MPG on a 92 PA

hey,


how much mpg should i get with my 92 PA sc? i looked at the figures on the net like carpoint and all.. they say 17/28.. can this be true?

i fueled the car 2 days ago and i drive 36 miles to go to work and back, plus normal driving around town.. and on the highway i drive 65 MPH on cruise control.. otherwise i findmyself doing 90 in a seconds :iceslolan

like since the last 2 days i did 100 miles and the car is already at the 3/4 of the tank...(btw, the needles kinda drop fast from the "over the full line" eh? some cars stay there for alot of mile bofre moving down)


i hope to get atleast 360 miles with my tank of fuel of premium. :uhoh:

you get 100 miles to a 1/4 tank???

I'm lucky to get 100 on a half a tank!

I think your milage is absolutley fine, and dont worry if its not up to factory specs, its old! :lol:

yeah it is kinda 14 years old.. but i dont want a gaz guzzler.. although having this much power while weighing 3500 pounds is kinda normal.. it pulls ALOT lol...i only push it sometimes, only when necessary..like when a rice boy with his suposeldy souped up honda with a 5 feet tall aluminium wing tries me...and thinks he can win...i'm sorry but i can't help myself :)



last night i got to a traffic light and some guy was trying out a new honda odissey with a salesman..they both looked at me funny and i saw the driver get into "watching for the green light in order to beat me to the next one" mode...so i did the same.. even though it has a 3.5 liter 24 valves 240 hp.. and about the same weight, the supercharger had the uppper hand...at the next light, the guy had a mad face and took off again with WOT.. itook off easy, the battle was won :d

I get around 21-23 city and 27 highway with 108K miles on motor and sythetic oil. Change you 02 sensor and a nice tune-up with plugs gapped at about .058 not 60 like the book says and you'll be on your way. Also If you get a cone air filter or K&n and remove the silencer at the front of the air box and remove the THROTTLE BODY SCREEN you will be on your way to a more power and mileage.

the screen is already off... as for the cone filter it's on as well.. i'll get plugs this weekend and install them.. are platinum good for those 3800?

Don't listen to anyone who says platnuim is good. it sucks. The factory copper plugs offer alot more performance. The car was biult and programmed with the resistance that the AC plug has and only runs best with the original and trust me, I have used every damn plug out there and for GM you use AC for ford you use Motorcraft ETc etc. The only alternative to this rule is the AC DELCO RAPID FIRES.. they are pretty nice and are platinum. 3.99 a plug

deadring, this guy with a honda civic and a fartcan muffler pulled out in front of me, he turned onto the road i had to turn on, and there are train tracks there, which he literally crawled over, while the rear of my car is half on and off the main road. He finally crosses, and gets up to about 60, the limit there is 55, but the guy ticked me off, I wind it up, passed him, and my speedo ran out of numbers, the fool tried to fight back. Buick Power!

You can't get the best of both worlds! You can't get more power and better gas mileage. To gain one you have to give up something. To increase power you need more gas. To increase gas mileage you have to give up power.

what if i get a cone filter and the screen of and good plugs...and i don't step on it too much ( try to) on the highway..wouldn't that get me good MPG ?

btw, i mesed with a mazda potege with an aliminium wing last night.. the guy was going 50 when i came up to him and he decided no one would pass him so i heard him down shift (prolly to third gear) and i just step on it and you could hear the SC wihining like crazy and i passed all the way to 90.. he wasn't coming even close... poor kid.. he catches me at the next light and looks in the car only to find 2 people in their 30's looking at him and laughing because all that sh!t on the car, the wings, spoilers, and big MAZDA sign 5 feet long on the side will not get you torque :)

I'm kind of new AND ignorant. What is a cone filter? What is this screen you are talking about?

I have a 1993 Ultra with the SuperCharger and I was surprised that it squalls tires as easily as it does. Has a lot of get up and move, huh? I've had it about 9 months now. Had a Mercury Sable before.

Hahahaha. I am getting 23 city and 38 highway on an 86 Lesabre LTD. I know things...

well maybe you don't carry as much weight and don't have a SC :) thats why..if i take off 700 pounts on the car i SHOULD get more MPG..and performance

so? I can't help it. The SC will only increase HP. Not torque. besides, I can sqeal the tires without even trying. Believe me, rice rockets can't keep up. Taking off wheight will not increase performance, but it will help b/c there is less work the motors part to get the car moving. Oh, and the Lesabre LTD with a turbo is only a few hundred pounds heavier than the PA. Heck, as old as mine is, it might be heavier that yours! It's just good on gas B/C the turbo isn't belt driven, and the motor doesn't use any extra power to drive it. :)

Buick Mastermind, please don't post about subjects you don't know about. You should not be posting in a thread about mpg on a 92 park ave, if you own the dinosaur that you do. They are completely different cars, and CANNOT be compared.

