260pos Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 Why go low compression? If you aren’t running emission controls on your motor, an l-16 with a small chamber head design and flattop pistons would give you greater efficiency. It’s the long duration cam that usually goes with it that kills your mileage. If you are paying $5.00 a gallon for fuel, $0.30 a gallon isn’t anything! Better mileage, more power. More NOx emissions are the only evil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 That's what I was saying. These engines were low compression stock, and people STILL get 30mpg out of them on carbs! I see no reason that a high compression, EFI L engine couldn't reach 40mpg if driven right. That's some pretty good mileage for the engine the car cam with 30+ years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
260pos Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 40 may be a stretch, but I imagine you could get to the mid-high 30's, look cool and still be all datsun. Smaller engines don't always equal better mileage, as you are likely to be heavier on the throttle! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowlerMonkey Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 I got 20mpg towing a 5x10 foot u-haul trailer with a 280zx turbo. The turbo failed so I removed the T fitting, unhooked the wastegate actuator, and slid a very thin shim between the drain and the tube to block exhaust gases. So it got 20mpg towing a trailer at 3400rpms with 7.4 to 1 compression, the exhaust wheel seized and the intake wheel rolling around in the housing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cockerstar Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 The RX7 presents interesting situations because of the relative height of the stock engine versus anything else. Also, I may well be mistaken, but I always thought the 2nd gen were kinda heavy..?? He DOES have an interesting point, and I have lost track at this point... but how married to the S30 concept are you? If you DO want to stick with an S30, then you need to start boning up on how to set the thing up aerodynamically, and there is no time like the present. the Aero sub-forum is a result of a group day done at a wind tunnel facility last summer, and MUCH data was gathered regarding different pieces and body kits used, and not all of it was at all intuitive. On the other hand... If *I* were to build my dream econo-sportster it would be either a CRX (sorry I like em anyhow) or really.. the REAL dream ecobox would be a Subaru XT. Specifically, a FWD, NA, 4 cyl, 1.8 liter 2+2, 2 door sports car, shaped like a wedge, with a drag coefficient of 0.29. Reports of this engine in a five speed, FWD sedan or wagon getting mileage of up to 40 mpg are considered reliable, reports of up to 50 are heard but usually the skeptics are skeptical of anything over 40. I haven't heard anyone say "*I* have a FWD 5 speed NA XT!! It gets such and such MPG city/highway!" yet. Everyone hears "Subaru" and thinks of AWD or 4WD but back in the 80's and before, the best selling point in many peoples opinions was economy. The NA 1.8s were usually all TBI; but the XTs actually came with a SPFI "spider" manifold and I *think* different cylinder heads but not substantially so. ALL of the vehicles that I refer to with above economy reports were TBI, or weber carburetors. It is an economy motor, 89hp/108tq IIRC. There WERE turbo 4's and an NA 6 cylinder, based on the same engine. You could get AWD in the car, some of them came stock with a problematic (but easy to swap out and not entirely difficult to repair, just $$) computer controlled air suspension.... Sorry, I have to make the full case for this car, since I have already started. Thus far I've talked about "economy Z motor," which is one subject that simply comes up ALOT in my family.. but this is MY "dream MPG sportscar," so now that I've started I'm just going to finish and let it sit So.. I don't know how easy it would be to put onto the XT, but the sedans and such were made with manual steering, so a manual rack for the car exists. 0.29 drag coefficient. An MPFI intake system exists, albeit with 1984 technology. Computer controlled Air suspension exists on some models, but is probably more trouble than it could be worth to fool with. Car weighs about 2500 pounds or so, weight CAN be shed. Engine in less aerodynamic vehicles, at about the same weight, with stock factory TBI and electronic ignition (nice, simple, easy to maintain hitachi stuff) achieves ~40 mpg or BETTER. Non-interference, 9.5:1 compression, run on low test stock, big bore, short stroke, torque-heavy, MPFI, megasquirted, SOHC 1.8 liter boxer four. In a vehcile that weighs 2200-2500 pounds, with a drag of 0.29. You could even swap out, say, a newer EJ18, and retain the stock transmission with use of a readily available adapter plate... I could go on............ wiki on the XT allright, I am done. Sorry to bump this thread with a bit of an off topic post, but I saw two XT's on my local craigslist for $250 and thought of this thread. One is turbo, and the other isn't. For this price I don't know how they're still around... http://kpr.craigslist.org/cto/990679846.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oddmanout84 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 skeptics are skeptical of anything over 40. Skeptics being skeptical? NO WAY!!! lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oddmanout84 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I'd have to agree with the people in this thread who say that this "Hypermiling" thing can be dangerous when taken too far. Its fine to save gas by not driving aggressively, coasting, being light on the gas/brakes and doing 55 like an old lady. When you start doing things like shutting your engine off while rolling, blowing through rest stops at high speed (and the EZpass lane) and dangerous things like that, it gets stupid. The risks are not worth saving the money on gas if you take this stuff too far. A lot of systems (including the brake booster on our cars) need to have the engine running to operate. If I want to save gas, I'll just drive passively and avoid burnouts at stoplights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowlerMonkey Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I used to work on subarus and someday there will be the last XT with non-cracked cylinder heads at a barrett jackson commanding high prices. The air suspension shocks are super expensive and dirt road driving guarantees a sharp rock will end up between the "bag" and shock which will hole it soon enough. They also have the worst shifter in the world and I still have scars just from shifting one with worn shifter hardware causing me to punch the radio........which is far less fun than punching the clown. They're damn fast and a bit more aerodynamic than the original subaru RX from the same time period but without the super rarity of the original RX pictured below. If any of you see one of these for sale......please let me know. If you are a subaru tech, go for it. If not, expect to pay and pay and pay to keep it on the road. If you already have a L series engine, go on over to the "small port heads" thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leon Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 The one above looks like the Acura Integra's ugly little brother, hehe! