Polished a turd....bird - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum

bhazard · 08-03-2009, 01:58 PM

Well, back in May or June 08....

Now...

Shows the good and bad spots I guess.

Id really like to get the wheels cleaned up, as well as the lights. The tail lights are nasty. Ill deal with the rust. Its pretty much everywhere on the lower body.

Filling a 22gallon tank with premium can be fun. I got 28mpg on my first fillup since getting it back together. Miss the 45-50mpg fillups of my festy but at least its better than the 19mpg the government says Im supposed to get. Its also theeeee most comfortable car I have ever driven. I may be heading down to West Virginia in it Friday.

I also miss lugging around in the capri or festiva at like 1000 rpms around town in 5th. For some reason the 2.3 just hates being under 2000 rpms. Im not sure if its the weight of the car (probably 3400lb empty) or just the design of the engine, but anything under 2000 rpm and it starts lugging and theres no possible acceleration under 1600 or so. Basically I have to shift at close to 3000 rpms. It cruises at 55mph at around 2000-2200 rpms. The computer switches to open loop at around 3000 rpms, so I can go up to 80mph without losing too much mpg, after that it drops significantly.

It has a "ranger roller cam" swap, which is slightly milder than the stocker and has the benefit of being a roller setup instead of a slider. It may improve mpg slightly.

DonR · 08-03-2009, 06:12 PM

A guy here at work used to have one. From what he has said about it, try going faster. He claimed his fuel milage would increase the faster the highway speed.

I thought he was slightly off in his thinking, but hey I could be wrong. Maybe the drag vs. engine efficiency curves cross abnormally high.

Don

jcp123 · 08-03-2009, 06:46 PM

^^ I agree with him. I had a '99 Dodge Van that got it's best highway FE at 70mph - it was the only time I was ever able to get over 16mpg with it.

Amyhow, interesting car. Turbo Coupes aren't easy to find anymore, so you have yourself a bit of a rarity there. I imagine it's the weight holding the acceleration back, T-birds aren't terribly light cars. 28mpg is excellent mileage for it! I would love to have that motor in a Pinto - sleeper racer with decent MPG's the rest of the time. If cou can get a boost controller on there, you could even cut out the turbo boost when you want more MPG's or dial it back up for passing, hill climbing, etc.

bhazard · 08-03-2009, 07:16 PM

They are getting rarer, my car is the most popular candidate for a turbo mustang swap. Along with the fact that my car was basically junkyard-worthy when I got it back in '05.

brucey · 08-05-2009, 03:22 AM

When you get here we'll weigh it for ya. I know of a few truck scales and they're always free.

bgd73 · 08-05-2009, 03:38 AM

turbo thunderbird. its the first four cylinder turbo I ever drove. My peeve with the n/a was feeling the lower end of engine, (mustang 2.3) the turbo skips right over that.

they are nice cars. I liked them enough to seek the king of its body type, it turns out to be a mark vii-viii, those are very very nice to ride in. in contrast, the only accident I saw witnessing a fatality was a v8 thunderbird like you have. Goes to show, not everything can keep a good memory.

missing low rpms of n/a discipline, lugging around? my old boxer would make you cry. The steepest hills in my city, I start off in 500rpm in 2nd...one could double take and ponder how i got a diesel in a AWD sube wagon. It is beyond comical now, more than ever....

nice to see the 28mpg, I knew the 2.3 could do it.

JeremyinIndy · 08-05-2009, 05:16 AM

That's a pretty nice looking bird, now.

Are you Biohazard from Cougarnuts and the old Vboard?

bhazard · 08-05-2009, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bgd73

missing low rpms of n/a discipline, lugging around? my old boxer would make you cry. The steepest hills in my city, I start off in 500rpm in 2nd...one could double take and ponder how i got a diesel in a AWD sube wagon. It is beyond comical now, more than ever....

nice to see the 28mpg, I knew the 2.3 could do it.

I was able to lug around at 1000 rpms in my turbo capri xr2. Granted it weighed 1000 lbs less, but had a 1.6L mazda turbo engine with 7.9:1 compression. I would think that wouldnt have more low end torque to lug around with than the grunty 2.3l.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeremyinIndy

That's a pretty nice looking bird, now.

Are you Biohazard from Cougarnuts and the old Vboard?

Nope, I use this name on pretty much all boards I go to, foxtbirdcougarforums.com, turbotbird.com, turboford.net....