Does it defeat the purpose of the good gas mileage when you spend 100k in parts to get there?

If your concerned about saving that much fuel but willing to spend how ever much to accomplish it, seems kinda counterproductive.

love that Green Bean build

I love the idea of these alternative engines, unfortunatly the guys paying the bills usually just dont want to take any risk away from the LS norm. If I had my choice though......

Great point, You can buy a lot of gas for 50k :D

Since when do muscle cars and counterproductive not go hand-in-hand? :lol:

I had a customer mention to me earlier today that he should have bought a Rolls Royce for the amount of money he was dumping into his Mustang. But anyone with the right wallet can go out and buy a Rolls Royce, I said, and his Mustang will be completely unique.

I would start with a smaller lighter car.
1962-65 Nova is about 2500 lbs with the straight 6.

put the turbo charged ecotec engine in it from a Pontiac solstice. 28mpg

Well if you're thinking about Alternative fuels.... Blake at 417 Motorsports (green bean) also did a TT dura max in a 66-7 Nova wagon. He could tell you the mileage on that one as well I'm sure. :thumbsup:
http://www.hotrod.com/cars/featured/...station-wagon/

Did the customer change his mind now that gas is $2 a gallon... LOL


I agree with Rodger.... WTF does a guy care about MPG if he's spending 150K to build a car. To the folks that say strip everything out to save weight... who'd want to drive that every day?


MPG has been figured out by every OEM... small lightweight cars with tiny engines... or you buy a New Corvette and keep your foot out of it... but then why would you want a Corvette? LOL I don't get it.

I get 17 MPG out of a 61 Buick, driven daily (ave over 100 miles a day mostly Hwy driven) with a poorly tuned carbed 350 SBC,

It's heavy, not aero, and very poorly tuned.

30 MPG is very doable.

X2. I'm curious.