Ask the Car People.SM


Project Cars--You Get to Vote on "Hold 'em or Fold 'em"

25623 messages,  Last post on May 10, 2013 at 9:03 AM

You are in the Classic Cars Forum.

What is this discussion about? Classic Cars

Messages Page 2444 of 2563

#24427 of 25623 Re: Cutlass Supreme [texases] by gsemike

May 18, 2012 (10:23 am)

Replying to: texases (May 18, 2012 10:12 am)
I guess that's he's used up 5 gallons from the original tank. 15 mpg is more like it

#24428 of 25623 Re: Cutlass Supreme [texases] by andre1969

May 18, 2012 (10:43 am)

Replying to: texases (May 18, 2012 10:12 am)
This car was ordered with the optional 403 ci 4 barrel. It has a turbo 350 and an optional 2.41 posi rear end. Good for 20 mpg under normal driving speeds/conditions. "
 
The '78 LeSabre and Delta 88 are showing up on the EPA's database at 14 city/20 highway, with the 403 4bbl. They were full-sized cars, yet a touch lighter than the '77 Cutlass Supreme.
 
So, in gentle highway driving, in the right conditions, you might hit 20 mpg on occasion. But not on a consistent basis.
 
FWIW, my '76 LeMans, similar to that '77 Cutlass, but sporting a Pontiac 350-4bbl, THM350, and that same sucky 2.41:1 axle, almost got 18 mpg. Once, coming back from Carlisle. It got 16-17 on a few occasions, but the last time I took it on a trip, it got more like 15.8. Around town, I'm lucky to get 10.
 
But, the Olds engines were more efficient than the Pontiac engines, and cleaner running (one reason Pontiac V-8's went away), so it's possible a 403 would get better economy than my Pontiac 350 in a similar car. But I don't think it's going to be a huge difference.
 
BTW, I think that 2.41:1 axle is actually the standard ratio, not an option. In 1976, GM started putting the 2.41:1 as the standard ratio in most of their V-8 cars, in a vain attempt to get better economy. In '75, a 2.56:1 was the norm. However, I doubt they were putting that 2.41:1 in the small V-8's, like an Olds 260. At least, I hope not! Maybe they started reverting back to a different ratio by '77 though?

#24429 of 25623 Re: Looking around New Hampshire 1972 [andre1969] by hpmctorque

May 18, 2012 (2:58 pm)

Replying to: andre1969 (May 18, 2012 7:50 am)
Interesting about the horsepower comparisons, but how about torque?
 
My preference for the 360 also considered that the same Monaco with the 440 would cost more, and that would be especially true for the hi po 440. The latter is the only one that might stand a chance against, say, a recent model Accord or Altima V6, even on a straight road. I imagine the most powerful '72 Monaco 440 probably couldn't keep up with a new Challenger, Mustang or Camaro V6. Well, maybe it could, un. challenge the Challenger (ooh, I know that was really bad, but the devil made me write it).

#24430 of 25623 Re: Cutlass Supreme [texases] by ab348

May 19, 2012 (6:45 am)

Replying to: texases (May 18, 2012 10:12 am)
Not impugning the seller, but that listing leaves me with more questions than answers. Why would a dealer let a 1977 model new car sit unsold in an outside lot until 1993? I have never heard of such a thing. If it sat outside for 16 years why is the interior unfaded? Those GM red interiors of that era are notorious for that. Some of the other points make no sense either. I would be very wary of this car. It would have been far better to have been used rather than sitting.

#24431 of 25623 Re: Cutlass Supreme [ab348] by gsemike

May 21, 2012 (9:04 am)

Replying to: ab348 (May 19, 2012 6:45 am)
I was wondering the same thing. You'd think that by sometime in 78, there would be a bargain hunter on the lot and they'd just say let him have the 77 or someone in there looking at the 78 who declares, I just like the old one a lot more.

#24432 of 25623 Another Easy Restoration by Mr_Shiftright HOST

May 26, 2012 (9:03 am)

You have to hand it to some people for their sheer determination to bring back the dead:
 
"First Floor--Mens' Dept...Basement Level--MG Parts..."
 

#24433 of 25623 Re: Another Easy Restoration [Mr_Shiftright] by stickguy

May 26, 2012 (10:10 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 26, 2012 9:03 am)
probably easier than putting together a ferrari that was at the bottom of a lake.
 
here's another English whacko. Why buy them if you aren't going to drive them to just put them in a dusty old barn?
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/suffolk/8566881.stm

#24434 of 25623 Re: Another Easy Restoration [stickguy] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

May 26, 2012 (10:41 am)

Replying to: stickguy (May 26, 2012 10:10 am)
Aside from the Nissan Patrol and the Maser Quattroporto, I would have bulldozed the whole lot. Not very good taste in cars, that fellow. Picked mostly the wrong models.

#24435 of 25623 Re: Another Easy Restoration [Mr_Shiftright] by fintail

May 26, 2012 (11:26 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 26, 2012 10:41 am)
I don't know, the Khamsin can be pretty cool (if not prone to fall-apart), and the DeTomasos are good curios.
 
For that MG, that's not even a restoration, more like a re-creation using a pile of old parts. The British will restore stuff that would be scrapped or parted out elsewhere. Lots of "labour of love" ideals there.

#24436 of 25623 Re: Another Easy Restoration [fintail] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

May 26, 2012 (12:38 pm)

Replying to: fintail (May 26, 2012 11:26 am)
Nobody much wants a Khamsin and everybody wants a Pantera.

Messages Page 2444 of 2563

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement