U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 06-09-2019, 08:28 AM
Location: PSL
8,231 posts, read 2,204,325 times
Reputation: 2936


Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
NY i agree with you, to a point. you are trying to compare apples and oranges though at this point. remember that back in time, even up to the early 90s, fuel economy suffered due to a lack of technology compared to the late 90s on up. even early EFI systems suffered in comparison to today.

for instance, my 83 grand marquis 5.0 CFI rarely topped 10 mpg and that was on the freeway. my current 05 grand marquis regularly hits 17 around town, with the a/c on. and a big part of that is not only the MAF system, but the coil on plug and the sefi system working together to tune each cylinder individually. my 83 had none of that.

on the other hand my 66 mustang with a 600cfm holley carb would turn in 25 mpg on the freeway. and it even had the wrong cam for the overall combination.
Not really. The poster I quoted is comparing apples to oranges.
I'm talking about splicing apples (old power houses) with oranges (modern fuel injection and tighter tolerances along with reducing parasitic drag).

Most of those 60s and 70s small and big blocks have tons of room for improvement.
First things I do is take weight out of cranks, knife edge counter weights to cut through oil, scrap the dished pistons and go for much tighter piston to wall clearances when boring and honing. Install Teflon coated short skirt and depending on what direction I want to go whether I want a rev monster or a cruiser/tow pig change rods based on length. Balanced to within a tenth of a gram.

The 331s (327 bored .030 over) I built for my stock cars could pull 9k through a GM Canadian factory high rise and 2bbl Rochester.

The biggest thing is a lighter rotating assembly. Crank, pistons, rods, flywheel and balancer. Followed by cam, working the heads-porting and milling, piston profile.

With an aftermarket fuel injection system that included a crank and cam position sensor, knock sensor, programmable PCM/ECU, aluminum AFR heads static compression being around 11:1 that same short block that would drink 115VP go go juice, would run just fine on 87 octane, even better on 93, installed in a 72 Z28 achieve 26mpg regularly.
With a 4bbl, 461 fuelie heads, distributor, 10mpg on VP.

Carburetors flow fuel constantly. Ignition dwell is set for optimal performance at a given RPM range. This was done via chassis dyno 5 gas analyzer in the exhaust and timing light.
The fuel injection system I installed, the injectors shut off on decel. The injector dwell and on time were adjustable, same with ignition dwell. Actually ignition dwell and fuel tables were damn near infinitely adjustable based upon multiple factors, from mass air flow readings to 02 sensor readings to knock sensor readings crank and cam signal calculating engine load. The ECU calculated MOST of the inputs. I merely had to fine tune it.

Throwing an electric cooling fan in that had a coolant temperature sensor built into the thermostat housing, adding an electric water pump, manual steering the only thing being driven by the crank was the cam. Where the distributor would reside was a plug.

26mpg cruising at 60mph out of a 600hp small block that could pull 9k rpm... with a T10 4 speed going to 3:73s out back on factory sized 15s, that's impressive. That's with a radical camshaft profile too compared to what would have been factory... had I had a T56 instead of a T10 behind it or a gear vendors double overdrive unit it would probably be 28+ as it would be cruising at just above idle opposed to 1800rpm.

If there were a way to phase the camshaft and a way to deactivate 4 cylinders based upon engine load, 30+

Chevys ecotec 5.3 and 6.2 do this-reduce to 4 cylinders have cam timing adjusted on the fly, direct injection, high compression.
They really have alot of power to unlock just by tuning alone.

Example below.


53 hp with just a straight piped exhaust, aftermarket intake, and tuning.
Sounds similar to mine. Mine is louder. No cats x pipe to twin 2 and 3/4 tips exiting at each corner of the rear bumper. She barks.

Never mind what these things do when filled with E85
E85 alone in Stock trim results in a big increase in power. if they repeated that run with E85-easily 80hp above factory stock trim.

Playing with ignition, injection and cam timing... with high compression....
Impressive numbers can be acheived. Start playing with cam profile, seek a custom intake manifold and exhaust...

I think it was lingenfelter who plays primarily with corvettes developed a supercharger system for these trucks and reported with just the factory exhaust, their supercharger and intake system, they attained 700hp with factory exhaust and stock camshaft on E85 and 500+ on 87 or 91... can't remember.
There's more companies now that build supercharger systems for these engines that make insane power.

Modern small block Chevys are the master race for longevity and insane power.

Example below. The world's fastest method lab.
Dude a LQ4 6.0 commonly found in 3/4 ton trucks and vans...
A turbocharger
End result?
A winnebago lifts the front end at WOT
I can't help but laugh hysterically at this thing.


