|
04-07-2008, 01:20 AM
|
#26 | |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: W-S, NC
Posts: 211
|
Re: 6 cyl MPG
Quote:
maybe a bit less 
__________________
Have fun, Don |
|
|
|
|
04-08-2008, 04:35 AM
|
#27 |
|
Senior Member
 Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 398
|
Re: 6 cyl MPG
I don't know..... but Iv'e had this 71 short bed stepside 250 I-6 for a long time...I feel bad if I don't get at least 15mpg city.
The majority of the time I travel the same route, can see over traffic, and maintain a cruzing speed to allow me not to stop in stop and go traffic. stock 250 I-6, 3.73 rear, 235-75/15 tires |
|
|
|
|
04-24-2008, 01:38 AM
|
#28 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brenham,TX
Posts: 571
|
Re: 6 cyl MPG
ttt
|
|
|
|
|
04-24-2008, 02:11 AM
|
#29 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cypress, Tx
Posts: 4,005
|
Re: 6 cyl MPG
Rio,
Why are we Taking this to the top? Wasn't your question answered?
__________________
1972 C20 Suburban- Big Blue Betty '56 Chevy Bel Air Sedan- Frame up Restoration -What would you attempt to achieve if you knew you could not fail?- -I Refuse To Tiptoe Through Life, Only To Arrive Safely At Death's Door- R.I.P. EAST SIDE LOW LIFE |
|
|
|
|
04-25-2008, 06:32 AM
|
#30 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Thief River Falls Mn
Posts: 30
|
Re: 6 cyl MPG
13 mpg at 65, 17 mpg at 55, 71 chevy 250 six in 1/2 ton 3.73 gears bone stock with rebuilt mono jet.
|
|
|
|
|
04-26-2008, 11:48 PM
|
#31 |
|
Longtime Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Over Yonder (DFW)
Posts: 171
|
Re: 6 cyl MPG
I had no idea the 6's were so bad on gas! I understand most of it has to do with these motors being plain worn out, but 8-12mpg is ALOT lower than I expected. I've thought about keeping my straight six because it's different and I thought it would be better on gas than a V-8. Guess I won't be rebuilding my 250 after all.
__________________
Rokcrln - "I'm a major car addict so trying to go as low buck as possible is like asking a coke head to use flower to save money." 1972 C10 Short Step -http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=261405 Last edited by sixnine; 04-28-2008 at 09:14 PM. Reason: grammar |
|
|
|
|
04-27-2008, 12:27 AM
|
#32 | |
|
FarmBoy.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Rhinelander, WI
Posts: 1,103
|
Re: 6 cyl MPG
Just a side note...
Although I have no experience with driving a six long enough to check mileage, we have to remember that these engines are old. Yes, a 6 was built to be reliable, easy to work on, and all around a decent source of power. So, of course it's not going to get the best fuel economy, especially with fuel distribution of the one barrel, not to mention being choked and strangled with restrictive intake and exhaust. The compression on these engines has no doubt plummeted in their 35-40 years of service, not that they were high compression engines to begin with. Alot of guys are running fresh V8's, with only a few fresh 6's in the mix, along with all of the old tired ones. My 307 gets a pretty consistent 15-16 mpg, and thats driving like an idiot for the most part. Would I get better mileage with a fairly stout 292? Eh. This rambling post really serves no purpose, just something to think about I suppose. -Sam.
__________________
1969 GMC C1500. long fleet. 307. 3 on the tree. 3.07 gears. Oliver green. Bent and bruised. Daily Driver. Quote:
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=242993 |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
