I have just pulled my 30 ver 292 that was giving me 19 mpg in my 57 t'bird.  It had an original 2x4 manifold with twin rochester throttle bodies controlled by a Accel gen 7 dfi set-up.  I was running 273 rear gears, using an old borg warner super special wide t 10 with 2.64 first gear.  Going from the 2 x 4 holleys to the throttle bodies was like swapping in a big block.  It had buckets of low end torque and didn't load up like the carbs.  Will be back in action on my new motor and .80 over 312.  24 or so more cubic inches should boost low end drivability some more.  I am anxious to see how it all works with the isky 333 cam.  MIKE

Mike, still lovin his 57 t'bird after 53 years!

Further to what Ted mentions re E 85 fuel. In the latest issue of Y-Blk Magazine there is dyno tests on a 334 " Y-Blk. One of the tests was done with the engine, equipped with injection & running E 85 fuel. While the power numbers were up by 27 H.P., fuel consumption with that setup was up by 45 % !!

Paul

But was that engine built to run on gasoline or alcohol? I'll bet it was built for gasoline. I'd like to see a fair comparison of E85 and gasoline, where all that can be equal is, but the engines are tailored for the target fuel where necessary. I'll bet that the results will tell a different story then.

It's kinda like building a low compression engine to test the benefits of octane - the result will be that higher octane is not worth the money and that is false when the engine is built for it.


Lawrenceville, GA

has anyone gone to a holley pro-jection set-up on a y? if so, i must have missed it. i'd like to know how much trouble it is to switch over and what the performance, millage difference was, thanks, wayne. if this has already been done, please help me find it.

 lincoln/merc. y-blocks &mel's                                                               bucyrus, ohio.

Paul, I noticed the fuel consumption on Royce's motor running on E85 also. Some of the change was the E85 but Hilborn Injection would probably not give the best BSFC numbers with any fuel.

Charlie, the flex fuel cars are a joke. How can an engine run efficiently on gas and ethanol with the same compression ratio?

http://ford-y-block.com 

20 miles east of San Diego, 20 miles north of Mexico

I agree, and that's exactly my point. I am curious to see how two engines built as equally as possible but with the changes necessary for each type of fuel compare. I'll bet ethanol isn't so bad when it's used in an engine that's truly designed for it.


Lawrenceville, GA

Pretty sure Mpg will always be worse w/ ethanol because there is less btu's per gallon. It's not a fair comparision. Cost per mile would be better when comparing dissimilar fuels.

      You're right, it doesn't make sense that an engine that runs on gas and E-85 would run on either efficiently, even I understand that. The key word I think would be......efficiently.

       My wife's brother has a full size scrub flex fuel truck.  He is divorced, kids grown and is known for being the "thriftiest" person you will ever meet (read that as he is one of the cheapest B_______s to walk the face of the earth).  He drives to Florida from Chicago a couple of times a year and from Chicago to northern Wisc. on a pretty regular basis.  He puts some miles on this truck and has determined E-85 must be 20% cheaper then regular for it to benefit him to run E-85.  If regular is $4 a gallon E-85 must be $3.20 or less to make it worth buying.

        He does acknowledge that anything close to a 50-50 mix in the tank makes it run very poor.  It has to have a majority of one or the other type fuel to run half way decent.  Cheap as he is I know he's run the numbers dozens of times.

         For what it's worth.

          Missouri Mike

I'd rather be lucky than good.................

    but good ain't bad!!