new engines or old?

im just woundering whats people opion on engines ....do u like the computer system in the new day so u can hacl into it and make more horse power or do u like having to tear apart the engine every time u want to add more horse power?

teenwith38chevy said:

im just woundering whats people opion on engines ....do u like the computer system in the new day so u can hacl into it and make more horse power or do u like having to tear apart the engine every time u want to add more horse power?

Click to expand...

It depends on the "era" your going for.
For me, anything manufactured AFTER 1954 is too NEW!

Engines made before 1954, (or the 1970's) for the most part relied on the machining skills of the owner. The combination of the "pieces" (speed equipment) used would give you a basic output.

The "Fine tuning" of those engines was what got the last little bit of HP out of them.

"Hacking" into the computers on more modern engines is not exactly the way to improve their performance. They are a "compromise" between HP and Economy.

I hate computers...so that pretty much answers the question.

I,m kinda kicking around the idea of a 9.5 to 1 comp ratio tuned port injected 409 stroker for my model Eh sedan project ..77.

Anything old works for me...... computers are for the ricers.

Teen, The new engines are fine and dandy for your everyday drive car that you will one day trade in and move onto another late model thing, they will start first kick without having to give the gas peddle 2 kicks to activate the auto choke. But the reality is they aren't really that much more fuel efficient than the old ones.

I'll give you an example here, 30+ odd years ago I had a 66 4 door Impala 283 2 barrel carb and powerglide (no, no over drive 4 speed in those days). For no real reason other than interest sake I did a fuel test over a 3 month period so that consisted of round town running and country running, being in New Zealand there are a few hills and the roads weren't as good as they are today (so therefore you had to work a car harder) and that car averaged over the 3 months 24.7 miles to the gallon. Ahhh you might not think that is so good, Okay I used to drive that thing pretty hard and a set of steel belt radials would last 14,000 miles and the normal old cross ply tires would last about 3,000 and there were no burn outs involved with that either just a lot of quick hard miles. Now think about this if you were to drive a new V8 car which weighs a whole lot less than that car did with all the computer stuff on it supposidly keeping it tuned ever second I really don't think you would get any better fuel consumption that that old 283 did back then. For sure I know you would have got better mileage and tire wear if you drove more conservatively.

The only way to really tell is to do a decent test like over a long period like the 3 months and then see what you are truely getting for fuel mileage and drive it like you always do or will if you are conservitave like I am now days then drive it like that. Also take into consideration the weight of the car and all that stuff as well. Then also compare apples with apples and if you are driving a late model car as in everything near new you would have to make sure that the old carb was set right (or a new one) as with everything else in the tune set up. Todays engines sure do have a bit of a head start because you only have to look at the High voltage charge that runs through the ignition system and if you had that on the older engines they would have run more efficiently as well, but that was only race car stuff back then.

As I say I was a mad fella back then and you will find a lot of guys on here who were the same and travelled at break neck speeds, because that is the way it was back then. There was way less traffic on the roads and way less cops than today. Some of the roads compared to todays roads were almost goat tracks so that also has to be taken into consideration. I also had another 66 Impala with a 283 with a 4 barrel quadrajet carb which I know was a more efficent car as well but can't recall now what I got out of that.

I really don't think we are any further ahead so far as mileage is concerned in a true power to weight test so with me the older designed engines and cars come out head and shoulders above what we are told is a you beaut thing today. If you set the old engines up right from day one there would not be a problem like wet sensors or dirt on the sensors etc etc. So give me the older engines over these things I can't do anything with. You know even the tires, oils and greases are better today so it is hard to compare the 2 in a proper and true manner unless you were to have access to a fully restored car and then could just hop into a new similar car and do the same thing. Even from driver to driver you will get a difference.

Just give me the old way where a man could do everything at home and set things up how he wanted instead of having to go to a service centre with a computer to read what is going on. We used to read spark plugs etc where today they don't even give them a second look and just replace them. Problems were a lot easier to chase down when 1 did arise.

Just a bit of a ramble for the night but food for thought.

Cheers, John