It might be a good idea to find out what your car’s fuel economy sweet spot is before spending money modifying it. Some new cars can give instantaneous read outs for fuel economy but the easiest indication for older cars is engine vacuum. I suggest you temporarily hook up an accurate vacuum gauge and tacho and do some plotting of speed/rpm/inches mercury at various highway speeds and on various inclines in top and second gears. Best economy is at highest vacuum. Putting in too much overdrive could make fuel economy suffer if engine falls into inefficient territory. You should find the highway speed where your economy is best. If that is too slow for you, by all means put in taller gears but don’t go so far as to make things worse. Carburetted engines aren’t the same as fuel injected with spark timing maps that can run efficiently at low rpm. Many years ago I did a two day defensive driving course. Apart from learning cadence braking on a skid pan (made more slick for Police training by the addition of some diesel to the water!) and the different ways to take a hairpin turn at 50 mph in a FWD Camry compared to a RWD Falcon, the instructor told a story about fuel economy. If I remember correctly he did some training in the US where he was asked to drive a large old V8 sedan in the traffic over a mixed course and use a little fuel as possible. He was happy when he got 21 MPG on this instrumented vehicle. The instructor then did the same course and got 27 MPG which he thought was impossible. One thing I remember was the US instructor told him to imagine there was a raw egg between his foot and the accelerator pedal. Hence, keep your vacuum high. I imagine the raw egg option goes against the grain of a 300 owner but the fuel saving is available for those who want it. My 78 Valiant still has its fuel pacer light on the front fender indicator lights. It rarely lights up (unless I’m in “the mood”) but if it does, sometimes I’ll manual drop to second before the auto wants to kick down because I’m not giving it enough throttle to make it (eg cruising up an incline). Therefore, running an engine at a lower rpm isn’t always the best way to save fuel. Cheers Henry From: 'James Douglas' via Chrysler 300 Club International [mailto:chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Thanks. The other question is cost-benefit. I have the factory 727 in the car and a spare from 1964. I would have to source a rebuilt trans 1965 or later which would be a wash with rebuilding the earlier 727. Then $3500 for the GV unit. Plus costs to do a crossmember and the drive shaft. Say $4000 to $4500 more than just rebuilding the stock unit. Back of the envelop calculations tells me that a round trip cost to coast with a 2.5 to 2.8 final drive ratio would save me about $2000 versus the stock 3.23. So, it would take two full round trips to break even, not counting the daily usage savings… I need to decide if all the time and effort in doing it would be worth it. James From: dplotkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <dplotkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> It was a small cut on passenger side of tunnel about 2 O'clock, I'll look for a photo from the build. It will be hidden, only you will know. Eventually you will forget. I did. Until you reminded me. Danny Plotkin -----Original Message----- Hi Danny, You have a point. My question is “how much” and “where”. The problem I have seen is that once you start you can end up with a lot more issue than one thinks. If the car did not have a console, I would be more inclined, but I do not want to have to start cutting up a console to make clearance. That is why I would like to find someone that has done it on a ’63 or ’64 floor pan so I can see how extensive or not the metal work done needs to be. I am not against cutting, I just do not want to open up a can of worms. James From: dplotkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <dplotkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> My opinion, likely worthless. These are not Duesenberg's. If a small cut under the carpet, never seen again will have you driving and enjoying your car, well, that is a heck of a lot more important than a homogeneous floor pan. Consider that Chrysler engineers hacked the floors on the special for the silly french transmission, didn't seem to cause less sleep, the cars are worth a million that way. Is it different because James did it instead of Fred at Chrysler? You both will likely cut it with a similar saw. Danny Plotkin -----Original Message----- Hi Danny, I did give that some thought; the only issue is I really hate to cut into the sheet metal. That is why the A518 idea intrigued me if it can be done without cutting the body. I would love to find someone that did it on a ’63 or ’64 for either solution to see what it took. The idea of having a 3.5 or 3.7 rearend with a 30% reduction would be a great thing for a daily driver and cross-country mount. James From: dplotkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <dplotkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> John Grady wrote: "They apparently make a GV you can use with 4 WD late 727 short output spline ( drops the long tail shaft ) sounds good , but details hard to find . So far . " The attached picture shows my Gear Vendors behind my 727, replaces tail shaft. It's in a 61 Plymouth, required a small clearance cut to the tunnel. The GV makes the car enjoyable on the street with 4:10's in back. Cannot say enough about it...its 16 yeas old and no problems. Danny Plotkin -----Original Message----- Hi , on this , the problem is 518 is for A block motor it was never factory behind B block . adapters are available , I never did it . I did put 518 behind 450” 392 going into F ( i know i know ) “ Real 300 has a hemi , I like F” . Someone else said that . A guy named Waters in Vermont makes stuff to put 518 behind any early A block . Bolt pattern is the same , 518 / 392 but need a spacer about 1.125 and flex plate conversion piece . Smart guy . I used his stuff Don’t have contact info handy —-TL Waters or TJ Waters I am debating this now on another F , all this started on first one trying to put Gear Vendors OD on 62 PB trans into F . 