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 The one above looks like the Acura Integra's ugly little brother, hehe! The look grows on you like you wouldn't believe. Not to mention, the same thing could be said of the contemporary 200SX: and corolla AE86: and if you want to be quite brutal, they're ALL fugly but theyre fugly in a utilitarian way that has a GREAT deal of appeal. The appearance of a car is not a linear, good/bad scale of pretty and ugly.. And howler, I LOVED the pistol grip shifter in the XT, but I was a kid then so I naturally would have. my old man had one brand new, so the shifter bushings were fine. The cylinder head cracks arent inherently the death of the motor; I ran an EA82 with cracked cylinder heads for 70K miles before the trans quit. Although you're right, they ARE ALL cracked. I think that day was last thursday actually (har har, meaning, the day of which you spoke has already passed) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowlerMonkey Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Quick hijack. Hey daeron......have L28 mounted again in M30 and will have pics soon and writeup on mounts. I used the front sump from a first generation maxima and it clears fine with the engine low enough to have enough hood clearance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 3, 2009 Share Posted February 3, 2009 Yea, I love the S12 chassis 200SX. I'd take one over a Z31 any day. Good engine options, decent suspension to work with, decent aero, and light enough too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Yea, I love the S12 chassis 200SX. I'd take one over a Z31 any day. Good engine options, decent suspension to work with, decent aero, and light enough too! baby 300Z there is a guy who drives around in the area I deliver pizza with a super clean black 86 turbo 4-cyl 200sx.. ooompy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK-Z Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 BTW the subaru made a boxter 6 version, XT6. Had a turbo option and air ride adjustable suspension straight from the factory. As a matter a fact. I have a compressor pump out of one of then o_O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 BTW the subaru made a boxter 6 version, XT6. Had a turbo option and air ride adjustable suspension straight from the factory. As a matter a fact. I have a compressor pump out of one of then o_O After much laboring nd thought, my dad bought one of the XT6s new in 1989. His other alternative that he thought long and hard over: a brand new Z32. I STILL can't fight the old man's choice.. super-cool as the Z32 is/was.. the Soobie is/was just infinitely cooler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowlerMonkey Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 XT6 did not have turbo. The XT6 shares a distributor rotor with the Z31. That was the 1.8 liter XT 4 cylinder. The SVX would have been cool except for the bizarre little windows and the fact it weighed a ton.......and they shared a tranny with early pathfinders which never lasted too long. I loved the S12 except for one thing................the seat was so low you could feel if a penny had slid under it. I'd hate to run over some debris and have to explain ass damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 .......and they shared a tranny with early pathfinders which never lasted too long. REALLY??? wow. WOW. that pathy trans should be a series descendant of the auto gearboxes in the pickups, 240SXs, and trace it back far enough, the Z-cars as well, isn't it??? I wonder.. I have LONG suspected that soobie and datsun clutch discs would spline onto each other (certain older models specifically I looked up and the spline diameter and spline count was the same) and seriously.. This makes me wonder if you might be able to find a way to use a 4wd nissan pickup/pathy stickshift setup on an SVX using some sort of hybridized bellhousing or adapter plate, OR forget about the SVX, just snag the 3.3 liter, 280 horse box-six out of it and use it in... !????! this thread is so far gone.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK-Z Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 XT6 did not have turbo. I was corrected and they shared a tranny with early pathfinders which never lasted too long. WRONG- Pathfinders always had a front diff separate for the tranny. I just helped one my friends do a WRX 5 speed tranny swap on his SVX. SVX had the front diff inside the tranny, like all modern scoobys. REALLY??? wow. WOW. that pathy trans should be a series descendant of the auto gearboxes in the pickups, 240SXs, and trace it back far enough, the Z-cars as well, isn't it??? I wonder.. I have LONG suspected that soobie and datsun clutch discs would spline onto each other (certain older models specifically I looked up and the spline diameter and spline count was the same) and seriously.. This makes me wonder if you might be able to find a way to use a 4wd nissan pickup/pathy stickshift setup on an SVX using some sort of hybridized bellhousing or adapter plate, OR forget about the SVX, just snag the 3.3 liter, 280 horse box-six out of it and use it in... !????! this thread is so far gone.. The reasons for the similarities is because subaru and nissan have the same company machine their parts (fuji heavy industries). That is also why hyundai/kia have similar parts to mistubishi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straight6Z Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 I am going to have to agree with Daeron. I had a 85 200sx before I got my Z and I loved it. Actually it drove a lot like my Z does only a bit slower. Mine was CA20 powered. Unusual dual plug engine was kinda hard to find parts for so I had to let her go. She got great gas mileage when she ran right but my 82 sentra did even better on gas and it was carbed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowlerMonkey Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 WRONG- Pathfinders always had a front diff separate for the tranny. I just helped one my friends do a WRX 5 speed tranny swap on his SVX. SVX had the front diff inside the tranny, like all modern scoobys. No......not wrong.......I've rebuilt both because I worked at a nissan/subaru dealership and specialized in tranny rebuilds. The tranny is a 4EAT which also went into certain mazdas and fords. Regardless of the case and application, the transmission assembly is the same is still called a 4EAT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.