Jump to content
HybridZ

Ideas of a good 2nd car/dd


jonzzer

Recommended Posts

Like all of you I cant get enough of my Z, but with gas so high it is killing my enjoyment since ive been daily driving it. 8-9mpg is pretty bad by any standard. So, want do you guys drive as a dd or whats a good idea for around $2k? I have been looking into 1st gen 4runners, but still not good on gas. looking for something to have fun...camping in but still get over 20 mpg. not a big fan of econoboxes

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My stock 260Z is set up a bit rich, and will not break under 20mpg unless I'm racing or on the highway at an average speed over 100mph. And even then, it still gets 19mpg!!!

 

Normal commuting on the 60 FWY into L.A. at 65-85 for 50 miles averages 22-24mpg on premium.

 

If I get the time, there is an LD28 that is just calling to go into that 77 chassis I have in the back. That would average mid 40's for MPG...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I DD a 1973 Super beetle, It has its quirks and i'm running Dual Kadrons but the parts are super cheap and the gas mileage is decent depending on how I drive it. I get about 35 on the highway and about 15 in the city (not sure on that since I have tuned it since then and I drive it hard :D) and I drive maybe 6 miles a day back and forth to work otherwise it is a pretty awesome bullet proof DD until I finish the Z. I have been thinking about selling the Beetle and buying a Volvo 240 Wagon turbo, I have always had a soft spot for any kind of wagon plus something like this would be pretty cool.

 

Streetkarnage-2.jpg

Edited by 19762802+2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, my bus with a 1641 and Engle 110 Cam running Dual ICT's would be consistently in the 28-30mpg range freeway if I kept it at 55-65mph (which was BETTER than the 1500CC Single Port with the 28PICT single carb!!!)

 

Of course, commuting in SoCal at 75 consistently it got 24 and wouldn't go below that... In town it was a bit better than 15, but the ICT's are smaller than the Kadrons, and without a CW Crank I had to limit it to 4500-5000 going through the gears, and I'm sure that helps immeasurably on the mileage in-town compared to the 1776 I had in there with a CW Crank and 44IDF's! Running to 7500 between shifts in two tends to kill the off-highway mileage... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a 1500 Single Port the 62 Microbus with reduction gears will only go about 65mph tops anyway! Doing that, basically flatfooted from Tawas to Saginaw for a Ted Nugent Concert one summer, my mileage was about 24mpg (I still have the records actually...)And that was with 5 guys in the bus along with various accouterments de concertiphilia. It shocked me that I could put DUAL CARBS, a BIGGER engine, and get BETTER gas mileage at a HIGHER speed! (The bus would go 75+ with the 1641 and return as stated 24mpg. If I restricted it to the former driving speeds of 55-65 tops, the thing got 27mpg!!!)

 

The PICT should give you 20-24 between 50-60mph. Not as much as a Beetle for sure, but better than just about anything else with that kind of cargo capacity.

 

When I ran the gasoline heater during the winter, the mileage on the freeway went down 2mpg, which was acceptable to me because I like driving in a T-Shirt at -35 and watching all the guys bundled up in Down Coats in their Impalas and New Yorkers look at me with steam rising from their cups as I quaffed ice-cold Mt. Dew from the big styro cup from Forwards in Standish...

 

I used to transport juvenile offenders in that bus. The guys on Pasadena Street in Flint always got a charge out of the irony of miscreant youth being delivered in a Microbus. 'Hey man what did you do, trick them into that hippie bus then lock em up and take em here?' :P I have to admit, it probably was a pretty bizarre sight!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats what I have heard about the Dual carbs, Being better then the stock PICT, and like you I was going 65 tops when I got 35, On the journey home I did about 70-75 and I got 21mpg. I have no idea what has been done to my motor though. It was "rebuilt" five years ago and my parents didn't ask what had been done but so far I have found the heads are Gasket ported and it has the earlier 3 bolt cam gear on it (not fun to find out when you ordered a oil pump/filter that took a week to ship) and I believe it is a 1600CC motor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may have seen 65 once with a 30 mph tailwind! I must have needed a serious tune. Most of the time I was cruising 55 and still got crappy mileage. Course I was 17 and most of it was rigged.

