macertheracer

Hello all: I just purchased a Cherry 1991 RS today for $750 it is almost spotless, one bad rust spot, one rip in the interior. Lots of little Sh--tuff worn out, fan switch, AC fan, tilt loose, ... She has 205k on the register, and was a 45 year old Lady's pride and joy,and she had all the recipts for every dollar spent on it since it was 2 years old. now on to the motor, it does run strong, I pusshed it to 90 clicks on test drive. but is kind of noisy, lifters, and possably an injector. I am in the planning stages, but I would like to put a 3.8 in her for better millage. any input on this idea? and before you all start with the V8 argument, I have a 1988 Convertible that is getting the "fun" V8 treatment. this one is going to be my millage car since I drive 100 clicks a day round trip. but what a cool millage driver, bling bling all the way to the bank. imports eat your heart out!

macertheracer

i had a crazzy idea today!! how about a 250ci inline 6 with TPI ??? the 250 got 24mpg with a down draft carb, I wonder what fuel injection would do for it???

camaronewbie

I know you mentioned the V8 arguement - but ...
If 24mpg is good in your book, my stock 305 TBI got 30+ on the highway, and my stock 1997 LT1 gets 27mpg highway (both auto's, both had 2.73 gears - and although the 305TBI is a dog, the LT1 is amazingly fun). It's more in the foot, and the gears, than it is in the cylinders. Anyway, the point is - fun and mileage can be had in the same car.

Now some will argue it has alot to do with induction as well, and I agree to a point. But when a 60's Beetle with no emissions and no great technology gets 43+ mpg and a new FI Beetle only gets 30mpg, something's wrong with the "technology".

But it's your ride - YOU do to it what makes you happy!

Atilla the Fun

I somewhat agree both ways. My '97 Bonneville 3.8L did kiss 35 mpg, but I've had carbureted 350s exceed 25 mpg. For now, just do maintenance on your LG3, it should average better than 25 mpg, depending on your driving style. The money you save by not swapping will buy an awful lot of gas. Keep the car cherry, and search for a '96-up Camaro or Firebird. They're better in every way. Better front suspension, better ergonomics, 4-wheel anti-lock brakes, available traction control, better looks, better aero, better to commute in. Especially in the snow. And the 3.8L is already there.

macertheracer

ya I guess you are right on the V8 point, after all I am a gear head. I've had 305's in two station wagons, that got 25 to 27mpg, just didnt want to be down to long. I need it for my 40k a year driver. as for the 4th gen, some of us will argue with you, I personally do not like them, but I graduated in '79 :-) the 80's were way cool when I served in the Navy. I guess I'll have to process it all.

Guest

even better. Commute in a car you can tolerate, but you wouldn't cry over if some other bonehead driver totalled it, save the cars you love for when traffic isn't as dense, in either sense of the word :-)

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

It ain't the technology. It's the regulations - i.e., safety and emissions. Then there's creature comforts and performance expectations (who would be a "new" 1949 Beetle DD today?). Remove those constraints from the new FI Beetle, and you're talking 50+ mpg.

And, it's a lot more than induction. Combustion chamber technology, cam technology, friction reduction measures all contribute to efficiency. The 250 I6 is dead in the water by comparison (to say nothing about what you would have to do to the hood to clear the front corner of a 250).

Guest

If you want a 250, consider instead swapping in a 4.2L straight six from a late model Chevy Trailblazer. It's alot like the LSx, including aluminum block, efficient heads, et cetera, but the demand is low, so these can be found with under 50,000 miles for around $500, complete. You'd be the first to put one in a third gen. These engines are good well past 200,000 miles, too!