|
|
Item Posts
Sort Order
|
|
|
fuel economy difference between 202, and a 210 duration cam?
|
bdvdw
New User
| Posts: 29
| Joined: 12/08
Posted: 08/16/09
05:59 AM
|
|
does any one have any back to back fuel economy tests of a 202@ intake duration at .050 lift vs 210@ intake duration at .050 lift?
the magazine cam of choice seems to be around 210@ intake duration at .050 lift
factory is closer to 202@ intake duration at .050 lift.
i'm searching for fuel economy on vehicles that spend a majority of their driveing cruise time between 1000-2000rpm.
please post mpg's if you have them. and engine size. trans , cruise mph ect.
thanks.
i'm having a little difficulty deciding which cam, cause i still don't have enough info. 
|
|
|
|
bdvdw
New User
| Posts: 29
| Joined: 12/08
Posted: 08/20/09
05:06 PM
|
|
doesn't anyone out there care about real supercars?!
you know daily drivers that don't scare the hell out of you at the gas pump.
v8's that might even compare to a 500hp turbo 4cylinder in both power and milage.
i know my commute at 132miles a day is a bit much, but no way am i livin in some garbage filled, shoot, and rob your neigbors city.
and i aint buying some crappy house that costs more to fix than it did to purchase.
what the hell?!
i wanna see some real world cam tests. i could do it myself, but i'm budget limited.
my motors pushing over 3,000 hours, yes thats right 3,000 hours and still gets over 26mpg, with my 91 factory TBI 5.0 camaro, it aint no beauty queen, but there's no rust, and for the most part it's in good shape, even if i'm pushing 320,000+ miles,
but i've already started dropping mpg's from 28+mpg 3 years ago to the 26mpg it gets now 
i need some cheese and crackers with all my wine. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|