Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Best MPG

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Best MPG

    With the increase in gas prices, I have been thinking of a new daily driver(Studebaker of course). Let's hear the suggestions for best MPG(80% around town/20% highway). 15,000-18,000 annual mileage.

  • #2
    From this group, you will likely get recommendations for every year and every engine/transmission/rear end combination made by Studebaker . Also some pretty wild claims for "actual" MPG.

    Truth be known, it's not going to make a whole lot of difference WHAT you select. With that combination of city and highway driving, a well tuned and maintained 6 cylinder OD Lark will average in the high to mid teens and a similar V8 auto car will average in the mid to low teens.

    If mileage is your goal, a used Honda will cost less than a nicely done Stude and return twice the mileage. In addition, the Honda won't need servicing every 3,000 miles, tune ups every 10,000 miles and tires will go a lot further.

    It's probably impossible to rationalize a Stude from an ECONOMIC standpoint as a daily driver AT THE MILES/YEAR YOU ARE SUGGESTING. It's EASY to do if you include the FUN FACTOR, however []


    <h5>Dick Steinkamp
    Bellingham, WA</h5>
    Dick Steinkamp
    Bellingham, WA

    Comment


    • #3
      From this group, you will likely get recommendations for every year and every engine/transmission/rear end combination made by Studebaker . Also some pretty wild claims for "actual" MPG.

      Truth be known, it's not going to make a whole lot of difference WHAT you select. With that combination of city and highway driving, a well tuned and maintained 6 cylinder OD Lark will average in the high to mid teens and a similar V8 auto car will average in the mid to low teens.

      If mileage is your goal, a used Honda will cost less than a nicely done Stude and return twice the mileage. In addition, the Honda won't need servicing every 3,000 miles, tune ups every 10,000 miles and tires will go a lot further.

      It's probably impossible to rationalize a Stude from an ECONOMIC standpoint as a daily driver AT THE MILES/YEAR YOU ARE SUGGESTING. It's EASY to do if you include the FUN FACTOR, however []


      <h5>Dick Steinkamp
      Bellingham, WA</h5>
      Dick Steinkamp
      Bellingham, WA

      Comment


      • #4
        I buy and drive X used cars when they are 6-9 years old. I've been driving a 99 Chrysler for a couple of years. It has all the bells and whistles, was cheap and gets a average of 25 MPG and saves me enough money on gas and repairs to toss time and money into Studebaker repairs.
        If I had to have a Studebaker as a daily driver and was worried about fuel economy, I'd chose a 259, 2 barrel with overdrive.

        JDP/Maryland
        63 R2 SuperHawk (Caesar)
        spent to date $54664,75
        64 R2 GT (Sid)
        spent to date $62,439.30
        63 Lark 2 door
        52 Starliner
        51 Commander
        39 Coupe express
        39 Coupe express (rod)

        JDP Maryland

        Comment


        • #5
          I buy and drive X used cars when they are 6-9 years old. I've been driving a 99 Chrysler for a couple of years. It has all the bells and whistles, was cheap and gets a average of 25 MPG and saves me enough money on gas and repairs to toss time and money into Studebaker repairs.
          If I had to have a Studebaker as a daily driver and was worried about fuel economy, I'd chose a 259, 2 barrel with overdrive.

          JDP/Maryland
          63 R2 SuperHawk (Caesar)
          spent to date $54664,75
          64 R2 GT (Sid)
          spent to date $62,439.30
          63 Lark 2 door
          52 Starliner
          51 Commander
          39 Coupe express
          39 Coupe express (rod)

          JDP Maryland

          Comment


          • #6
            Wayne, here's my documented evidence. I have a '60 lark 6. When I got it it had a 3 spd transmission, 4.10 rear axle. I drove it this way 5,361 miles, averaging 18.712 mpg, with a best tank of 25.9.

            I put an 3 sp OD transmission in and in 5,219 miles have averaged 23.206 mpg with a best tank of 29.2.

            These two averages are over a total of 5 years.

            I put the OD in because the car was really screaming on the highway. Now, at 70 mph it ticks along at 2,800 rpm.

            My druthers would be with a 259 and OD, but apparently that isn't to be.

