Newb with plans

[Commeatus]

Hey all, I go by Commeatus. I've just acquired an 86 accord hatch (CoD .31!) that will be a project over the next year or so. fe currently hangs around 25 mpg no matter what we do with it, but it needs a tune-up--the first step!
my goal is a car that gets 40-50 on the highway while retaining the excellent driving qualities of the 3rd gen accord. with custom engine mounts I can have ay of honda's A- and B-series engines swapped in with a transmission from a civic si or a prelude--I'm looking at the civic since the gears are closer together.
I'm interested to talk with the number crunchers here and find out relationships between fe, weight, and power delivery. for instance, the blocky CR-v weighs over 1.5 tons and gets 20/30 with a CoD of .45, roughly. what happens when I put that engine in my slippery, 1-ton accord? this is my current line of inquiry.

[mcrews]

a subject I pondered many times.
I owned a 2002 Infiniti Q45 3800lbs (lot of alum) 4.5l V8 340hp. .30 cd epa 22hwy
I could get 30+ with the aero mods and easy driving.

Always wondered if there is some optimal hp to maximize fe AND some level of comfort ( i alway kept the auto climate control on!!)

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by Commeatus

the blocky CR-v weighs over 1.5 tons and gets 20/30 with a CoD of .45, roughly. what happens when I put that engine in my slippery, 1-ton accord?

You could make it a hell of a sleeper, while retaining some good fuel-economy

[Commeatus]

I'm not a racer, so it won't be that punchy. it looks like a base model integra transmission is better-- wider spacing but the ratios match up with ideal daily speeds at 3-4 k rpms, which is better. I'm learning more about "taller" gearing.
I'm also putting the project on hold until I have a donor car--my accord has the carb which actually makes it more cost-effective to just buy a second, fuel-injected model and build it up. I'll be practising hypermiling in the meantime

I'm wondering if it makes sense to put a torquey engine in a light car. it seems to my reasoning that an engine can have good economy one of two ways: big boom a few times (high torque, low rpm) or little boom many times. if an engine has a high specific output but isn't very powerful, you should be able to rev the nuts off of it and still return good economy. in fact, thinking now, isn't that how the metro runs? I feel like that's why a lot of the 80's imports had better economy than their meaty detroit counterparts. can anyone point to a thread or knowledgebase that goes into more detail?

also, mcrews, that is one slippery infiniti! color me impressed. the .30 to begin with surprises me, though. I guess it's the wind tunnel data showing through.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by Commeatus

I'm wondering if it makes sense to put a torquey engine in a light car.

Since you would be able to use taller gears without too many sacrifices to the performance, a torquey engine makes sense.