Aftermarket cams...What gas mileage do you get?
02-03-2006, 11:36 PM
#23
Originally Posted by Bad Blu Formula
I hope you get headers before you install that cam dude. They'll help a little with the gas mileage not to mention the 25 horses you'll be leaving on the table.
I'll be getting lowering springs and some GOOD shocks. I was just curious and learning/planning ahead about my future mods. I don't really wanna put in a cam till after I upgrade the stock clutch and hydralics. With my future cam install I want a new ported LS6 oil pump, timing chain, hardend pushrods, and Ideally....the Patriot LS6 Stage 2 Assembled heads and new lifters! Oh and the means for a tune.
02-04-2006, 07:53 AM
#24
LS1TECH Sponsor
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: RI
Posts: 5,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when i had my tr230 i got 19-20 city and 26+ highway 4.10 gears m6
new h/c setup gets me 17 city 24ish highway but i have issues with my right oot going to the floor
new h/c setup gets me 17 city 24ish highway but i have issues with my right oot going to the floor
02-04-2006, 11:48 AM
#25
For a 2002 SS, the EPA fuel economy ratings are 18-mpg city, 26 highway, and 22 combined. I have not even come close to numbers that good and my car is a stock M6, except for a lid.
With all due respect, there's no friggen way on earth that a car with a cam and gears can come close to the EPA rating.
With all due respect, there's no friggen way on earth that a car with a cam and gears can come close to the EPA rating.
02-04-2006, 12:19 PM
#26
LS1TECH Sponsor
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: RI
Posts: 5,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its very atainable i averaged 28 when somewhat stock lid/catback just cant be on it 24/7
my friends 535rwhp procharged vette gets 33 with the a/c on driving respectfully
it is very possible
my friends 535rwhp procharged vette gets 33 with the a/c on driving respectfully
it is very possible
02-04-2006, 12:36 PM
#27
Originally Posted by badpewter-z
its very atainable i averaged 28 when somewhat stock lid/catback just cant be on it 24/7
my friends 535rwhp procharged vette gets 33 with the a/c on driving respectfully
it is very possible
my friends 535rwhp procharged vette gets 33 with the a/c on driving respectfully
it is very possible
Maybe there was an error in calculation.
Last edited by ShevrolayZ28; 02-04-2006 at 12:42 PM.
02-04-2006, 02:56 PM
#28
Staging Lane
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Nortern Idaho
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShevrolayZ28
I can't bring myself to believe that. Not even down hill, with a tail wind, and my grandmother driving. Sorry.
Maybe there was an error in calculation.
Maybe there was an error in calculation.
02-04-2006, 07:09 PM
#30
Staging Lane
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I drive the exact same route every day to/from work. 3 miles highway @70 mph, 17 miles city with a little traffic. Before H/C, 20 avg. After H/C 17 avg, sometimes 18. If I have to idle for long in traffic the mileage really suffers, it can go to 15. Pure highway at 80 is about 20, used to be about 22. If I go 65 on the highway mileage used to be about 26, but I seldom go only 65.
All in in all I figure I lost 2-3 mpg combined. But I gained 104 RWHP and dropped 1 second in the quarter (more to come) so you have to give something for all that power.
Just installed 3:90's last week, not broken in yet, so jury still out on that. I know I now do a 1-4-6 when putting around, so I'm hoping mileage in the city may stay close to the same. The gears make the H/C car easier to drive, feels like it lost 500 lbs. Can't wait to hit the strip... 11's here I come.
All in in all I figure I lost 2-3 mpg combined. But I gained 104 RWHP and dropped 1 second in the quarter (more to come) so you have to give something for all that power.
Just installed 3:90's last week, not broken in yet, so jury still out on that. I know I now do a 1-4-6 when putting around, so I'm hoping mileage in the city may stay close to the same. The gears make the H/C car easier to drive, feels like it lost 500 lbs. Can't wait to hit the strip... 11's here I come.
02-04-2006, 08:12 PM
#32
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Texas
Posts: 8,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, when I was just a full bolt-on car (before the new motor/cam) I was getting close to 30mpg on the highway and 18-20 in the city - thats with 3.89 gears and a Moser 9" full spool.