            [img=left]http://www.alink.com/personal/tbredehoft/Bothcars3.jpg[/img=left]
            Tom Bredehoft
            '53 Commander Coupe
            '55 President State Sedan Project
            '60 Lark VI (Now on the market)
            '05 Legacy Ltd Wagon
            All Indiana built cars

            Typo Correction

            Comment


            • #7
              Wayne, here's my documented evidence. I have a '60 lark 6. When I got it it had a 3 spd transmission, 4.10 rear axle. I drove it this way 5,361 miles, averaging 18.712 mpg, with a best tank of 25.9.

              I put an 3 sp OD transmission in and in 5,219 miles have averaged 23.206 mpg with a best tank of 29.2.

              These two averages are over a total of 5 years.

              I put the OD in because the car was really screaming on the highway. Now, at 70 mph it ticks along at 2,800 rpm.

              My druthers would be with a 259 and OD, but apparently that isn't to be.

              [img=left]http://www.alink.com/personal/tbredehoft/Bothcars3.jpg[/img=left]
              Tom Bredehoft
              '53 Commander Coupe
              '55 President State Sedan Project
              '60 Lark VI (Now on the market)
              '05 Legacy Ltd Wagon
              All Indiana built cars

              Typo Correction

              Comment


              • #8
                From my experience, JP is spot on with his recommendation.

                Owned and drove a '62 4dr from 1992 to 2002 as a daily. It had a 259, 3sp/OD, and 3.31 rear.

                I averaged 19 mpg around town and made as much as 26 mpg on the highway.

                In the last year, I have discovered the thrifty nature of Toyota's ugly little Echo. Averages 43 mpg, have gotten over 50 on several tanks, does not have a timing belt to replace (timing chain - recommended to check it at 250,000) and Toyota does not recommend changing the automatic tranny fluid...

                I remember seeing an article in a gas-crisis era magazine from the mid-70s that had pictures of a '53 Champion coupe. Might have been Special Interest Autos.

                Good luck

                <div align="left">1960 Lark VI</div id="left"> <div align="right">1962 7E7-122</div id="right">
                [img=left]http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l163/62champ/car/8b0ac4c6.jpg[/img=left]
                [img=right]http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l163/62champ/car/th7E7-11-20021.jpg[/img=right]

                Comment


                • #9
                  From my experience, JP is spot on with his recommendation.

                  Owned and drove a '62 4dr from 1992 to 2002 as a daily. It had a 259, 3sp/OD, and 3.31 rear.

                  I averaged 19 mpg around town and made as much as 26 mpg on the highway.

                  In the last year, I have discovered the thrifty nature of Toyota's ugly little Echo. Averages 43 mpg, have gotten over 50 on several tanks, does not have a timing belt to replace (timing chain - recommended to check it at 250,000) and Toyota does not recommend changing the automatic tranny fluid...

                  I remember seeing an article in a gas-crisis era magazine from the mid-70s that had pictures of a '53 Champion coupe. Might have been Special Interest Autos.

                  Good luck

                  <div align="left">1960 Lark VI</div id="left"> <div align="right">1962 7E7-122</div id="right">
                  [img=left]http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l163/62champ/car/8b0ac4c6.jpg[/img=left]
                  [img=right]http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l163/62champ/car/th7E7-11-20021.jpg[/img=right]

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    And I remember meeting a guy in Redondo Beach, CA who was driving a '53 Champion Coupe during the same time frame: '73-'75 fake "Oil Shortage" with a 5 speed O.D. 4 Cyl. Japanese engine, I think a 20R '73-'75 Toyota Corona/Pickup engine. Now THAT should should produce some good MPG numbers!

                    quote:Originally posted by 62champ

                    I remember seeing an article in a gas-crisis era magazine from the mid-70s that had pictures of a '53 Champion coupe. Might have been Special Interest Autos.
                    StudeRich
                    Studebakers Northwest
                    Ferndale, WA
                    StudeRich
                    Second Generation Stude Driver,
                    Proud '54 Starliner Owner

