Team Chevelle banner
1 - 5 of 28 Posts
Wow...that's a 15.6:1 reduction in first gear...and I though my 11.9:1 reduction made 1st gear uselessly short...

And that overdrive is equivalent to driving in 4th with a 4 speed and 3.36 rear gears...I would hardly call that overdrive.

If you want other examples of burning disproportionate amounts of fuel for power output, look to the exotics...lamborghini and ferrari are pretty terrible IIRC...
 
Speaking of fuel mileage, my brother's daily driver is a 1991 Suburban. It has a TBI 350 with a 700R4 trans. I have no idea of the rear axle ratio. While gassing up the other day he said there was a guy filling up a Subaru Forester. The Subaru is all wheel drive and the guy was complaining about fuel mileage. There was a discussion about how far you could go on a tank of gas and my brother was surprised that the Subaru gave about the same mileage as the Suburban!

Paul

From my super-quick google search, a Forrester has a 15.9 gallon tank versus a 31 gallon tank in the Suburban...so if they were comparing range and are getting similar numbers, the Subaru is crushing the Chevy in terms of fuel economy.
 
So once you get a car "up to speed", it becomes a perpetual motion machine?
I didn't say you burn no gas, wouldn't that be nice :D.

What I meant was the gas you are burning while cruising down the highway is being used push air out of the way, and not so much on moving the mass of the car. There would be a _hair_ more resistance due to the increased load on the bearings and tires, but I would wager that this increased resistance is negligible compared to the drag force acting on the car.
 
Yeah my inlaws have an '05 CRV, and it doesn't get very close to its EPA numbers either.

I enjoy my EPA city, and can far exceed my EPA highway in my '91 Mustang GT.
No idea what my Chevelle's EPA numbers are if they even exist? But I get 12 city and 19 hwy. '69 Malibu stock 307/TH350/2.73's. I'm sure it'll drop some if I ever get this 454 in...
 
1 - 5 of 28 Posts