Classic Mustangs (Tech) Technical discussions about the Mustangs of yester-year.

Economical 1968?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 7, 2008 | 10:34 PM
  #11  
baddog671's Avatar
baddog671
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 5,736
From: MD/WV
Default RE: Economical 1968?

170ci manual would probably be best on fuel economy and period correct, and 200 next in line... IMO, i wouldnt be doing engine swaps and all that if your going for economy, all that work is going to cost more than youll be compensated by the gas
Old Jan 8, 2008 | 06:57 AM
  #12  
mustangmatt63's Avatar
mustangmatt63
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 744
From:
Default RE: Economical 1968?

Stick with the six if you are looking for fuel economy because if you go with a V8 you will have to spend a small fortune changing a lot of other stuff which will end up costing you more than the $ for fuel.Good Luck with it!![8D]
Old Jan 8, 2008 | 10:07 AM
  #13  
sschanz's Avatar
sschanz
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 235
From:
Default RE: Economical 1968?

I agree...if your goal is fuel efficiency, stick with the six! If you do a search in this forum you will find lots of useful information on ways to improve power performance on your stock six. Like nineteensixtysix stated, once you go to an eight, there are many more upgrades you will have to do...it's not a 'should do' it is a must do with the extra power.

Then again, if money is of no concern, then stay on course with the EFI 5.0.

Either way, best of luck!
Old Jan 8, 2008 | 10:31 AM
  #14  
jlp66stang's Avatar
jlp66stang
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 278
From:
Default RE: Economical 1968?

I don't think anybody buys one of these cars for fuel mileage, could be wrong! I'm sure the i6 will run, but when I mash the pedal, I want something to happen! Better build what you are going to be happy with, cost too much to do it twice. If you are really going to restore it, the engine is the last thing you need. Unless it's a rolling restoration, which I've never done. They are right about being expensive to change over to V-8. I have done that! The cost of the engine and transmission is only a part of the swap.
Old Jan 8, 2008 | 10:54 AM
  #15  
1967inline6MUSTANG's Avatar
1967inline6MUSTANG
1st Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 95
From: Round Rock Tx
Default RE: Economical 1968?

look at the forums at www.classicinlines.com there is tons of info on the 6...have fun with it
Old Jan 8, 2008 | 11:46 AM
  #16  
68EFIvert's Avatar
68EFIvert
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 682
From: Washington
Default RE: Economical 1968?

I converted my car from a 6 to an EFI 5.0 and overdrive transmission. I wanted the mileage improvement, benefits of a computer controlled engine, performance of a V8 and wanted to be a little more unique. It does add a lot onto the cost but you can do it on a budget if needed. I did the conversion with basic mechanical skills and taught myself as I went.

If you want a quick and easy solution go for the 6 cylinder engine. If you want a kick in the pants to drive car that is likely more dependable then go with EFI V8. I know some will challenge me on reliability but I don't have to adjust my carb any longer.

Either way you go you will have fun and get plenty of attention driving one of these beautiful classics.
Old Jan 8, 2008 | 05:59 PM
  #17  
68six's Avatar
68six
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 45
From: Minnesota
Default RE: Economical 1968?

Let's be conservative and say that you can go from an I6 to a V8 withefifor only $6K, including changing out the rear end, the front suspension, the radiator, etc., etc, all of the necessary things to make a V8 work in a car that was designed for the I6. And, let's suppose that you could increase your average fuel mileage from 20 mpg to 25 mpg.

At $3.00/gallon, you'd have to drive 200,000 miles to break even, where the money saved from reduced gas purchases paid for the upgradesfor a higher mileage vehicle.

Let's face it, we are not restoring these cars to save money on gas. My own gasoline bills have gone up since I bought a car that I really didn't need, and starteddriving just for fun,even though I have the 'economical' I6.
Old Jan 8, 2008 | 06:50 PM
  #18  
1slow67's Avatar
1slow67
ROTM Moderator
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 8,158
From: AL
Default RE: Economical 1968?




[align=center]
Magnuson and/or Procharger Blowers Kits[/align]


Classic Inlines will be working with Magnuson on the development of an intake manifold suited for mounting the M90 SuperCharger to the new aluminum cylinder head. If possible, the design will incorporate an air to water intercooler so that boost levels can be increased for optimum performance gains.




The Magnuson MP90 is a “State of the Art†supercharger engineered for 3.0 to 5.7 liter passenger cars. It was designed as a compact, flexible supercharger for increased power, quietness, and reliability without adversely affecting fuel economy. The M90 has proven itself in a number of original equipment and aftermarket applications. This latest version incorporates “S Port†technology and a built in bypass for unparalleled performance.

[align=left]The Magnuson MP90 is a “State of the Art†supercharger engineered for 3.0 to 5.7 liter passenger cars. It was designed as a compact, flexible supercharger for increased power, quietness, and reliability without adversely affecting fuel economy. The M90 has proven itself in a number of original equipment and aftermarket applications. This latest version incorporates “S Port†technology and a built in bypass for unparalleled performance.
[/align]




[blockquote]
Most installations see a realistic 40% plus increase in power output.
Magnuson/Eaton Superchargers work effectively in any orientation (flat, upside down, on edge).
Magnuson 4th generation superchargers have internal bypass valves. The bypass actuator can be located in any of 12 possible locations (6 on each side of the supercharger).
Shown with generic one-piece drive. Two-piece and different one-piece drives are available, as are pulleys with variable offset giving a wide range of possible drive lengths.
[/blockquote]
Old Jan 9, 2008 | 07:07 AM
  #19  
falconfixer's Avatar
falconfixer
1st Gear Member
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 138
Default RE: Economical 1968?

^yeah, but on stock brakes? Stock C-4? The cost/benefit ratio goes bad quickly again.

Me? If it is an I6 - keep it stock. If you need more performance - sell the car & buy a V8 one.
Old Jan 9, 2008 | 05:16 PM
  #20  
1slow67's Avatar
1slow67
ROTM Moderator
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 8,158
From: AL
Default RE: Economical 1968?

I would put disc brakes on if i did that.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
alymac
New Member Area
2
Aug 26, 2015 07:46 AM
Philhampton1
Classic Mustangs (Tech)
3
Aug 21, 2015 12:04 PM
Hillbilly1968
Classic Mustangs (Tech)
1
Aug 19, 2015 12:03 PM
Super_Chief
New Member Area
10
Aug 11, 2015 03:54 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:19 AM.