Re: 318 to 273 Problems
[Re: stumpy]
#886663
12/25/10 01:02 AM
12/25/10 01:02 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,424 Kalispell Mt.
HotRodDave
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,424
Kalispell Mt.
|
I agree that he is wrong, I even came up with a very scientific test to prove it, he has not tried it nor has he come up with any evidence or test to prove his "theory" or disprove the facts. The fact is if you hook a vaccume gauge to your engine it will still have very high vaccume at 70mph cruise speeds because the typical automotive engine is way more power than is needed for that operation.
I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!
|
|
|
Re: 318 to 273 Problems
[Re: stumpy]
#886665
12/25/10 05:33 AM
12/25/10 05:33 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,576 Sarcoxie, MO, USA
MoPar Jamie
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,576
Sarcoxie, MO, USA
|
Mom's '93 Dakota got the same or worse mileage than my old ;95 318 truck. My truck would run circles around it, they were basically the same truck, extended cab 2wd autos. Her truck has manual windows and locks however.
I'll take the 318 over the V6 any day.
- MoPar Jamie
1972 Fury III 4dr 1986 D-150 LWB Royal SE
|
|
|
Re: 318 to 273 Problems
[Re: HotRodDave]
#886666
12/25/10 09:31 AM
12/25/10 09:31 AM
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 15,487 Florida
scratchnfotraction
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 15,487
Florida
|
so stumpy agrees that yall disagree but you still feel you do not agree that you disagree I remember a poster of Archie Bunker,it read "in his own mind,he knows he is right" sounds like you are the same way at least stumpy went half way to agree to disagree,so you most likly will not agree with anyone unless the say you are correct and agree with you I think to agree that you disagree would be the end of it hard to be humble when you know your right in your own mind and wont agree to disagree and move on sometimes I guess
Last edited by scratchnfotraction; 12/25/10 09:33 AM.
|
|
|
Re: 318 to 273 Problems
[Re: scratchnfotraction]
#886669
12/25/10 10:40 AM
12/25/10 10:40 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Owned a 67' Cuda with the 273 Commando Engine and 4-speed. Great car!! Down on power compared to a 68' with a 340, BUT I knocked down over 21-22mpg on the road. Always kept the motor in a good state of tune. Now compared to my ex-car 79' Chrysler Lebaron Coupe with the "Lean Burn" 318 and 3speed auto w/lockup converter, mileage was different. Besides the 318 being smog-laden, it too was down on power. it had VERY good road manners but I couldn't seem to get out of the high teens' in on road mileage. I took the black box out (lean burn module troublesome) and put the hi-po ignition on it. Pickup speed was improved a lot but mileage was pretty much the same. If I drove a 50-55 with the cruise on for LONGER trips (level roadways out west), I'd notice almost NO difference from my 'Cuda. The 'Cuda ran at 60-65 on the road. Had NO problems with it as long as it was tuned (Had a mechanical cam in it) and the AFB performed flawlessly!!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 318 to 273 Problems
[Re: HotRodDave]
#886670
12/25/10 11:44 AM
12/25/10 11:44 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
Mabey he has a bad 318 in his truck and happens to have a good 273 sitting around. Mabey he just wants better MPG and don't mind the performance hit, it could be lots of reasons.
He will get better miledge and it will take longer to get an equal sized load going. My 239 in my dakota gets way better miledge than my 318 dakota even towing a 67 cuda on a flat bed but it was working a lot harder going up mountain passes. As a matter of fact the little motor truck only got one MPG less loaded than the V8 did un loaded.
As for the converter you can get one made with the small hub and regular 904 guts. You could also swap cranks.
I guess the argument goes back to the AGE OLD comparision of balance between HORSEPOWER vs. TORQUE. Throw into the mix: BSFC, Vehicle weight, gearing, tire/front end science, C of G, and so on and so forth, and you have ENDLESS possibilities on the mileage/power factor. YOU BOTH are RIGHT in your RESPECTIVE ways, since there are no CONCRETE standards to base the "theories" on. Everything Detroit builds is based on a COMPRIMISE, and IF you guys still are at odds, settle this at the TRACK. AT least there you can have a laugh or two, as well as BRAGGING RIGHTS!! A MERRY CHRISTMAS and HAPPY NEW YEAR to all!! And God Bless us, every one!!