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      And I remember meeting a guy in Redondo Beach, CA who was driving a '53 Champion Coupe during the same time frame: '73-'75 fake "Oil Shortage" with a 5 speed O.D. 4 Cyl. Japanese engine, I think a 20R '73-'75 Toyota Corona/Pickup engine. Now THAT should should produce some good MPG numbers!

                      quote:Originally posted by 62champ

                      I remember seeing an article in a gas-crisis era magazine from the mid-70s that had pictures of a '53 Champion coupe. Might have been Special Interest Autos.
                      StudeRich
                      Studebakers Northwest
                      Ferndale, WA
                      StudeRich
                      Second Generation Stude Driver,
                      Proud '54 Starliner Owner

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        My '61 Cruiser with a 259 V8, 2-barrel carb, automatic tranny AND AC still gets better mileage than most modern V8's, including my dad's big honkin' Toyota Tundra 5-speed. I had him do the math- after all, he worked as a Cost Analysist until he retired- and he figured that my Stude averages 19-20 mpg locally, and 22 highway. His truck gets 18 mpg at best, but then, it also holds like 45 gallons! My Chevy Aveo(which is actually a Korean car made by Daiwoo)gets around 36-38 mpg, locally and on the open highway, respectively, but then, it's nowhere near as comfortable a ride as the Stude, so I have to sacrifice something either way. People don't make fun of the Stude and call it a "putt-putt" car, either.

                        pitbulllady

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          My '61 Cruiser with a 259 V8, 2-barrel carb, automatic tranny AND AC still gets better mileage than most modern V8's, including my dad's big honkin' Toyota Tundra 5-speed. I had him do the math- after all, he worked as a Cost Analysist until he retired- and he figured that my Stude averages 19-20 mpg locally, and 22 highway. His truck gets 18 mpg at best, but then, it also holds like 45 gallons! My Chevy Aveo(which is actually a Korean car made by Daiwoo)gets around 36-38 mpg, locally and on the open highway, respectively, but then, it's nowhere near as comfortable a ride as the Stude, so I have to sacrifice something either way. People don't make fun of the Stude and call it a "putt-putt" car, either.

                          pitbulllady

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Greetings, All,

                            Engineers tell me fuel economy has four main components:

                            1. Gross weight of the vehicle.
                            2. Frontal area and coefficient of drag
                            3. Engine efficiency
                            4. Rolling resistance.

                            The idea that putting a smaller engine in the same car is going to greatly increase fuel economy is not usually true. If a car is accelerated at a given rate and then cruised at a given MPH, the only variable is then is engine efficiency. That doesn't vary greatly among engines of a given era. Back in the bad old days of the Mobilgas Economy Run, the Studebakers often won their class. The Champion six usually only got one to two MPG better than the V8. They were both usually in the low 21-23 range. Thus, the six isn't dramatically more economical in the same car for most to give up the performance potential of the V8. Same would be true today. Put a tiny engine in a 3500# Stude and it has to run its guts out to maintain a given speed and thus won't get substantially better mileage than a well-tuned and similarly driven V8.

                            Keep them tuned to the nth, radials properly inflated, junk out of the trunk and just enjoy!

                            thnx, jack vines



                            PackardV8
                            PackardV8

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Greetings, All,

                              Engineers tell me fuel economy has four main components:

                              1. Gross weight of the vehicle.
                              2. Frontal area and coefficient of drag
                              3. Engine efficiency
                              4. Rolling resistance.

                              The idea that putting a smaller engine in the same car is going to greatly increase fuel economy is not usually true. If a car is accelerated at a given rate and then cruised at a given MPH, the only variable is then is engine efficiency. That doesn't vary greatly among engines of a given era. Back in the bad old days of the Mobilgas Economy Run, the Studebakers often won their class. The Champion six usually only got one to two MPG better than the V8. They were both usually in the low 21-23 range. Thus, the six isn't dramatically more economical in the same car for most to give up the performance potential of the V8. Same would be true today. Put a tiny engine in a 3500# Stude and it has to run its guts out to maintain a given speed and thus won't get substantially better mileage than a well-tuned and similarly driven V8.

                              Keep them tuned to the nth, radials properly inflated, junk out of the trunk and just enjoy!

                              thnx, jack vines



                              PackardV8
                              PackardV8

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X