Now I have a stock rear end again(don't ask) and 3.42s, but a new cam. Once it gets fully tuned and such, I'll know more. Right now since its not tuned I have to rev it more to get it out of the hole, also the gear disadvantage - so I'm gettin shitty mileage.
Anyhow, its perfectly possible to get that kind of gas mileage on a modded LS1. Especially after long tubes, since your gas mileage gets BETTER with them - providing you can lay off the gas pedal. When you have half a dozen people saying something is so - maybe you should entertain the idea its doable. Just b/c you can't achieve that same result doesn't mean its not possible.
Now I have a stock rear end again(don't ask) and 3.42s, but a new cam. Once it gets fully tuned and such, I'll know more. Right now since its not tuned I have to rev it more to get it out of the hole, also the gear disadvantage - so I'm gettin shitty mileage.
Anyhow, its perfectly possible to get that kind of gas mileage on a modded LS1. Especially after long tubes, since your gas mileage gets BETTER with them - providing you can lay off the gas pedal. When you have half a dozen people saying something is so - maybe you should entertain the idea its doable. Just b/c you can't achieve that same result doesn't mean its not possible.
02-04-2006, 09:06 PM
#33
Originally Posted by cyphur_traq
Well, when I was just a full bolt-on car (before the new motor/cam) I was getting close to 30mpg on the highway and 18-20 in the city - thats with 3.89 gears and a Moser 9" full spool.
Now I have a stock rear end again(don't ask) and 3.42s, but a new cam. Once it gets fully tuned and such, I'll know more. Right now since its not tuned I have to rev it more to get it out of the hole, also the gear disadvantage - so I'm gettin shitty mileage.
Anyhow, its perfectly possible to get that kind of gas mileage on a modded LS1. Especially after long tubes, since your gas mileage gets BETTER with them - providing you can lay off the gas pedal. When you have half a dozen people saying something is so - maybe you should entertain the idea its doable. Just b/c you can't achieve that same result doesn't mean its not possible.
Now I have a stock rear end again(don't ask) and 3.42s, but a new cam. Once it gets fully tuned and such, I'll know more. Right now since its not tuned I have to rev it more to get it out of the hole, also the gear disadvantage - so I'm gettin shitty mileage.
Anyhow, its perfectly possible to get that kind of gas mileage on a modded LS1. Especially after long tubes, since your gas mileage gets BETTER with them - providing you can lay off the gas pedal. When you have half a dozen people saying something is so - maybe you should entertain the idea its doable. Just b/c you can't achieve that same result doesn't mean its not possible.
If we get more air in there, we need to get more fuel in, too. Is this not true?
No disrespect intended but I don't believe everything I read on a message board. Entertain what I read? Yes.
02-04-2006, 11:08 PM
#34
LS1TECH Sponsor
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: RI
Posts: 5,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes more air = more fuel but EFFICENCY(sp?) is what dictates the mpg so it also lies on the tuning of the car . if you cruise the car it will still get great mialge and sip gas. you drive it hard it shows on the mpg too . not everybody is always driving as hard as others
also my buddys 67 GTO ls1/m6 averages 27mpg still stock just true duals
it is possible .
i will say some brands of gas are worse than others though because they have more cleaners/chemiclas in them
also my buddys 67 GTO ls1/m6 averages 27mpg still stock just true duals
it is possible .
i will say some brands of gas are worse than others though because they have more cleaners/chemiclas in them
02-05-2006, 01:29 AM
#35
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShevrolayZ28
For a 2002 SS, the EPA fuel economy ratings are 18-mpg city, 26 highway, and 22 combined. I have not even come close to numbers that good and my car is a stock M6, except for a lid.
With all due respect, there's no friggen way on earth that a car with a cam and gears can come close to the EPA rating.
So some of you are experiencing better-than-stock fuel economy after installing a high performance camshaft? Supercharged too? *shakes head*
With all due respect, there's no friggen way on earth that a car with a cam and gears can come close to the EPA rating.
So some of you are experiencing better-than-stock fuel economy after installing a high performance camshaft? Supercharged too? *shakes head*
City MPG 19, Highway MPG 28.
