Real Fiero Tech

My trip meter rolls backwards.... :scratch:

Series8217 wrote:I really don't think anybody with a 2.8 is getting 30 mpg average besides pure highway driving with a manual transmission.

I calculated the mpg by resetting my trip counter every time I filled up my gas tank. When I filled up I would write down the trip counter mileage and divide by the number of gallons it took to fill up the tank until the auto shut-off on the pump.

Yeah, that's the only real way to determine gas mileage. I keep a small ledger in the car and track mileage with that. I do get about 28 mpg with the 2.8 on pure highway driving (I have a 400 mile round trip every month for reserve duty so I have plenty of opportunities to stay current on mileage). I've touched 30 once in the The Mule when it had the 2.8 in it instead of the Northstar, but I believe it had functioning EGR at the time AND that was a pretty slow tank compared to my usual driving habits.

The Dark Side of Will wrote:

Series8217 wrote:I really don't think anybody with a 2.8 is getting 30 mpg average besides pure highway driving with a manual transmission.

I calculated the mpg by resetting my trip counter every time I filled up my gas tank. When I filled up I would write down the trip counter mileage and divide by the number of gallons it took to fill up the tank until the auto shut-off on the pump.

Yeah, that's the only real way to determine gas mileage. I keep a small ledger in the car and track mileage with that. I do get about 28 mpg with the 2.8 on pure highway driving (I have a 400 mile round trip every month for reserve duty so I have plenty of opportunities to stay current on mileage). I've touched 30 once in the The Mule when it had the 2.8 in it instead of the Northstar, but I believe it had functioning EGR at the time AND that was a pretty slow tank compared to my usual driving habits.

The mule has the n* in it? I didnt know that.

The Mule = (mostly) black '87 GT. I think I've only called it The Mule in 1 or 2 other places on here.

The white Formula that caused me to start this thread is the "Storm Trooper" (White, covered in plastic and from the '80's).

I'm shocked. seriously. My own experiences with the 2.8 come from an '85 Camaro 2.8 H.O./5-speed, that car got 30, on a set of 235/60R15 tires, not lowered, and an '87 Camaro 2.8 H.O./automatic, on 215/65R15 tires, also not lowered, plus my sister's '90 Firebird 3.1L / automatic, on 235/60R15 tires, also not lowered. These cars arecertainly heavier than the Fieros, and the gearing is different, but I saw at least 29 in each.
At a steady 55, the bird returned 31! both ways!
Heck, my '89 S-10 4.3 eventually got 28 mpg, even after swapping on wider tires and a performance axle ratio.
If you wanna go 70 mph, then no, you won't approach 30.

My GP with a 3.1 and DIC says I hit 40mpg at 50mph

I've been tempted to test it on a long highway trip, but you get clobbered here if you go slower than 65.

Atilla the Fun wrote: If you wanna go 70 mph, then no, you won't approach 30.

My 28 is at speeds between 65 and 80. Including stoplights and crap my overall trip average comes out to about 60 (220 miles in 3:45)

My modded 3.4 has done as high as 32 on the freeway and as poorly as 18 in the city.

The Dark Side of Will wrote:The Mule = (mostly) black '87 GT. I think I've only called it The Mule in 1 or 2 other places on here.

The white Formula that caused me to start this thread is the "Storm Trooper" (White, covered in plastic and from the '80's).

I thought the mule was the ste?

wtf am I smoking?

6000 SE = Goose (6OOOSE)

pretty funny stuff in this thread.