I was watching yet another build on TV with yet another 500+hp SBC going in an expensive reconstruction. It was a bored 350 SBC with a CARBURETOR.

Yeah, I'd say Dennis is trolling for an arguement, and it never ends. Back in the 60's a V8 Chevy or Pontiac could get 25+ mpg on the highway hauling around 2 tons of metal. Put the torque of a V8 into a 2500lb car and you can gear it easily to get very respectable gas mileage, and no, it is not hard to build and maintain, and no, it is not obsolete, and yes GM,Ford, and Chrysler would go broke if they installed Edelbrock carbs with vacuum advance on their new cars because the need for expensive Dealer only service would be drastically cut. The same thing goes for all the other advanced electronics. This whole thing has to do with the big automakers making more money, not fuel efficiency.

Or do I need to say once again that my 1960 Fiat could get 59 mpg in 1960 with, yes, a carburetor, and it ran in all kinds of weather.

If I had the opportunity, a V8 would do great in my Fiero.

Arn

quote Originally posted by Oreif: Shipping weight of a 3900 is 404 lbs Shipping weight of a ZZ4 is 405 lbs Only difference between the two is the ZZ4 comes without carb and the 3900 has the entire intake and TB on it. The stock 3900 is only 240 hp per Pontiac's website. So 240/6 = 40 40* 8 = 320 hp So thanks for proving that a modern V-6 and a modern V-8 have nearly the same efficiency contrary to what the original author of this thread says. 3900 = 61.5 hp per liter LS2 = 66.6 hp per liter ZZ4 with a carb = 62.2 hp per liter Now these are normally aspirated, I'm sure Dennis will bring up boosted engines so: Cobalt SS 2.2L SC = 93 hp per liter XLR Northstar SC = 98 hp per liter

quote Originally posted by mploucha: Actually the cobalt SS supercharged is a 2.0L which raises it to 102.5 hp per liter and now theres the new 2.0L turbos in the new cobalt SS and solstice, etc pumping out 260 hp. or 130 hp. per liter. The 4 cyl. clearly won here. and with maybe 200 lbs. less weight and better weight distribution.

Just to throw out some ford love:
2.0L 170HP Zetec N/A used in the Focus SVT at 85 HP per Liter. Up to 2003 it was Fords highest specific output for a production motor. (I don't know about since 2003)

Just damn.

Drag it back from the dead, why dontcha.



As if there aren't enough new flame threads.

quote Originally posted by Arns85GT: Back in the 60's a V8 Chevy or Pontiac could get 25+ mpg on the highway hauling around 2 tons of metal.

I'd like some of what you're smoking.

Like Marilyn Manson said, "If you remember the 60's, you weren't really there."

quote Or do I need to say once again that my 1960 Fiat could get 59 mpg in 1960 with, yes, a carburetor, and it ran in all kinds of weather.

And your 1960 Fiat weighed... 1200 lbs? and had a 500 cc enigne? Was it even that big?

.

[This message has been edited by couldahadaV8 (edited 07-30-2008).]

My fuel injected 4.9 puts out less than 1/2 the emmissions as my V6. FieroChick's Carbed V8 is damn the same as her Fuel Injected V6.

------------------
85GT,93 Eldorado 4.9, 5spd Dual O2 Custom Chip, Custom Exhaust. MSD Everything Capt Fiero --- My Over View Cadero Pics Yellow 88GT 5spd Full Poly Suspension, Lowered 1/2" in front, Corner Carver.

OH NO! here we go again!
it can be whatever you want. IMO. go big!
it will all cost so you might as well get the most bang you can.

quote Originally posted by mploucha: Actually the cobalt SS supercharged is a 2.0L which raises it to 102.5 hp per liter and now theres the new 2.0L turbos in the new cobalt SS and solstice, etc pumping out 260 hp. or 130 hp. per liter. The 4 cyl. clearly won here. and with maybe 200 lbs. less weight and better weight distribution.

please keep it apples to apples. Boosted engines vs non-boosted is a no-no. If we boost the v8 it's HP per liter goes up too Although not making 130hp per liter the new LS9 is making around 103 per liter.

http://www.digitalcorvettes...=1022912#post1022912

This is only at 10.5 max boost as well. If you took it up to what the turbo 2.0 was pushing (18 psi) i bet the power per liter would be very similar.

