• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

Eco Bricks

Best bet would be to ditch everything and EV swap it. If you diy it could probably be done for the cost of an lsx swap.
 
Did anyone get a price on a new Cummins engine, because a reman 4BT is north of $7K? How much bensin can you buy for that kind of money? How many 740T's can you buy for $7k?

Its between $8 - 9K once you are done I expect.

The question wasn't about cost, it was about feasibility. Frankly, I'd love to do one of these motors, although I'll likely do it in my 72 Jeep Wagoneer in a few years. The nice thing is that it has as much torque as the AMC360, but weighs about 2/3 of that iron lump.

My B23F with an H cam gets between 24 - 26 MPG reliably.

I drive ~30K/year in my 242 (long commute). I figure that I would need to hit 50 MPG in order to justify the cost involved in any of the diesel swaps out there. I'm not confident that this swap (or any diesel swap) would get me there. I figure that if it hit 50 MPG, I would have a simple payback of about 5 years assuming that fuel hovered about $3/gal. That's not bad at all, but I just cant bring myself to try to justify the project cost and time to my other 1/2. The Wagoneer will be an easier sell (she likes that vehicle).
 
Hi
I am in England so we might have a bit of a problem understanding
I run a 16 valve penta 2.5 on Gas Lpg Butane
I cant remember the last time i used petrol
You could use Propane from red bottle ? in england and transfer to the car a pump is about 100 pounds
I dont know if you get them in USA
in England you can get a big white tank 1000 lts its for a house and get the Gas from that
petrol is 1.28 a ltr and gas is .70 a ltr at a petrol station pump a big saving from a white tank even cheaper
last year in France Gas was .20 a ltr
so cheep as chips and about half the emissions of Petrol
Volvo UK sell cars that run on Gas or Petrol called dual fuel
 
Hi
I am in England so we might have a bit of a problem understanding
I run a 16 valve penta 2.5 on Gas Lpg Butane
I cant remember the last time i used petrol
You could use Propane from red bottle ? in england and transfer to the car a pump is about 100 pounds
I dont know if you get them in USA
in England you can get a big white tank 1000 lts its for a house and get the Gas from that
petrol is 1.28 a ltr and gas is .70 a ltr at a petrol station pump a big saving from a white tank even cheaper
last year in France Gas was .20 a ltr
so cheep as chips and about half the emissions of Petrol
Volvo UK sell cars that run on Gas or Petrol called dual fuel

That sounds like a big leap towards socialism/communism, maga needs coal fired cars to keep the mines open.
 
I used to be on ecomodder. Look around there, lots of ideas.

As stated above, it's a square car. the coefficient of drag is high, and it's bigger than econo cars. (cd x area = drag).

The most overlooked (underlooked?) area is the underside of the car. Look at the nicer Lexus and Toyota cars for inspiration.
 
I used to be on ecomodder. Look around there, lots of ideas.

As stated above, it's a square car. the coefficient of drag is high, and it's bigger than econo cars. (cd x area = drag).

The most overlooked (underlooked?) area is the underside of the car. Look at the nicer Lexus and Toyota cars for inspiration.

Look under a 1967 Saab 96 for amazement....CD around .32 then...smooth and clean floor the full length just aft of the sump (front sump)...

I always am baffled when people claim they wanna spend thousands and thousands of dollars pouring money into some bizarre pet-car to get a XX% decrease in fuel consumption......who overlook one glaring--and really simple---way to increase energy utilization by squeezing out more energy out of the gas...higher compression...
A STRONGER pop.
If every time the motor POPS it does more work, then a lighter foot on the gas is needed to do the same thing...

Can you splain it better Mike? You deal with kids who lack basic understanding and maybe you could splain it so its clearer to those types here..Cause to me this is simple..too simple maybe..(So simple in my book it doesn't need explanation....yet evidently somehow people think spending $8,968 for an engine on the ground, a couple of thousand more modding and installing, ass-ploding their gearbox from the massive torque and fixing that..so "save" 10% of a gallon per mile seems nothing short of insane...)
 
