whats your average gas mileage?

Back in the 70s a friend had a 70 Charger R/T with 440, 600 Holley, Drake cam and 4.10 Dana.
At 55 it got a solid 20 mpg. We even compared it to my 72 Charger 318 with 2.76 gears. I got 23 and he got 20+.
My old 72 PolAra cop car 400 Tquad 3.23 got 10 and the 72 Monaco 400/2bbl got 12-14.
65 Sport Fury 383 2bbl converted to 4bbl with oem intake and carb and manifolds from aforementioned 70 Charger and 3.23s got 20.
My present MoPar, 92 Dakota 318 w/ 3.55s gets 18.
 
You guys with the single and 10-12 need a vacuum guage taped to the windshield, a timing light, a wide band O2 sensor and some tuning skills. You are wearing you engine out dumping that much fuel in there and not burning it.
My Challenger gets 15 mpg with a 750 Holley, 3.23 and 25" tall tires turns about 3300 @ 75 mph. It is lower if I push 70-75 mph, if I run 60-65 it is at 15 mpg.
This is also 284/484 MP cam on a 8.4:1 400
My brother in law got 12.97 with 292/509 cam in a 440 and exhaust manifolds.
Tune your stuff up and quit going around gagging people claiming your car runs good.
 
Just figured out my Fury's mileage after about 80 miles of highway and 20 of local driving in my 440.
15.2. with a 323 rear end. Local driving only I got about 11 mpg last year.
 
You guys with the single and 10-12 need a vacuum guage taped to the windshield, a timing light, a wide band O2 sensor and some tuning skills. You are wearing you engine out dumping that much fuel in there and not burning it.
With over 100,000 miles on my car, I am not too worried about wearing out my motor.
 
okay,so part two.
do any of you run the Thermoquads?
like them? hate them?

i have acquired a stack of them,and several are the Federal ones/no emissions.
was thinking about using one of those/in the 6454 range,
for my 1976 440 motor/trans.
 
Last edited:
okay,so part two.
do any of you run the Thermoquads?
like them? hate them?

i have acquired a stack of them,and several are the Federal ones/no emissions.
was thinking about using one of those/in the 6454 range,
for my 1976 440 motor/trans.

I love them and am probably one of the few left that will sing their praises. I always run TQs on cars that call for them (for me Formals). Love the sound they make at WOT and I find the small primaries big secondaries make for great driveability.
Yes they can be finicky, but I find the plastic bowl construction that they are vilified for actually helps a lot with modern fuel and the problems with fuel boiling. I have never had too much trouble in getting them to run well for me...consequently I am always confused by all of the TQ hate and complaining.
 
I think I have fuel boiling on my 440 with the ethanol gasoline. When hot it is a bit hard to start.
I have an Edelbrock 1406 I think and added a 1/2 inch insulator under the carb and although it helped a bit it did not solve it. I do remember adding leaded no ethanol 110 race gas and chickened out at 70 bucks worth at 8 something per gallon and noticed no difference in the running of my low compression 440 but it did have much better hot starts.
 
When I changed my '67 Newport from the original AFB and intake to a Torker 400 and the (allegedly) matched/calibrated TQ 9801 (allegedly calibrated for a '70 383 4bbl), it was not ntil I put the thick OEM-style base gasket under it that it ran better. I'd read (somewhere) that the throttle plates being too close to the bottom of the plenum caused fuel distribution issues, but spacing it up 1/4" made a definite difference over the (supplied) thinner cardboard base gasket. It ran good, but was not that much better than the stock parts, other than WOT power. Mpg increases didn't really happen, either.

I'd been using a sodium-based valve recession additive. After the car sat for a while, I was going to take it to a car show. It cranked and cranked and didn't start. NO accel pump shot. The additive had glued the accel pump circuit's "anti-pullover weight" closed. When I finally discovered that and free'd it up, everything as normal.

I later took it off and put a '70 Holley 4160 I'd bought at a swap meet. I kitted it and it worked good. That's what's on it now. I kept the TQ for later on. I like the design of it AND the triple-booster primary venture. For some reason, at least on that application, kind of lack-luster.

When I saw the then-new Street Demon, I did a double-take! Especially with the optional phenolic fuel bowl! A definite knock-off of the TQ, right down to the tube from the bottom of the accel pump to the pump shooter! So, when Summit put them on sale, I got one.

It appears the TQ is a "metering rod" carburetor, but on the bottom of the single power piston, there's a "nub" that rides against a flat "board" in the throttle body. The "board" is modulated by the primary throttle position. It ensures that a particular placement of the power piston happens at dedicated throttle opennings, kind of over-riding the power piston spring in the higher-vac situations. I know the later ones have it, but don't recall the earlier ones? But never was concerned, either.

The other thing about TQs is their height, compared to an AFB/AVS or Holley 4bbl.

