View Single Post
Old 05-27-2002, 02:43 PM   #4
84LX89GT
Mustangs
 
84LX89GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,938
Default

I've had two 5.0L mustangs and one 2.3L mustang here's what i had (all were 5 speed cars):
my '91 2.3L got 18-22 miles per gallon regularly (100k on engine)
my '84 5.0L LX got 16-19mpg regularly (150k)
my '89 GT gets regularly 17-21mpg (125k)
My GT also has 3.55 gears and a few mods that i would think reduces gas mileage (mileage is the same as when i bought it with only a few small mods).
The power differance easily justifies the purchase of a 5.0L over a 2.3L. I think the main reason i got the mileage i did was because a 2.3L has to work harder to move a 3000+ lb. vehicle so you have to floor it more which makes the engine pretty inefficient if it's trying to run richer for more power all the time. I used to have to wrap it out at full throttle and drop gears just to make it up hills, now i go part throttle in one gear and the torque just pulls it up hills.
i usually get 220-260 miles per tank of gas depending on when i fill up (hardly ever get to the "E" mark, but close) usually i fill up 10.5 to 12.5 gallons.
__________________
2005 Suzuki Hayabusa GSX1300-R

1980 Ford Thunderbird - 255 V8
ported heads, 5.0L ported stock headers, O.R. H-pipe and Flowmaster 2-chambers, dual roller timing chain
hi-po Mack Truck hood emblem

1985 Mustang GT 5.0L T5, F-303, GT40p, headers, off-road h, flowmasters, MSD stuff, etc.

Sold 02/06/04
1989 Mustang GT ET: 13.304@102.29 mph (5-24-03)

Sold - 1998 Mustang Cobra coupe, 1/4 mile - street tires: 13.843@103.41 (bone stock)
84LX89GT is offline   Reply With Quote