<VV> was: testing Tom's cooling system, now: fuel economy

[NicolCS at aol.com]

We're on the same page here, Padgett.  This is why I installed a 3.08  
gearset (with a compensating lower first-gear 4-speed to retain driveability)  and 
Fiero 2.8 EFI on my '66 Corvair 140.  The one time I checked the fuel  economy, 
I got 29.7 mpg at a steady 70 mph.  The head temp runs around  275-300 and 
the plugs are light brown.  
 
The cam is a stock 110/140/180 "304" cam, the heads are modified for .032  
squish,  9.25 true C/R, and the car has headers.  Very fiesty and  thrifty too.  
One of these days I'm going to try the 140 "high-torque" cam  setup as found 
on a PG140.  While the addition of EFI greatly increased the  area under the 
torque curve, I think I'm still leaving some torque "on the  table" with that 
304 cam.  Thoughts?
 
Craig Nicol
66 Monza 140/4/3.08 EFI
65 Corsa 140/4/3.27 EFI
67 Monza 140/4/3.08 with PG cam mod (Econorun champ at 38.9 but not  
realistic result)
 
The issue is that my itch says that a Corvair should get 30+ mpg on  regular 
gas and one of the first issues is that to move the necessary air  should 
require less than 2 hp, 2.5 with losses. So when I hear that an  electric 
fan pulling 20 amps at 12v is working, that sounds about  right.

Next issue is that 3500 rpm at 70 which is at least 1,000 rpm too  high is 
another so I am going to do some playing there, with tires  initially, once 
I have a car. Reinforcing that is the note that the 3.08  ratio was 
developed for the Pure Oil trials. For this, after studying the  torque 
curves in Bob's book (yes, I do buy books - has nothing to do with my  
posting on the web) it appears that the 110 hp engine is best suited for  
this.

Not at all sure where this is going to wind up but will note that  the 
2.8/3.1 Chev 6 cyl used in cars in the 80s (just got out of Fieros)  
produces almost identical torque (170 lb-ft ) and gave 30 mpg. True carbs  
are "poorly controlled leaks" but with the right tools can do quite a bit  
there also.