lugging the motor, on the expressway with very mild inclines, the motor needs to be downshifted from 6th gear into 5th gear. So, this is where I aim to improve low end grunt with a camshaft to address this issue, and using a tuned port injection intake manifold from the predecessor Firebird will allow me to have my fun with the torque peak it produces in the mid-RPM range. This is all fuel efficient since more torque production at lower RPM is less fuel consumed versus torque production at much higher RPM.

[Phoenix'97]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

On lean burn you only melt pistons and damage stuff if you don't know what you are doing.
All that happens at wide open throttle.


I ran a lean burn tune for cruising for 9 months. I had it running 18:1 at idle, 16:1 for cruise, 14:1 for mild acceleration and 13:1 flooring it, with a carburetor and aem wide band O2 meter. I was able to get 10 to 20% better fuel economy with no loss in power.
Where is the down side?

Well the engine builder I have in mind for my build also performs Dyno Tuning with emissions compliance testing, so maybe I can suggest the fuel ratios you have used and see what he can do. Any fuel savings is good fuel savings, especially when I can enjoy those times I do floor it for some thrills.