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
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
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.
Moved to general. IDI section is for performance mods.
I'm getting 45 miles per gallon with about 200k on an 83 wagon. I am gonna compression test it soon.
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
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