The fact of the matter is, SC add more air to be combusted, thereby generating horsepower. Torque is a function of horsepower, and they have an indirect relationship. Increase horsepower, generally increases torque in some proportion.

Please don't post again about issues you know nothing about, or you'll face my wrath.

buickmastermind : one word for ya.. inertia..one of the most important laws of physics..if you take off 500 pounds on a car you get the car ALOT better in handling and in acceleration.

and a SC DOES get more torque.. and the proof, a 3800 with non SC has 230 lbs of torque, and a SC version has 270-280 lbs of torque..well that 50 pounds of torque i add without getting a 350 CU v8 in is by far, more efficent than yours..it's like turbocharging... i' like to see you at a stop light with a eagle talon TSI AWD ..it's a 2 liter engine with ONLY 200 lbs of torque.. but does 0-60 in less than 7 seconds..an thats a bone stock one..

Actually, you need not to post stuff you don't have a clue about. The Buick LeSabre is not that much lighter than the PA. They are within a few hundred pounds. Torque, you would have learned if you ever took a physics class, is NOT directly related to horsepower. Taking wheight off a car will not neccesarily mean that you gain handling. It is where the majority of the wheight is located that effects handling. (center of gravity) If the CG is too high, no matter how small the car, your handling will still suck.
NO Buick has a more efficient motor than mine. I would like to see you get 38 mpg on your 3800, while getting 220 ft/lbs (might i add, the correct label for measuring torque) of torque and 260 horsepower. See, unfortunately for you, the 3.8l v6 on the 86-87 Lesabre/PA is much, much more powerful and efficient than the 3800 series one or two. It's only rival is in power on the Pontiac's series 3, but woe and behold, none of them get 38 mpg. Sorry, but you are both wrong. I don't disagree that a lighter car (Eagle Talon) could outstrip a heavier one, especially if they have the same amount of torque, but the torque cannot be increased without increasing the bore/stroke. That is not the function of a SC or TC. They pressurize the manifold, making it so that the piston isn't "sucking" air in, but rather air being forced in.
A 4-cylinder motor has, in general, larger piston heads than a v6 or a v8. That is why the Eagle is so fast. Ever heard of a short block? It is a term used by a machinist who is describing for you what they do when they rebuild your motor. It means that they bore out the motor block so they can fit larger pistons into the existing holes, thus increasing the torque. Suffice it to say that you have never come across an 86 Lesabre, because no matter what you have been told before, it doesn't have a 350 V8. The '85 did, but not the 86.
Any Buick that can smoke a camaro with the 305 ci v8 is worthy of bragging about.
"...if you own the dinosaur that you do." Dinosaur? I didn't know car companies made Dinosaurs!?

I say indirect relationship
You say NOT directly related
Same difference

I would like to see you get 38 mpg on your 3800, while getting 220 ft/lbs
I'd like the see YOU get that

torque cannot be increased without increasing the bore/stroke.
Interesting, the series I and II had the same bore/stroke, yet series II had more torque!

Dinosaur? I didn't know car companies made Dinosaurs!?
It's a term used to describe an older car moron!

Go ahead, post again with your misinformation, and it'll be your last!

*tman polishes his ban stick*

:)I do get that torque and gas mileage:). I am not lying. This isn't misinformation. And, my car is not a dinosaur. Give a few more years! :)

If the series I and II have the same bore/stroke, what did they change? Lever arm over...I get it! The tranny gear ratio! Wow.

You said:
"They are completely different cars, and CANNOT be compared."
Another Moderator said...
"Basically the Park Avenue just has an upgraded interior,and some extra badges. I also believe it has an upgraded suspension, don't take my word on this, but the ride in the Park Avenue just seemed smoother."
You said:
"and they have an indirect relationship. Increase horsepower, generally increases torque in some proportion."
1st grade math says...
x/y~y/x. as x goes up, y goes down.
:)
A dinosaur would be a Ford T-type, not a 18 year old buick.
Dinosaur: 1,000,000,000 years old. lizard is 2. is lizard a dinosaur? think...think...think...

the other moderater was referring to to the 92-97 lesabres, and 91-96 park avenues, your 86 lesabre is nothing like either car of those years!

Horsepower is a function[F(x)] of torque. To be precise, horsepower is defined as 550 foot-pounds per second. Dynomometers measure torque, and derive horsepower using torque X rpm / 5252 to get the horsepower number.