62 A block PB 727 ( 318) are common . Goal was a lot more go off the line not gas mileage . You cannot put GV on a TF with a rear pump ( spent a year trying to work out , can’t be done, without making your own spline coupling and complicated billet adapter ) I do not know ifJ/K have rear pump ? Don V would know . Oil lines go into rear case Trying to keep push buttons was why I wanted that 62 trans in F .. idealist etc —A or B block . Imperial Services once made external cable shift adapter for later ( ?66 up ?) TF to the early buttons , I copied that design myself from their pictures ( they stopped selling it ) I put the same idea onto the 518 , to keep F PB ; but you have to physically pull out ALL 518 park actuator stuff , and use lighter rooster comb spring from 62 on 518 trans. Buttons cannot move the heavy park actuator ( a surprise for you ) Did all that , not in the car yet - A and A 518 is a heavy duty build , a 90’s dodge truck 518 . Electrics another story , did that , 12 v on trans plug engages OD .Have to make an OD controller ,. Performance Trans sells nice analog one for this . . Plus input spline of later 727 changed if you do go THAT way = , new converter . But generally a very good smart upgrade . Cannot get good converters for small spline old 727 TF now . Related , 70 challenger E body 8 3/4 axle fits F , you get real E brake , did that too on another (3rd) car ( 60 matador/ 440/ 727 ) same frame as F But end of day on any letter car with brake on trans= no park no e brake , as you will lose early trans brake . So converted dana 60 axle in F # 1 to cadillac disc caliper with E brake built in the caliper ( auugh) They are a piece of work , believe me . on and on . Advice , : you need 3:90 or more to use OD as engine rpm can be too low ( ratio is .~ . 7) , you want 3:23 -3:31 with the od in ! it will be very unhappy with J / K rams at 1200 - 1500 rpm cruise . So moving on , some painful wisdom gained —- and as now older ,= avoid pain , F number two hot rod is going to be big B block , or gen 2 hemi so 727 with Gear Vendor or 518 ?is question ; a narrowed dana 60 4:30 in F # 2 now . So committed to OD . Now. Net of all this ,now in 2024 , = forget PButtons or non park console setup , or the park with two cables , or early 727 trans in general . use a new hurst floor shift and cable ( looks way cool, like a 4 spd in F - in ash tray hole )so you can keep P on a late single cable ( post 66 ) 727 and then add a gear vendors , may have to beat out the floor a bit at GV unit . Supposedly fits B body ok . Or , keep hurst shifter and P but with 518? = todays question The bell is not the problem , back of 518 is way bigger a lot farther back ,— but it Fit in an F tunnel . F had cast iron biggie but I think letter car floor pans all the same . note “think “ Given need for that non stock B to 518 adapter ($$$) and then a 518 ($$$) ,and control for it ($$) —- and fact : so easy to use a later crank / 440 and reasonable price late torqueflight , Add readily available HP converters for big spline 727 ( AA has a reasonable price super tech later converter for cadillac adapted to 727) and you then have park , and an e brake too — say on later dana drum or E body axle , that saving will more than pay for $$$$$$ gear vendors setup . 2k$ about . Need special drive shaft , 500 more, Dennie’s One man’s long trek though this wilderness … leaning now to late 727/ GV on F 2 , would go 518 on A block or new hemi . Brings up 415” mopar Indy small block in F ? 450 hp 200 lbs less ? handling!!! They apparently make a GV you can use with 4 WD late 727 short output spline ( drops the long tail shaft ) sounds good , but details hard to find . So far . Then there are guys selling late GM OD trans 4L80E and adapters (..no one say new hemi , hate computers ) and it has no distributor . enough is enough . your mileage may vary widely ! At end of day , I think J/K beautifully optimized by Chrysler exactly as they come . Leave stock! I had a J modified it, ( cam , shift kit) huge mistake . Made exactly as they came for long distance trips , don’t need OD and all this fun .Spending 8 k to save gas needs some logic applied? may actually get worse gas mileage at way below design rpm at cruise . Cam is extremely inefficient that low . I guess 8 mpg , not a 40’s flathead . But if you want to wipe out mr BMW to 80 , see first part above . At least the aggravating bright blue headlights should be behind me , even with his driving gloves , bra and all he gets a good look at two 3” tailpipes and fins jg Sent from my iPhone
-- -- -- For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/65aa219f.250a0220.4ddab.68d2SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN%40gmr-mx.google.com. |
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network
Archive Sitemap