Miles per gallon
#3
Your Mileage seems really poor unless you are beating the hell out of it all the time. I dont own a 2nd gen yet but I have had plenty of cars and trucks with a 350 in them and gotten better mileage by far. 1969 Chevy 3/4 ton with a dead hole in a 350 gave me 10 on the freeway and about 7 in town. That is alot heavier than your car and the dead hole does not help mileage.
Massey
Massey
#4
when my 81 had a stock 350 with edelbrock intake and carb, 1 5/8" headers with 2.25" dual exhaust, and 2.56 gears I got like 18mpg freeway and like 15 city. So if your 355 is built i could see getting 8mpg with an auto(assuming 3 speed) and 3.42 gears
and unless you have really stripped the car down its not gonna weight 2900 lbs. That's about what a 1st gen weighs.
and unless you have really stripped the car down its not gonna weight 2900 lbs. That's about what a 1st gen weighs.
Last edited by jason7504; 01-25-2011 at 04:45 PM.
#5
Please don't take this wrong, but I'm always amused when people build a classic muscle car and begin to worry about mileage. If mileage is an issue you should keep them stock, or buy a economy car for a daily driver and enjoy your 2nd gen for what it is.
#6
+1..I agree Vall, I always here people talking about don't get this or that because it's gonna suck more gas but it's not a honda so who cares
#7
350 hp at 25 mpg is common with ls1 6 sp. im getting 20 mpg at 380 hp and im running rich. but i dont have a carb either, forgot about that. get about 2-4 mpg with the gillnetter. only thing i have with a carb. lol. if you dont already have one a 700r4 would bring the mpg up
Last edited by craby; 01-25-2011 at 06:09 PM.
#9
I've got no idea what my Camaro or my Austin gasser get for mileage. Didn't build either for mileage. I can tell you exactly what my Toyota 4x4 gets, and it's not as good as I'd like, so it's going down the road soon! I need one of those economy trucks! Is there such a thing???