I acquired a NOS TQ for a '76 400 LeanBurn application. I bought it at a major swap meet. The seller was a dealer who had raided his obsolete parts for some things that didn't make the trip to the dealership's new owner. They might have chunked it anyway. New in Box!

I also got a Carter StripKit for TQs, too, from "back when" in the middle 1970s.

ONE thing about poor fuel economy, the piston and ring wear issues come from the unburned fuel making it into the motor oil via blow-by. On an engine with good rings and such, the motor oil should not color from fuel contamination very soon. It should remain "clear" for a good bit, especially on a newer rebuild. IF you can smell hydrocarbons on the dipstick, the engine is running too rich or has a fuel leak into the crankcase.

Thanks for your input.
CBODY67
 
I think I have fuel boiling on my 440 with the ethanol gasoline. When hot it is a bit hard to start.
I have an Edelbrock 1406 I think and added a 1/2 inch insulator under the carb and although it helped a bit it did not solve it. I do remember adding leaded no ethanol 110 race gas and chickened out at 70 bucks worth at 8 something per gallon and noticed no difference in the running of my low compression 440 but it did have much better hot starts.

Fuel percolation always seemed to be an issue with our Chryslers even in earlier times. Not enough to have fuel boiling out of the carb into the venture area, even in the middle of July. Hot restarts always seemed to take a little longer. Adding more throttle seemed like it would make matters worse with the related extra pump shot.

When I was driving the '66 Newport to work and back (1975 or so), it was needing a new fan clutch. I did a shadetree fix by putting a dimple in each side of the front metal (not the aluminum casting) part, which was the silicone fluid reservoirs, best I could figure out. In any event, it apparently increased the fluid pressure such that the fan was not free-wheeling nearly as soon.

Later, I got a Flex--A-Lite stainless steel flex fan and put on it. I spaced the fan in and out of the fan shroud in an effort to decrease the noise. With 2.76 gears, after 60mph, it sounded like it was getting ready for takeoff! Almost like it was helping pull the car down the road wit the added airflow through the fan! None of the real benefits of a flex fan, from what I'd read.

There was ONE big difference! I'd driven it for about 1.25hours at 60+mph in the middle of July. When I raised the hood, I could leisurely grab the air cleaner and remove it slowly. it was THAT cool! Otherwise, everything would have been 150 degrees (or thereabouts) and taking off the air cleaner that soon would have really needed gloves. I was impressed, but not enough to put up with the fan noise. I got a new fan clutch as soon as I could and put it back to what it has been. Took the flex fan back and got a refund.

CBODY67
 
I think I have fuel boiling on my 440 with the ethanol gasoline. When hot it is a bit hard to start.
I have an Edelbrock 1406 I think and added a 1/2 inch insulator under the carb and although it helped a bit it did not solve it. I do remember adding leaded no ethanol 110 race gas and chickened out at 70 bucks worth at 8 something per gallon and noticed no difference in the running of my low compression 440 but it did have much better hot starts.
I'm uncertain if you will fully resolve the hot start issue with today's fuels, but the use of high octane is a waste of $$. Older marine and small engines can be the most sensitive to ethanol... I bet somebody not too far away has a lower octane available. The premium I have been paying for non-ethanol 89 is about 30-40 cents per gallon over the 87 I would otherwise be buying. I figure that any slight increase in fuel economy is getting me close to break-even by itself. I too noticed some improvement in hot starting, but I'm running it due to hatred of ethanol. I use it in everything I own... which all runs on 87.

I lucked out that the fuel is not too inconvenient, but have been noticing a lot more activity at those pumps since the station I go to has opened. Fortunately with my schedule there is never a line at 5:30am.
 
Well do you all think it's a waste of money and just run 87 unleaded instead of 93 unleaded?
I have never tried 87 but who knows, she may like it just fine.
 
I run premium in mine, always have. In the Bakersfield summers I added Octane Booster.
 
I just today was informed of a non ethanol gas station in NY state and I plan on using it to purge the ethanol in my tank. I hope to see some improvements.
 
The Monaco gets about 10 mpg running around town. It's over 50 yrs old, has run 106,000 miles without a rebuild and has no trouble keeping up with traffic.
When new we had a brand new 69 Newport Custom with 383 2bbl that once got 22 miles. Nice cold night running up I-75 to Boyne Mtn. was right in this cars sweet spot. 8 mpg pulling our trailer with a new 63 Newport wagon. Average hwy is probably more like the 15 mpg in a new 74 New Yorker 2dr we drove to Florida.
 
Gas is cheap now and this thread has had me completely re-evaluating my needs.
I'm skipping the no-names and staying with top tiers now. Especially Shell.
When it goes to 4 bucks and I'm doing 15k mi a year again, I'll re-re-evaluate.
But, jeeze, Bhakim, stop letting those crackheads sit around the front door day and night. I know you need their lottery and cigarette business but.....
 
Shell has the best pump gas? Why is that?
 
Back
Top