That is supposedly why Rudolph Diesel wanted to crank up the compression. Efficiency.
There are mid-size drone aircraft engines that run on gasoline but once started, are diesels. Insanely efficient.
More chamber turbulence, and strong push for a small amount of fuel.
As John suggested, it pops hard.

For huge torque at the expense of fuel, cramming air in first with low compression makes a loooonnnger high pressure curve.
 
So simple in my book it doesn't need explanation....yet evidently somehow people think spending $8,968 for an engine on the ground, a couple of thousand more modding and installing, ass-ploding their gearbox from the massive torque and fixing that..so "save" 10% of a gallon per mile seems nothing short of insane


He asked what was possible, not what made the most sense.

What makes the most sense (largest rate of return) is to simply give the car a good stage zero, run high (ish) pressure in the tires, keep and empty trunk, and drive with the windows up.

This forum is largely about the biggest fun factor/what's possible, not what makes the most sense.

If we all did that, we would all drive beige Honda accords that we bought used with less than 100K on the clock. Drive it with the normal maintenance until the first major mechanical failure. Then go out and get another one with less than 100k and sell the broken down heap to some ricer enthusiast kid for more than it is worth.

No one drives a 25 year old car because it is 'sensible'. They are either crazy (as we all are on this forum), or poor.
 
Go back to Maintenance, noob.
?And? empty trunk might give a 1% increace in town. Zero increase on the highway. And no tools to fix your heap.
This is performance and mods. Buying a civic is not a mod.

I for one welcome our homemade air dam overlords.
 
Also, a 16v head would be way better if you crank up the compression.
Thin gear oil helps.
Lean fuel maps and more timing (also best with a better combustion chamber).
Wheel skirrrrrrts.
 
lots of improvements that can be made on the underside of our bricks to inch up the mpg.

Also, different final drives, cams, etc... can make a difference.

if you have an auto... going to a real 5 spd like a m47 will provide a big jump.
 
Guys these are great tips. Honestly I thing an EV brick would be freaking awesome.

I like doing mods to my brick that also help it run better and go faster, and im poor so id rather not get 15 MPG. I first got this wagon 5 years back from an euro mechanic, had been sitting, the radiator had cracked letting tranny fluid in the coolant system, and it was leaking from windshield and rear windows. First thing I did was take out the aw71 put an M46 in it. then I put a new windshield got some 15inch novas, and replaced all the worn suspension bushings and other rubber(Coolant system, and fuel return line, SS brake lines, rubber gaskets around wagon windows and new window scrapers..) I pretty regularly get 25mpg but do mostly highway driving. It does seem to be running a little rich as it seems to smell like fuel outside the car when running.


It seems adding a 2.4 chipped, wasted spark, 16V turbo, and a T5 would get me improved mpg if I got a smaller turbo and was not having a total lead foot?

Thanks!
 
He asked what was possible, not what made the most sense.

What makes the most sense (largest rate of return) is to simply give the car a good stage zero, run high (ish) pressure in the tires, keep and empty trunk, and drive with the windows up.

This forum is largely about the biggest fun factor/what's possible, not what makes the most sense.

If we all did that, we would all drive beige Honda accords that we bought used with less than 100K on the clock. Drive it with the normal maintenance until the first major mechanical failure. Then go out and get another one with less than 100k and sell the broken down heap to some ricer enthusiast kid for more than it is worth.

No one drives a 25 year old car because it is 'sensible'. They are either crazy (as we all are on this forum), or poor.


Well fortunately raising dynamic compression is one of the simplest and cheapest and do-able things one can do with direct fun results...performance and efficiency are 2 sides of the same coin...
If we make a n.a. motor that has 175 wheel HP and is quick, that same motor gives better Em Pea Gees if we poke along like a old fart..And I've built scores and scores of n.a. motors that have done just that.....albeit a cruder all cast iron thing with pushrods..
That motor..the Ford V4 1.7 came with a little tiny 34mm 1 bbl carb with like 26mm venturis, and for USA 8.0:1 compression 37mm intakes and 31mm exhausts with a horrible 1.25" exhaust and allegedly about 65hp..
Doesn't sound like a lot...but with a car weight of about 1945 lbs and final drive of 4.88 it was fairly fun..and quicker than 240 n.a. things...
To "go down the road" on steady cruise at 60 mph they did around 27 mpg...and that was maybe 1/2 throttle.