And then there's hotrod magazines mighty mouse. What they thought was a 5.3... turned out to be a 4.8
Their junkyard shootout to test to see which of the big 3 produces mod friendly foundations and to see how much power a junkyard sourced history unknown engine can take before scattering...
Over 60 runs were made at and above 1,000hp. With a rust Ridge in a cylinder.
Just a cam. Ported heads. Opened the ring gaps and brought on the boost and fuel.


If you wanted, you really could Retrofit the old, with most of the new...
Just depends on how much money you have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 06-09-2019, 09:43 AM
Location: PSL
8,231 posts, read 2,204,325 times
Reputation: 2936
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
I agree 100%, I rebuilt a Yanmar 3 cyl diesel from an mid 90s commercial outfront mower, that little engine was putting about close to 36hp and could probably have been brought up to around 50hp without too much hassle or loss. It could have easily powered a small daily driver, did I mention how indestructible these engines are?!! I have no idea what kind of MPG it would get put into a daily driver on the roads, but I bet it would be close to 70 Mpg +.

I also had this Yanmar running totally clean, no black smoke at all, didnt leak or burn oil either.
I was building 7.3s 6.0s and 6.4s that made very very impressive numbers. Not a single one of the 6.0s or 6.4s even made a bit of haze 7.3s on the other hand... they have what I call dumb PCMs.
HEUI injection from 7.3s... think of it like this...
It's that odd cousin who shows up to a wedding with a mullet aviators and in a tuxedo printed T shirt who can't help but drool and slobber... nice guy... will do anything for anyone. Strong. But not the brightest drinks and smokes. Alot. Has some potential.

6.0 HEUI injection system is a bit more refined, like the slobbering loudmouth older cousin. Doesn't drink as much. Doesn't smoke. Has alot of potential.

6.4 common rail is the stock broker/PhD. Very refined. Lots of potential.

I have trucks in the northeast NY MA CT NJ VT that are still running to this day unless they've rotted away, that push 600hp 800+ft lbs of torque at the least, on up to dyno destroying 1500hp 2000+ft lbs of torque. Daily driven. Not so much as a haze from the exhaust.
The guys that own them, run them at sled pulls in county fairs and drag race them on weekends. Can usually be found towing equipment and materials monday-friday.

When you see a 8k+ pound crew cab 3/4-1 ton truck embarrass "muscle cars" in the quarter mile. and not even so much as a haze exiting the exhaust... that's impressive.

Had I remained in NY I would have played more with 6.7s... however 6.7s have tiny rods compared to the 6.0s and 6.4s... I wouldn't have pushed those too hard...

Shame the general public is ignorant and fears diesels. If high MPGs is what one seeks. If high miles and longevity is what one seeks. Coupled with clean exhaust.

Ditch the trashcan of doom that Destroys Pickups Fast and the EGR system. Fine Tune it on a dyno. Mid to high 20 mpgs+ out of heavy pigs with the aerodynamics of a brick.
What the general public does not understand with diesels is if the focus is made upon the combustion event, to maximize the absolute most complete combustion. Emissions are reduced. Same with gasoline. The side effect is increased power output. Couple increased power output with rapid acceleration to cruising speed followed by barely any throttle to maintain said cruising speed. MPGs increase. Drastically.

I've proven it with scan tools running datalogger. Most of the complaints when 6 speed autos came out were from boomers who have grown complacent to 3 and 4 speed auto slush boxes. 99% of warranty concerns that forced Ford Motor company to update PCM strategy, came from baby boomers who made such ridiculous claims as
"Muh transmission is falling out of this thing!"
"It's constantly hunting for gears!"
"It's gonna blow my motor!"
"Check the vacuum servo! And kick down cable"

wait what?

I'd drive their 5.0 or ecoboost F150 and not have any issue what so ever. Adaptive strategy. I could not repeat their concerns. Not a single time could I ever repeat their concerns. Then again. I don't drive like I'm driving miss daisy.

But when I'd drive like they did. Dogging it to cruising speed... especially up a grade?
Oh yeah. BANG and get violent down shifts with it revving to the moon.
When I'd have some ride shotgun and show them how I drive and can't get it to repeat their concerns? They would scream and shout and tell my service manager to fire me for I beat their status symbol like it owed me money. ESPECIALLY when I showed the ecojunk owners how to achieve higher MPGs...

Gone are the days of cast iron cranks that can't hold up. Gone are the days of loose tolerances that result in severely worn internals.
If. IF I can blow your chit up in Stock form? That thing left the assembly line with something loose or deformed.