------------------

ARCHIES JUNK IS FASTER THAN SHAUNNA'S JUNK
12.3 is faster than a 13.2

Why have big HP/Torque if you dont have a trans that can use it 100% and put it to the ground. Just a thought!!

quote Originally posted by MstangsBware: Why have big HP/Torque if you dont have a trans that can use it 100% and put it to the ground. Just a thought!!

4t65Ehd

------------------

ARCHIES JUNK IS FASTER THAN SHAUNNA'S JUNK
12.3 is faster than a 13.2

quote Originally posted by Will: And your 1960 Fiat weighed... 1200 lbs? and had a 500 cc enigne? Was it even that big?

Actually the Fiat was an 850, much the same size as the modern Suzuki Swift in hp and weight. Less hp due to lower compression etc. but not far off. Both cars have similar gas mileage.

As far as mpg, I didn't test my first car, a 1957 Plymouth flathead 6, but I did test my father's car, a 1960 Olds with a 315 hp 394ci engine. It got 22 mpg at 70 mph. But, that car was by any standard a tank. The Chevies of that year were capable of 25+ mpg with the SBC. The Chevies by today's standards were all tanks also, just not as big a tank as the Olds.

You really had to drive those cars to understand that today's cars are not that much better in the engine department. Way better in the suspension department, and way, way better in the stereo department.

Arn

quote Originally posted by FIEROPHREK: 4t65Ehd

Good answer BUT look at all the SBC/LSX/L-67 motors that are still on stock Fiero trans. What a waste.

I don't know much about cars and all their fancy components. What with the modular regurgitator transfunctioners and high performance sag reducers. But I've kind of got the best of both worlds right now. I've got a stock V6 in my 85 SE and a 72 LT1 in my 87 GT. You'd think that the V6 would be getting much higher gas mileage than the V8. I have yet to find out exactly how many MPG it gets and all that good stuff, but honestly, I think they're pretty close. Let's say the V6 is getting around 28-30 (like some sites/people have claimed the stock V6 gets, probably less cause its transmission is fussy) and the V8 is getting around 18-20 MPG. I'm poor, barely making ends meet and I hardly notice the difference. That's like if you have a fat son and a skinny son. You don't favor one for being better on food.

And as for weight. The difference between the two is around 80 LBS (apparently, could be wrong.) The V8 has Herb Adams suspension in it which is fairly new, but I'd say the V8 handles better than the V6. Which could be largely due to the fact that it's been bagged to shiitake and has had a tough life. But still, minimal differences. I know this is about 3800SC's, and I've also driven one of those in a Grand Prix GTP and it just doesn't have the same feeling as a V8 (for me).

In the end, I may be paying more for gas in the V8, but I have fun driving it, which is what it all boils down to. If you have fun driving your V6 398040 RFQ SC NA Turbo, then by all means, praise it. Odds are, the seriousness of these minimal differences between the 3800 and any V8, in weight, speed and gas mileage aren't that huge of a deal unless you make a living on racing and have 89 children to feed and 4 hungry wives.

You only live once, and if you let gas prices control what you really want to do with your vehicles, you might as well just drive a Focus or something. (Not knocking a Focus, I love shouting "CALL DAD!" at them.)

Seems like the light weight all aluminum LS1,6,2,3,7 or any of the other all aluminum GM V8s would get pretty good gas milage if driven right. My 02 WS6 Trans am auto, before any mods, was getting about 25-26 mpg. Not to mention the ones claiming 30-32 mpg from 6-speed cars. These cars weigh anywere from 3350 to about 3600 lbs if memory serves me right. The Fiero weighs what 2700-2900 right? Keep your foot out of it and drive like your driving a grannymobile it would probably get pretty good milage. No I haven't got anything bad to say about any swap. Just do what you want to do. Me, I'm going with a 3.4 DOHC in mine just because I want to.

Vinny