My "normal package" (way back in about 1986) was to bore 'em 0,8mm and go zero deck or +0,1 out, 1mm gasket, 42mm intakes and 36mm exhausts (straight outta Ford 2,9 V6), a 2bbl manifold with a 38x38 synchronous carb called Weber DGMS, minimum 10,85:1 compression and a middling Saab "rally cam (about 310* duration and 11.4mm lift)...and a Simons 044-K 2" exhaust...:-P

These motors routinely gave about 31-32 mpg but nobody cruised 55-60...most cruised 70-75mph....:oogle:


Sure around town like here in Sleezattle nobody ever showed any self-control... and they'd blast up hills full throttle and shifting up cause they could..They became maniacs, big saucer eyes and droolin with tongues hanging out...If i ever brought up in-town mileage the answer was always the same "F?ckit!!! I don't care about MPG anymore, its just too f?ckin fun blasting up hills....This thing LANDS sooooo nice....'' followed my pervy laughter.... One older mellow Alaska fisherman told me he was doing 110-120 the whole way up to Steven's Pass Ski Area...mostly on snow..(he had studded tires and a LSD in the box...and his wife in the car)...

Myself I've done coast to coast trips in the mid 90s with "the normal spec" and got a nice 31mpg cruising mostly 70 or a bit more (mid winter and around the top of all the Great Lakes so curvier road than straight I-5)

So if you have any self-control co-ordinated well thought out increased engine torque, increased BMEP can yield real world increases in both fun and MPG for a sh?t-ton less money and work than buying and paying somebody to install and make work some diesel for thousands or some ridiculous electric car powerplant transplant...:roll:

Presuming that the intention actually is to have a done project and not a TB Fap-fest.:oops:
 
He asked what was possible, not what made the most sense.

What makes the most sense (largest rate of return) is to simply give the car a good stage zero, run high (ish) pressure in the tires, keep and empty trunk, and drive with the windows up.

This forum is largely about the biggest fun factor/what's possible, not what makes the most sense.

If we all did that, we would all drive beige Honda accords that we bought used with less than 100K on the clock. Drive it with the normal maintenance until the first major mechanical failure. Then go out and get another one with less than 100k and sell the broken down heap to some ricer enthusiast kid for more than it is worth.

No one drives a 25 year old car because it is 'sensible'. They are either crazy (as we all are on this forum), or poor.
I love this
 
One of the interesting things I read back in the day:
A slight nose-down ride is preferred, even with a perfectly smooth underside.
If the car is perfectly level, the underbody friction causes the air to "stack up" toward the rear, causing higher pressure and more drag.
 
One of the interesting things I read back in the day:
A slight nose-down ride is preferred, even with a perfectly smooth underside.
If the car is perfectly level, the underbody friction causes the air to "stack up" toward the rear, causing higher pressure and more drag.

So taking 500 pounds of spare parts and tools out of the back of my 88 765 will get me 2 more mpg?
 
So taking 500 pounds of spare parts and tools out of the back of my 88 765 will get me 2 more mpg?

Maybe. Of course when the 30 YO computer dies and you are stranded on the side of the road, the cost of the tow and sheer aggravation will likely offset the increase in efficiency.

I have a (tested) spare computer and ignition module in the trunk. I have a spare set of belts, cap/rotor/wires/plugs, a spare injector (just cause I had an extra), O2 sensor (changed it on the side of the highway one day), tested used AMM, some various bolts and a few things I'm forgetting. I also carry enough tools in the trunk to (mostly) fix anything that goes wrong.

My friends at work make fun of me because the tools in the trunk are likely worth more than the car. I usually retort by asking how much their car payment is.

They then ask me car advice when they have car trouble - which I'm happy to give.

In the end, I keep driving my Frankensteinian creation because I enjoy working on cars, and this vehicle is my brand of wacky.

As far as the ecomod crowd goes, I have nothing but respect for them. They are every bit the enthusiast that any of us are. Some of the things that they come up with are down right innovative, but I still think that the Brown's Gas thing is weird and I refuse to put side skirts over my back wheels.
 
Back
Top