 

My beetle hasn't hit 90mph before I swear.. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck yeah. You drive a super right? Should have macpherson struts, I've seen some german supers with 2110cc engines that were built to handle on a budget, and worked.

 

Yeah I have a Super, mine handles decent but I need to upgrade and replace everything since I'm poor because of my Datsun I just cut the springs and the ride is pretty rough,bottoms out, etc. It made a world of difference on the highway (didn't float at speed as much) though.

 

Anyways Sorry about the thread jack. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To add to the Threadjack one more time...

My 69 Beetle with H-1500 and PICT was an odd duck that got me REALLY interested in performance engineering.

VW said the top speed of that car was 75mph. I was like "B.S. it goes 90 EASY!" And it did.

 

Then I got curious, and did a tune up exactly to VW Specs (the biggest thing was doing the valve adjustment.) Took the car out to the same road and I'll be damned if the top speed wasn't EXACTLY 75 mph!!! :huh:

 

That was where I learned the duration difference caused by valve lash can be a contributor to horsepower---enough to get you almost 15mph more out of a stock VW Beetle (at the possible expense of burning your valves...)

 

It's why I laughed at the guy who railed on JeffP when he was talking about 0.001 or 0.002" lash difference significantly affecting valve timing events on the L-Engine. Little things insignificant like valve lash getting tight can really make performance boosts that add up.

 

From there, it went downhill fast: 1.25 rocker arms, Bugspray Holley, then a Zenith 32 NDIX...Webers, Dellortos, and within a year Turbochargers with big honkin' Holleys on them running 25 psi. It's where I learned why you use Case-Savers, and that detonation will actually blow a head off an engine. And once you put case savers in there, if you run 92mm pistons you better have a good set because splitting cylinders causes one hell of a strange noise that is hard as hell to trace down until you realize what it is...after that point, you know when you oops'd! :(

 

Yeah, 8MPG runing a big cam, centermount 48IDA... and even less than that when it was converted to run on straight ethanol. That was a strange experimental time... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am partial to the Swift, and the Turbo Swift. Not so much the 'partner clones'. Though the Geo Prizm seemed to be hardier than the Corrola in the year that I formerly had (93)...

 

I could put a Skoda 1.4 TurboDiesel, but we can't get those in the USA (Firefly, neither that's a Canada-Market Car not originally sold here.) Same goes for the Mini-Cooper Club Diesel, 60+mpg, but not available in the US of A.

 

For me personally a Suzuki Jeep of early 80's vintage (pre Samurai) with either the 800 or 550CC engine would be the greatest thing for around the neighborhood and short convenience trips.

 

But alas, it is not to be, outside of Guam that was not available in the USA either in that year. It's far to dangerous to have dontcha know. We must be protected from ourselves... :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's sad that these cars from the 80's could easily get over 50mpg but present day it's somehow a mystery. Even the pricey hybrids get 50 at best, Especially when they are completely capable of more but have some excuse as to why those aren't on the domestic market.

 

http://www.autoblog.com/photos/top-ten-epa-rated-fuel-sippers-1984-to-present/#3068345

 

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/topten.jsp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard stories of the hf getting 35-40 on the interstate.

 

Then that HF wasn't in tip top shape ;) . The EPA rated them at 42 city/50 highway. I've heard up to 60 highway.

But if a CRX isn't your style, a Civic VX hatch got about the same mileage (rated 1 or 2 mpg worse).

 

Of course, fanbois love them and they are hard to find cheap anymore.

 

So $2k, 20+mpg. non turbo Subaru? Esp. Impreza wagons. My WRX got about 18 in the city and up to 26 highway, n/a imprezas that weigh less should beat that, and 90s vintage ones sell pretty cheap, especially the 1.8 models.

My first 2 cars (MkII and MkIII Jettas) would beat that mileage too, but by now they would probably be more trouble than their worth...

I'm thinking a <95 Camry/Accord/Civic/Corolla would meet all your criteria (except camping, but they did make that Accord wagon...).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...