![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
not sure about the r/mk one , but thats what most people will probably familiar with
https://studiosofthewild.com/wp/
1989 VW T3 , I love that car more then I probably should Edit: ferrari banana for scale
its actually the 2.1L petrol version watercooled,with around 90 horsepower.
Yep , it also rusts everywhere... but at least the stickers look sharpbrowncow wrote: 14 Jun 2023, 08:36 Oh boy do VW's from the 80s rust.
Nice stickers tho! they look high quality
I especially like the alps logo, very nicely cutguidemetothelight wrote: 14 Jun 2023, 15:00its actually the 2.1L petrol version watercooled,with around 90 horsepower.
It guzzles gas like crazy though (about 15 L in the city).
I guess the shitty 3 speed automatic isnt really helping![]()
Yep , it also rusts everywhere... but at least the stickers look sharpbrowncow wrote: 14 Jun 2023, 08:36 Oh boy do VW's from the 80s rust.
Nice stickers tho! they look high quality![]()
Off-topic, but please indulge a US resident on what "15L" means.
yeah it is , but thats worst case... most of the time its more about 11-12. Normally its more like 9-10 with that engine , but the gearbox is the culprit here.browncow wrote: 14 Jun 2023, 16:20 15L is quite much, even my single carb 2,3L volvo 240 doesnt drink that much, I bet with a manual it would be much more reasonable, but gotta keep in mind that's a big car too... Definitely worth fixing the rust tho, lovely car![]()
thats exactly it ! but only in the worst of all cases , inner city traffic. Normally its more like 11..fohat wrote: 14 Jun 2023, 16:56 the only distance that seems to be in the proper order of magnitude for 15 liters of fuel would be 100km ....
My beloved Honda, in best conditions, on the open road with the air conditioner off, could probably get to 10.guidemetothelight wrote: 14 Jun 2023, 17:20
the worst of all cases , inner city traffic. Normally its more like 11..
Driving long distance on a highway at cuck speed will usually give you incredible fuel economy while city traffic where a lot of the fuel is used to wear down brake pads is terrible for fuel economy. If these old american V8 engines were fuel efficient by any modern standard, people wouldn‘t be converting them to LPG all the time over here.Polecat wrote: 14 Jun 2023, 17:53 My 60 year old Ford van with a 5 liter carbureted V8 engine got 21 MPG (~11L if I did the math correctly) on a 3000 mile road trip recentlty. How is it that newer, fuel injected engines can get such crappy mileage?
Not the answer I was looking for, but agreed on the type of driving. I just looked up the GVW ratings on the newer version of the Ford vans, and the unladen weight of the 2001 model (6400 pounds) is more than double the unladen weight of my 1965 (about 3000 pounds) and is also more than the fully loaded GVW of mine (4930 pounds). So carrying around an extra van load of gratuitous junk might have some effect on the MPG also.Wodan wrote: 14 Jun 2023, 18:10
Driving long distance on a highway at cuck speed will usually give you incredible fuel economy while city traffic where a lot of the fuel is used to wear down brake pads is terrible for fuel economy. If these old american V8 engines were fuel efficient by any modern standard, people wouldn‘t be converting them to LPG all the time over here.
yeah, I´ve only got that kinda milage once, driving 80 km/h on the highway behind big semi trailer.... 9.5 liters for 100 km but that kinda driving is just annoying
very interesting to find out that your 60´s van weighs almost the same as mine.Polecat wrote: 15 Jun 2023, 05:01 and the unladen weight of the 2001 model (6400 pounds) is more than double the unladen weight of my 1965 (about 3000 pounds)
In my first job out of school I drove an Econoline of that same vintage, with my right leg mere inches from the 6-cylinder engine.