Bring up data logger. Show ignition dwell. Show knock count. Show grams per milisecond. Mass fuel desired. Mass air flow. 02 and other PID data.
Show them what being thrifty at the pump using craptastic 87 octane yeilds coupled with their driving habits vs mine. Then have them bring it back on empty and fill it with 91 or 93 and repeat the same.
Just changing their driving habits alone hand calculated picked up 2-5mpg and didn't result in transmissions downshifting from 6th with the torque converter locked to 2nd or 3rd. I give credit where credit is due, Lexus. The Lexus ISF was the first vehicle I know of, that actually rev matched down shifts. Had Ford done the same for the F150? Boomers complaints would have been non existent and Ford would have saved a ton of money with warranty pcm updates and paying for diag.

The boomer is old fashioned. They do not know modern vehicles are fuel injected and refined. They still think pumping a gas pedal will aid in cold starts LOL
Gas pedals are merely a lever connected to a switch! LOL there is no throttle cable. No carburetor! But they will insist their carburetor is out of whack...

See back in their day... they grew up with a glorified toilet atop of an intake manifold that constantly burned fuel and constantly had spark events at TDC whether accelerating or decelerating.
Their automatic transmissions were primitive at best. 2 speed power glides, 3 speeds and 4 speed slush boxes that had vacuum and mechanical linkages to increase line pressure and yeild a desired shift point.

Modern vehicles? It's all done based upon inputs and calculated load.
One thing the boomer hates most? Feeling upshifts.
This is why modern pickup trucks kinda suck. They're built to appease boomers.
Muh soft seamless shifts.
See.... they lost their land yacht status symbols. The Cadillac Deville the Lincoln Town car.
So they buy fully loaded half ton crew cab pickups. Lazy boy recliners for front seats. Rear leg room ample for leggy 6ft+ tall foxy models. Faux leather and heated/air conditioned seats.

They are the squekiest wheel. They get the grease.
So as a result... manufacturers concentrate on meeting CAFE EPA and boomers driving miss daisy.
They are literally trying to do too many things all at once resulting in premature transmission failure.
Duty cycle the solenoids.
Lower line pressure and holding pressure.
Massage clutches etc instead of full on/off engagements. God forbid Marv and Ethel feel an up shift! Clutches get spanked. Internals prematurely wear. Transmission fluid temperature rises... Transmission filters clog with clutch material from both torque converters and internal clutch packs...

Both GM and Ford 6 and now 8 and 10 speed automatics are great as is. But. They're neutered through factory programming to get
1. Increased MPGs per .gov mandates.
2. Soft seamless shifts.
3. Terrible application of clutches bands and sprags.

Don't take my word for it. Get scan tools with the ability to log data and see for yourselves. Then change your driving habits and compare contrast.
You'll find when you bog around p*ssy footing to desired cruising speed consumes far more fuel than wide open throttle followed by barely any pressure on the long skinny one on the right as you've
1. Got up to speed in a shorter time and distance
2. Locked torque converter sooner and decreased mass fuel desired
3. Remained at cruising speed for a longer period of time with a light load.
This is most noticeable for both the ecoboost and any V8 half ton pickup. Be it Ford Mopar or GM.

V6 chitbox pickups are gas hogs. Regardless what the rear differential and tire/wheel combo is. They're constantly "working" trying to move a hefty vehicle. Never mind towing and hauling. I've had a very loyal customer from western MA. He owned a fleet of trucks for his employees to use. His personal truck a 2010 6.4 king ranch that I built to the hilt for, he complained most of his fleet pickups couldn't average better than 15mpg. ALL were a mix of Fords, GMs, and Mopars with V6s. He didn't want to supply them with V8s thinking they'd beat the crap out of them and do burnouts etc. Which is a legitimate concern I could have sympathized with.
Those trucks averaged 80 miles per day mostly on the highways.

When he traded them up to V8s as I had suggested...
His fords were traded up to 5.0s
Chevy and GMCs to 5.3s
Mopars up to 5.7s and a couple 6.4s.
All rubber floors vinyl bench seats manual transfer cases. He noticed an increase to an average of 18mpg.

And then there's the curious case of econoboxes and midsized sedans.
With how I drive? I get a best of 15mpg out of a modern 4 pot and v6 sedan.
Those in theory should yield far higher than that but don't... I wonder if the weight and lack of power has anything to do with that? Just like V6 camaros chargers challengers and mustangs.
Some engines are simply inherent gas hogs like the 4.0 that was shoved in every Ranger and Explorer.
The older 3.8s in mustangs. I proved that one to my father when he wanted to buy my mother a mustang convertible for their anniversary. Back when it was either a 3.8 or 4.6... the 3.8 was a gas pig. The 4.6 sipped gas.
Momma got a GT convertible in 03 and again in 08.
Pops wanted a toy. He bought an SSR.
I built my toys. And because he had a convertible pickup... well I had to have one too.
85 C10 meets sawzall.