You and I have gotten this thread increasingly off topic, so lets try to drop the subject, shall we?

buickmastermind,

either way, in my experience IF you got a 350 CU in that dinosaur and even if you DID smoke some rice ( which i doubt you can smoke a good rice car some are very powerful in 0- 60 with that very short gearing) it's obvious if you you cannot get 38 MPG with it.. it's a carbed engine,the efficiency is LESS than EFI... otherwise, they would still make 3800 with carbies wouldn'they? and unless you changed the diff ratios in it it's not geared to pull like a caprice police pack on a impala with a LT1 in it... and they surely don't get 38 MPG.. then why should YOU?? and if you do get that 38 MPG, then please share how you do.. coze i wouln'd buy a 2005 volks jetta TDI which does 52 MPG.. i rather sit in a confortable le sabre with a v8 to blow the does of everybody.. rather than here that clack clack clack diesel with black smoke out the back at 45 MPH....

oh and for the dinosaur thing, .. the technology in them is from the 60 's.. i'm not insulting you or your car, i have books here abour cars that nick named them that way.. we didn't make this up :)

as for you " you should have gone to physic class" thing, i did and believe me, if it's not inertia that affecting the car with ALOT of weight it's centrifuge ( not sur it's written right,my english is bad, i'm french what can i say..sue me) and this will affect greatly cornering ... what an example? try to follow and 1970' austin mini cooper in streets at high speed.. there is no way you will be able to follow... why? weight, sur the center of gravity has a link to it.. im not telling you to race against a garbage truck here...

and why would formula 1 race car have a so low weight ?.. it,s around 1200 pounds i believe.. if wieght didn't plplay such a big role in perfoamrnace everybody would have race cars weighting 5000 LBS..like WRC ( world rally championship, they have to weight 1200 KG in the LEAST.. otherwise they can't race.. the lighter, the better i say..


to sum it up..

it's very important to have a low center of gravity.. but the less weight you carry the faster you are in every possible way.. including braking..


Deadring

DR- I think he says he has the 3.8, and he may be using the formula backwards to determine milage

Miles traveled/gallons used = Miles per gallon

either way, :owned:

LOL

either way, if he has an older version of the 3.8 he certainly can't beat newer ones, and no rice either...



buickmastermind said : "the torque cannot be increased without increasing the bore/stroke. That is not the function of a SC or TC"

let me give you an idea of how much can a TC add for torque

1999 civic Si = 125 HP - 107 of torque
1999 civic Sir = 170HP - 111 of torque
1998 eagle talon non turbo = 140 Hp - 135 of torque
1998 eagle talon TSI = 210 hp - 210 of torque...

result, you CAN add HP without adding torque..honda make the motor run at a higher RPM which i think is pretty worthless...unless you put in a shorter gearing... but if you add a turbo and keep the bore/stroke you WILL add ALOT more torque, and get the max torque pretty at lower RPM too...

i did not make this up, i knew about it and found proof before posting it

i took this from auto.consumerguide.com


:loser:


deadring

As far as beating some rice on the 3800 motor its possible in 91 and up years. I do it all day long, But as far as 38MPG, No way in hell... if you said 28 that would be believable on the highway with intake mods that we all do, but stock with all the emissions crap, no way. best 18-26mpg.

The 86-87 PA had a 3.8l v6, different than the 3800 series, but it would get 22/31 mpg. And, if you were lucky enough to get a turbo on that, the cheap rice rockets can't keep up. As for the better ones...keep trying.

BTW a short block engine referrs only to the rebuilt main part of the engine block, It is without the valve heads. A long block is a complete engine, including the valve heads that have been rebuilt. Sometimes it's a bit cheaper to get a short block with just the pistons, rings, main bearings, rod bearings, and new oil pumpt all assembled, and you put your own heads back on the short block.

parkavenuechrome : it's your tranny that makes the diffrence, you got a shorter gear final ratio...all 94 and up have that.. on a GP GTP it's even shorter.. i get about 8.8 - 9 sec 0-60.. you must get atleast 7.5

deadring

What year is your car deadring? If I have a lower ratio I can still compete with the higher end ratio's. Its all in your motor and what torque it puts out. For example, My 5.0L mustang has 3.27 Rear Gear ratio, and I smoke mustangs with 3.55s or 3.73s easily, but thats due to a crazy cam and basically motor combo. If you don't have a motor to back up your rear end, rear end ratio's are worthless, they give you the allusion of HP but its all the same in the end. But i do understand what your saying. I would like to put in a trans from a grand AM in my PA if possible, I believe there the same. But have different ratio's. whats the fastest out there in the 4t60E?