Last edited by HYPER8oSoNic; 12/25/10 11:48 AM.
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 318 to 273 Problems
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#886671
12/25/10 01:30 PM
12/25/10 01:30 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,826 NY usa
540challenger
master
|
master
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,826
NY usa
|
Quote:
Quote:
Mabey he has a bad 318 in his truck and happens to have a good 273 sitting around. Mabey he just wants better MPG and don't mind the performance hit, it could be lots of reasons.
He will get better miledge and it will take longer to get an equal sized load going. My 239 in my dakota gets way better miledge than my 318 dakota even towing a 67 cuda on a flat bed but it was working a lot harder going up mountain passes. As a matter of fact the little motor truck only got one MPG less loaded than the V8 did un loaded.
As for the converter you can get one made with the small hub and regular 904 guts. You could also swap cranks.
I guess the argument goes back to the AGE OLD comparision of balance between HORSEPOWER vs. TORQUE. Throw into the mix: BSFC, Vehicle weight, gearing, tire/front end science, C of G, and so on and so forth, and you have ENDLESS possibilities on the mileage/power factor. YOU BOTH are RIGHT in your RESPECTIVE ways, since there are no CONCRETE standards to base the "theories" on. Everything Detroit builds is based on a COMPRIMISE, and IF you guys still are at odds, settle this at the TRACK. AT least there you can have a laugh or two, as well as BRAGGING RIGHTS!! A MERRY CHRISTMAS and HAPPY NEW YEAR to all!! And God Bless us, every one!!
Unless it is a 318 magnum the 273 "if it is the 4bbl version should be very clost to the horse/torque power of 318 heck even the 2bbl version would be close enough to the 72 and after 318 you won't see and big difference just drive and enjoy. The guy before me put a 273 4bbl in my challenger and it drove fine and plenty of power to move on a side note it was no 1/4 street fighter but niether is a 318
|
|
|
Re: 318 to 273 Problems
[Re: 540challenger]
#886672
12/25/10 05:34 PM
12/25/10 05:34 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Mabey he has a bad 318 in his truck and happens to have a good 273 sitting around. Mabey he just wants better MPG and don't mind the performance hit, it could be lots of reasons.
He will get better miledge and it will take longer to get an equal sized load going. My 239 in my dakota gets way better miledge than my 318 dakota even towing a 67 cuda on a flat bed but it was working a lot harder going up mountain passes. As a matter of fact the little motor truck only got one MPG less loaded than the V8 did un loaded.
As for the converter you can get one made with the small hub and regular 904 guts. You could also swap cranks.
I guess the argument goes back to the AGE OLD comparision of balance between HORSEPOWER vs. TORQUE. Throw into the mix: BSFC, Vehicle weight, gearing, tire/front end science, C of G, and so on and so forth, and you have ENDLESS possibilities on the mileage/power factor. YOU BOTH are RIGHT in your RESPECTIVE ways, since there are no CONCRETE standards to base the "theories" on. Everything Detroit builds is based on a COMPRIMISE, and IF you guys still are at odds, settle this at the TRACK. AT least there you can have a laugh or two, as well as BRAGGING RIGHTS!! A MERRY CHRISTMAS and HAPPY NEW YEAR to all!! And God Bless us, every one!!
Unless it is a 318 magnum the 273 "if it is the 4bbl version should be very clost to the horse/torque power of 318 heck even the 2bbl version would be close enough to the 72 and after 318 you won't see and big difference just drive and enjoy. The guy before me put a 273 4bbl in my challenger and it drove fine and plenty of power to move on a side note it was no 1/4 street fighter but niether is a 318
, but why put the smaller motor in a HEAVY chassis car for the 1/4 mi jaunts anyway!! It makes better sense to run the LIGHTEST chassis as per rules in class or bracket racing. Anything goes for street usage, if it moves it, it's good. Heck they HAD slant sixes in trucks for years and really no one has complained. If they did, a larger motor swapped in cured the problem. The 318 is nothing to sneeze at for racing, it just lacks in the breathing dept. on the top end scale!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
|
|