Quantum Economy

[Mark(The Miser)UK]

I see there are a few Quantum drivers here.
I'm interested in finding out the range of fuel economy achieved by all of us. State imperial gals or [US]...
{conversion is simply: 'x by 10' & '/ by 12' to go imp to US.}

I'm especially interested in 'worn out' engines and new engines to see if  'compression ratio' is a factor.

My current 'Q' does from  39[32] to 45 [37.5].  Timing set at 1mm (car timing was previously .93 and gave a mixed driving economy of 36 [30].
Engine low mileage compression not measured but no oil burning and minimal blowby so assumed good.

My previous 'Q' began life doing 36 [30] and tuning 'Miser style' upped it to 45 [37.5] to 62 [51.5]  Timing corrected and tinkering with Spaceship. Along with exhaust from 5 ganger [about 2" dia] and a cloth based air filter. Engine about 180000 and it did burn oil. Blowby acceptable. Compression assumed lower than new.
Cheers

Summary                IMPmpg [US mpg]      Compression
Q1: 1988 hydroTD  45 [37.5] to 62 [51.5]                     Low
Q2: 1985 mech TD  39[32] to 45 [37.5].                       High

[TDForNow]

HI Mark,

Well I've got a well-worn Quantum, 472k miles with a re-ring and hone at 225k, haven't checked the compression yet (scared to! :oops: ) but it has lots of blow-by and won't start without being plugged-in when it's below 15 deg F!

Uses oil, about a quart every tankfull, not all burnt though, some getting by the p.o.s. paper oil pan gasket.  Most of my driving is 115 miles daily motorway, 70-75 mph and I'm getting 40-42 mpg US.

 Stock exhaust has just rotted through at the bottom of the down-pipe and I've finally washed my K & N for the first time in three years  :shock:  :shock: !! I've previously fiddled with the fuel screw and both sides of spaceship lid but now that everythings opened up now, it doesn't smoke much after warm-up (except during a hard hi-rev pull when it grabs some blow-by that pooled up in the intake :lol: ). I've also got the cam advanced just slightly to help the bottom-end. I don't exactly know what the timing's set at I've been timing it by ear and seat of the pants. So far so good  :wink:

Alain

[greggearhead]

Hmm - my reference may be of no use to you.  I had a 1979 Dasher that I installed a 2.0 Gas engine and a 1993 Fox 5 speed.  I got a best of 36-37 mpg US just tooling along at 75mph.  The Fox gearbox has wide ratios and the 2.0 had enough torque to just scoot along without downshifting if I didn't want to go fast.  

I would think you could do just as well as a Rabbit/Golf 1 in most situations, except that the TD Quantums had a close-ratio transmission compared to the Fox unit I used.

[fspGTD]

Moved to general.  IDI section is for performance mods.

[Methanolab]

I'm getting 45 miles per gallon with about 200k on an 83 wagon. I am gonna compression test it soon.

[mainer]

I've got an 85 145k on it. Only driven in the summer, about the most rust free quantum on the east coast. It was using about a quart ever 3k. So the p/o rebiult the engine and turbo. its got about 15k on the new motor and turbo. I'm getting 42 around town pumps turned up a little. no muffler, jsut the resonator. and the air intake box was choped up.

Coop
_________________
Gnosticism Forum

[Mark(The Miser)UK]

Thanks for all the replies guys. We gotta stick together what with all these Rabbits running around!
Although king rabbit demoted this thread to 'general'; I actually think it is 'performance' related: :shock:
I wanted to see the natural spread of economies of our Quantae and what may be the deciding factors assuming correct injector operation.  Anyone else run the larger diameter 5 cylinder gasser exhaust from downpipe back? On my previous car I increased economy by some 50% by tuning etc :lol:
In the summer when I bring out my latest 'Q' [a gasser] and drop this current TD into it; I might test a theory that running  new (so correct spray pattern) n/a nozzles at a lower pressure will increase economy significantly.  :?:  
Cheers