These are ESTIMATED AVERAGES. The fine print below reads thusly- "Actual mileage will vary with options, driving conditions, driving habits and vehilce condition. Results reported to the EPA indicate that the majority of vehicles with these estimates will achieve between 16 and 22 mpg in the city and betweeen 23 and 33 mpg on the highway."
Dude, you just got totally
Seriously, before you start calling BS on people you might want to actually check your facts. Nobody on this thread so far has reported mileage in excess of the EPA reported maximums. The estimated averages are just that: averages.
02-05-2006, 01:44 AM
#36
Launching!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: NorCal, bay area
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShevrolayZ28
These threads always crack me up. You'll get about as many acurate answers as you would if you were asking how long everyone's shlong is.
BTW, mine is 14".
BTW, mine is 14".
You gotta feed your horses! I know 2.0 4 bangers with 400 hp that get worse gas mileage than LS1's with 400 hp.
02-05-2006, 02:44 AM
#37
Originally Posted by Silverhawk_02TA
Here's a dose of reality fo' yo' ***, and this is quoted straight off the original dealer window sticker for my TA:
City MPG 19, Highway MPG 28.
These are ESTIMATED AVERAGES. The fine print below reads thusly- "Actual mileage will vary with options, driving conditions, driving habits and vehilce condition. Results reported to the EPA indicate that the majority of vehicles with these estimates will achieve between 16 and 22 mpg in the city and betweeen 23 and 33 mpg on the highway."
Dude, you just got totally
Seriously, before you start calling BS on people you might want to actually check your facts. Nobody on this thread so far has reported mileage in excess of the EPA reported maximums. The estimated averages are just that: averages.
City MPG 19, Highway MPG 28.
These are ESTIMATED AVERAGES. The fine print below reads thusly- "Actual mileage will vary with options, driving conditions, driving habits and vehilce condition. Results reported to the EPA indicate that the majority of vehicles with these estimates will achieve between 16 and 22 mpg in the city and betweeen 23 and 33 mpg on the highway."
Dude, you just got totally
Seriously, before you start calling BS on people you might want to actually check your facts. Nobody on this thread so far has reported mileage in excess of the EPA reported maximums. The estimated averages are just that: averages.
This link shows that the 2002 Camaro was rated at 25 highway/16 city. FWIW
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm
Some of you might find this one interesting too.
http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/420f06009.htm
It explains how the EPA intends to change their rating method, so that the resulting numbers represent a more "real world" value. The new numbers could be as much as 15% lower for the highway and 20% lower for the city.
So the new and more acurate EPA fuel economy numbers for the 2002 Camaro might be in the vacinity of 13 city and 21 highway. (Those numbers are more like what I'm getting.)
Just about everyone that posted in this thread is getting better mileage than I am, and many of these cars have cams. Do I drive that much harder than everyone else? Somehow I doubt it!
My car has 30k mi and runs well. I just don't get it. Last edited by ShevrolayZ28; 02-05-2006 at 03:16 AM.
02-05-2006, 08:22 AM
#38
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Plainfield, CT
Posts: 10,520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ave. 20 mpg with mods in sig. 24mpg when I do a lot of highway driving. A lot of hills in New England, so your gas milage would be higher. I got great milage when I took a trip south.
02-05-2006, 10:36 AM
#39
Most of these #'s, I can live with. Anything under 15-16 city and 20 Hwy would suck IMO. My old 97' 3.8L V6 A4 constantly got 16-17 MPG in the city. I got 18 once. On a 400mi HWY trip, I made 28 tho? My Trans Am constantly gets 19/29......and my car has 122,000 on the clock
Anything under 15-16 city and 20 Hwy would suck IMO. My old 97' 3.8L V6 A4 constantly got 16-17 MPG in the city. I got 18 once. On a 400mi HWY trip, I made 28 tho? My Trans Am constantly gets 19/29......and my car has 122,000 on the clock
02-05-2006, 02:06 PM
#40
It is not uncommon for my brother to get 29 to 30 out of his 2002 Z28 on the highway. 2:73's cruisin at 60mph makes for good milage. That is going from Fayetteville AR to Pocahontas AR.
My 2000 Z28 with 3:73's, headers, lid, and TSP mail order tune gets 25-26 highway no problem
My 2000 Z28 with 3:73's, headers, lid, and TSP mail order tune gets 25-26 highway no problem