|
| | | Junior Member
 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:15 PM
Posts: 21, Visits: 92 |
| I am not a "performance " guy so much as an "economy"guy,and so all my considerations go toward making my '59 F250 more fuel efficient.I want to be able to continue affording to drive it daily.
Does it make any sense to have porting /polishing work done on my 2 barrel intake,or am I wasting my money?Is it possible to do it myself?I believe I've seen a guide or book on this.Please don't laugh at me,I'm vulnerable!Steve. |
| |
| | | Supreme Being
Group: Moderators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 5:15 PM
Posts: 999, Visits: 3,061 |
| | Buzzard: Porting an intake for street use and fuel economy is the wrong way to go. The larger ports will allow fuel to drop out of the airstream. The rough surface in the existing ports cause a little turbulance on the port walls to keep the fuel from puddling. When the fuel drops from the airstream, the engine runs lean because less fuel is getting to the cylinders, so to make it run right, you have to richen the carb, which defeats the fuel economy program. Save your porting money to help fill the gas tank. John
John - "The Hoosier Hurricane"
 |
| |
| | | Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, April 28, 2008 9:49 AM
Posts: 36, Visits: 255 |
| Like John said, rough is better for a street engine. When I was doing port work, I would use a 1/8" ball mill on my die grinder to give the short side in the head some bumps (like a golf ball). Flow #'s on the bench did not suffer and I was able to get 358 hp out of my otherwise stock (ok, headers too) 325 horse big-block by doing this and some mild porting. I have used them in the plenum, intake runners and the chamber. The #'s don't change much at low r.p.m so it's not really worth it unless you enjoy doing that type of thing are trying to keep yourself busy.
Per John, the rough casting is better at keeping the air/fuel atomized and all the balls would do is help retain this after port/polish was done.
|
| |
| | | Junior Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:15 PM
Posts: 21, Visits: 92 |
| | Gentlemen,thanks for the responses.Back to the drawing board,as far as ideas for increasing fuel mileage.I've installed an MSD distriutor and 6A box,Sanderson headers.Are there any other significant gains to be had for economy?I won't change out my Y Block.I know about the supposed gains to be had by switching intake and carb to a 4 barrel set-up,but I also know myself,and would not be able to keep those secondaries closed.Any ideas? |
| |
| | | Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:09 PM
Posts: 467, Visits: 1,753 |
| | You could try an electric fan arrangement - where the fan duties get handled by the battery. Have you got an alternator on there? Late models have just about exclusively gone to electrics.
Steve Metzger Tucson, Arizona
|
| |
| | | Junior Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:15 PM
Posts: 21, Visits: 92 |
| | Yes,Steve,I have converted to an alternator.One of the guys on the FTE website is a strong advocate of electric fans but mainly for their superior cooling.He swears by using twin fans.Is there a significant difference,single vs. twin,and mechanical vs electric? |
| |
| | | Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:09 PM
Posts: 467, Visits: 1,753 |
| The main reason I was thinking of the electric fan(s) was to eliminate a source of "parasitic drag" - a consumer of engine power. By using a fancy thermostatic controller you can use two fans and just turn on what's required to cool the engine - for instance, two for hot idle conditions in July and none on a cold day on the freeway.
Steve Metzger Tucson, Arizona
|
| |
| | | 
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
Posts: 243, Visits: 2,404 |
| It seems to me that one of the problems the Y's and mileage have is often the low compression which results from use of replacement pistons that have shorter compression heights, combined with the thicker composition gaskets. Then add increased ignition advance, increased negative work done by the piston, and you end up with a gas guzzler.
1946 Ford 1/2 ton with 1956 292 |
| |
| | | Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 3:55 PM
Posts: 981, Visits: 1,704 |
| You might try optimizing your distributor curve with as much timing as possible ( at cruise rpm) and leaning your jetting out as much as possibe. A free flowing air cleaer won't hurt either. Then spend as much time as possible in high gear while driving.
Frank/RebopBristol, In ( by Elkhart) 
|
| |
|
|