No roof. No roll cage. No fear. I could out corner 911s at limerock with it. Got the boot from there and Lebanon valleys drag strip for running a faster time than permitted without a roll cage

If you couldn't tell by now...
Engines. Transmissions. Differentials. Firearms. All things mechanical are my thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-09-2019, 11:27 AM
10,607 posts, read 2,710,396 times
Reputation: 7191
Originally Posted by NY_refugee87 View Post
We can't have military hummers to drive on the roads.
But absolutely can have FloridaMan mobiles with black garbage bags in place of what once was a window. Missing fenders inoperable lights...
Register a military hummer? Not only no. But hell no.

I don't get it...

I love Florida. But that one is derp jackpot.
Just thought Id mention, the only reason why there are restrictions against registering and driving former military Humvees on the streets, is because AM General thought it would potentially threaten their civilian Humvee sales.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-09-2019, 12:30 PM
Location: PSL
8,231 posts, read 2,204,325 times
Reputation: 2936
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
Just thought Id mention, the only reason why there are restrictions against registering and driving former military Humvees on the streets, is because AM General thought it would potentially threaten their civilian Humvee sales.
Hummer has been dead for years though...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-09-2019, 10:36 PM
10,607 posts, read 2,710,396 times
Reputation: 7191
Originally Posted by NY_refugee87 View Post
Hummer has been dead for years though...
The H2 and H3 have been dead...but not the H1 Hummers (the ones that are actually military grade Humvees), those are still made by AM General and still sell for a bundle new!

I had a neighbor that was looking into buying a surplus military Humvee years ago, it was incredibly difficult to do, for awhile the military were torching holes in the engine blocks and cutting the hummers into 4 halves, only then could they be sold to the public as surplus. He claimed this was all done because AM General did not want the competition for its high end civilian models, although most of the people buying the surplus military hummers, only wanted to use them for their off road capabilities and had no interest in the ultra luxury H1 Alpha versions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-09-2019, 11:34 PM
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,075 posts, read 13,598,798 times
Reputation: 22136
Originally Posted by Ultor View Post
Since their power to regulate comes from an EPA edict, California will compromise eventually.
No, it's actually a congressional edict:

The Clean Air Act empowers the EPA to regulate air pollution from motor vehicles. To promote uniformity, the law generally bars states from regulating car emissions.

But when the Clean Air Act was passed, California was already developing innovative laws and standards to address its unique air pollution problems. So Congress carved out an exemption. As long as California’s standards protect public health and welfare at least as strictly as federal law, and are necessary “to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions,” the law requires the EPA to grant California a waiver so it can continue to apply its own regulations. California has received numerous waivers as it has worked to reduce vehicle emissions by enacting ever more stringent standards since the 1960s.

Other states can’t set their own standards, but they can opt to follow California’s motor vehicle emission regulations. Currently, 12 states and the District of Columbia have adopted California’s standards.
I don't think Trump can overturn laws on his own yet, can he?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-09-2019, 11:42 PM
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,075 posts, read 13,598,798 times
Reputation: 22136
Originally Posted by Ultor View Post
They will back off... they won't take the chance of losing their regulatory powers in a court action.
A court action can't undo a congressional action, the California exemption is part of the clean air act passed by congress in 1990:

The Clean Air Act says that if a state had adopted equally- or more-stringent standards on auto emissions before March 30, 1966, that state may make more-stringent standards than the EPA. California is the only state that satisfies this provision. The provision requires California to get a “waiver” from the EPA, but the EPA can deny California only under certain conditions. To deny California, the agency will have to stray from precedent because California has been issued this waiver as a matter of course in the past. Alternatively (and more drastically), Congress can re-legislate and remove this exemption for California from the Clean Air Act. If that happens, environmental groups surely will seek an even higher authority to sue, which would have to be on Constitutional grounds (see Juliana v. United States, Judicial column).

The California Air Resources Board sets rules on emissions of greenhouse gases (auto emissions) for the State of California. Because the market for automobiles is dependent on California drivers, the result of California’s special status is that automakers end up complying with California’s more stringent standards for all of the autos they make for the nation. In the current regulations (2012 EPA and DOT Joint Regulations), the California Air Resources Board and the federal agencies (the EPA and DOT) have cooperated on making standards.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-09-2019, 11:46 PM
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,075 posts, read 13,598,798 times
Reputation: 22136
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
well the states can either adopt the california standards, or the federal standards, or fall somewhere between the feds and cali.
That's true, but if Trump rolls back federal standards do you really think that auto manufacturers are going to roll out two versions of every car, one that satisfies the California standard required in 13 states and another for the other states?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-10-2019, 06:04 AM
Location: Long Island
33,039 posts, read 13,940,344 times
Reputation: 7034
Many good reasons not to roll back the EPA requirements even if you don't believe in climate change. This will be worked out in rulemaking, the car manufacturers want something less than the current regulations but they didn't expect this drastic action.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top