Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I had a 1979 Mercury Cougar XR7 with a 351. It required premium gas, was underpowered and only got around 7 mpg in mixed driving. What a dog. You could literally watch the fuel gauge move toward empty as you drove across town.
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,082,780 times
Reputation: 3937
I've had a lot of gas pigs in my time,but it would have to be a toss up between the 70 440/six pack Superbird that I got around 6-8 mpg with or the 68 Chevelle with a built up 402...everytime you poured the coals to either one of them the speedo went one way and the gas gauge the other just about as fast....I think they were the absolute worst.
1968 Lincoln, drove as school car in 70's. Had 462/ 4barrel. It averaged 9 mpg but gas was free for me living on farm and Dad had 3, 300 gallon gas tanks for farming/personal use. I knew where key was but he had no problem with us using it.
I had a 1979 Mercury Cougar XR7 with a 351. It required premium gas, was underpowered and only got around 7 mpg in mixed driving. What a dog. You could literally watch the fuel gauge move toward empty as you drove across town.
Either you got a dog, or I got a gem. I owned a 79 XR7 with the 351. I never put premium in it, and it got decent mileage (in the upper teens, low 20's). Agreed about being an underpowered dog. That POS couldn't pull the hat off your head if it tried. I drove it cross-country a couple of times and it always got in the 20's on the freeways for MPG.
I also had a 77 XR7 with the 351. It was also a dog, but got slightly better mileage than the 79 did. That car went WAY over 200,000 miles. I sold it to a guy in town with 197,000 miles on it, and he drove it for 5 more years as a daily driver. Last I talked to him it was just over 225,000 miles and he had yet to put a dime into it other than oil changes and tires (that was when he had it 2 1/2 years at that point.)
Worst vehicle I have ever had for mileage was a 70 or 71 Ford 1 ton with the thirsty ol' 391 motor. That pig got 7 MPG but didn't matter if it was dead empty or loaded to the max. 7 MPG... day in and day out, all 4 seasons. Any 10 year old on a skateboard could beat it off the line and probably take it in the 1/4 mile, but that old truck would pull a house off it's foundations while hauling the replacement in it's bed. Wasn't worth a damn on the open freeway either, I was glad the top speed was posted 55 for most of the time I drove it.
i had three cars that got fairly poor fuel economy. a 69 ford wagon(429), a 74 mercury marquis(460), and a 77 olds delta 88(350). all three averaged around 12mpg.
1968 Ranchero, barely streetable 302, 3000 stall Hughes converter, 4.11s, racing cam, Holly dbl pumper x 2, ran leaded premium, 9.5:1 compression = 6 mpg. Ran great. Miss it (the chapter in my life)! Drove it everywhere when gas was 36 cents per.
Any early 70's USA V-8's, that were struggling to meet new emission requirements.
These engines became Complex with peripheral controls, WEAK, and hopelessly inefficient.
Kinda like anything else the Government gets involved in (aka, public schools, taxes, CARB, TSA...)
There isn't an engine made that wouldn't get better mpg if the e.p.a. garbage was removed. 3 benefits would be more fuel effiecient engines that would last longer and make more power.
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,722 posts, read 58,067,115 times
Reputation: 46190
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12GO
There isn't an engine made that wouldn't get better mpg if the e.p.a. garbage was removed. 3 benefits would be more fuel effiecient engines that would last longer and make more power.
AND the NET result could be less lifetime pollution than the epa is CAUSING.
CARB is similar... we could achieve the emission benefit TOMORROW, that is CARB projected in 20 yrs (if everyone buys a new CARB car, which I WON"T).
Conservation / alternative fuels can reach the 25% reduction goals. Add a robust traffic control system, good transportation planning, and moderate (affordable) public transit options, and they could DOUBLE the CARB goals. (without CARB and the zillion employees / inspections / repairs / frilly exhaust scrubbers that it costs)
So sad (and we PAY for this... idiot PAID legislators (soon to become lobbyists))
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(and we PAY for this... idiot PAID legislators (soon to become lobbyists))