well , since torque makes acceleration.. and hp gives you top speed, i saw that if you take a small car..like a civic Si VS a civic SIR... both have a 1600 cc engine.. both have about the same torque.. 108 for Si and 111 for SIR and the same weight, they should have about the same accelration from 0- 60 ...but for some reason the SI is at 9 sec and the SIR is at 7.5...1.5 seconds in acceleration on 0- 60 is ALOT considering it has only 4 ft/lbs in between them.. we both know that it's not that slight diffrence thats makes up for the 1.5 seconds... so i asked around and and checked in my 98 car guide and yes the Sir DOES have a shorter final ratio.. which makes the car slower in top speed.. like 15 MPH or so.. but who cares :)

it's at a stop light that's it's fun right?


so by checking that and in my 92 car guide ( i have a few years ) i noticed the gearing not being the same .. so my PA sc 1992 has a taller final ratio.. even taller then a 1992 bonneville SSEI which is the same drivetrain.. same 4T65.. although the don't have the same gearing.. and in a 1998 grand-prix GTP it's even shorter/ more geared for acceleration and that why the car has a series 2 3800 with 240 HP and 280 ft/lbs of torque and accelerate 0 - 60 in 6.95..

of course there may be a weight diff between a GP GTP and a PA 92 like mine, i know that.. but gearing does play lot.. and i dont see myself "camming" a 3800 in a PA 92 lol

as for your 5.0, well the engine already has alot of torque and the weight is rather low.. compared to a PA that is.

but if you check on the web a little you will see that one of the best rice killer there is.. a cavalier/ sunfire..i dont really like those beucause there are trouble prone.. but what do guys do is bolt in a 3800 series 2 on the manual tranny! it seems it's a direct swap and they use clucth or some sort.. use all the ECU / weiring of the doner car.. how can you beat a cavalier with 280 ft/lbs of torque bolted on a 5 speed with 2500 pounds to haul? i don't think that the getrag gearbox will holdthat much torque long .. but heck.. it must pull ALOT :)) but not enough to make my own :)


anyways, my PA is a 92 and the best i can get in 8.8 - seconds...

and i think 94 and newer has a better gearing.

deadring

Deadring, let me tell ya, If I could put a 5spd on the PA and have it look tight wow, i would do that in a heart beat. could you imagine that? that would be pretty awsome. but between the honda's there, alot of it is in the ECM too.. timing curves etc.

still but the power to weight ratio in a sunfire with a 3800 5 sp must be incredible...

if i ever blow my tranny im' gonna try to get myself a 95+ tranny..and from a GP GTP.. ;)

deadring

Sunfires don't come with a 3800 V6... they come stock with the 2.2L or 2.4L 4cyl.. The v6 option i belive is a 2.8L.. but most definetly not a 3800 3.8L...

I don't believe you COULD get a 3800 engine in there without major mods.

Now I'm not sure which year, but the Skylark got the 3800 once, and man did it fly!

parkavenuechrome : i know they don't come stock with a 3800 nor is there a way to get on in option.. but guy do it.. i even saw guy fitting one in a fiero..imagine the power..

if i may post this here.. i hope i can wihotu being banned, it's just to show thats it's do-able

http://www.westcoastfiero.com/engine_conversion/Engines.html

check it out.. one has a 4.9 v8 from a cadillac in the back :o

DR, theres nothing wrong with posting links to other sites, as long as your not specifically advertising for that site. Your link shows a helpful website, relating to a post you made earlier. Good job!

Sunfires don't come with a 3800 V6... they come stock with the 2.2L or 2.4L 4cyl.. The v6 option i belive is a 2.8L.. but most definetly not a 3800 3.8L...

The 2.8L has been out of production since the early 90s. It is the 3.1L or 3.4L V6 that is being used in GM models depending on the model year.The 3.8L is in the mid size carlines.

it's funny that the 3800 bloc bolts on directly to the manual transmission on a cavalier..just the clutch that must need a bit of fitting .. maybe?
it even bolts on to the old 125 A/T in a fiero.. which is the same as a cavalier tranny..

i still can't imagine a fiero with a 3800 SC or a northstar 4.6 ..my god !!! :)

well now if were talking the 4.6L northstar thats another issue.. I wish the PA's had that motor.. I would love to trade my PA for a Caddy with the 4.6L..

Then you can get to put in a quart of oil every 900 miles and put elect tape over the SES light. My 95 PA gets 240 miles on 8 gallons doing 70MPH all the way. The Northstar makes a nice anchor.

I have drivin that motor before.. It didn't give my buddy any trouble about oil consumption.