Gas Mileage

[Schurkey]

Driving style is the single biggest factor for fuel economy.

Next up is probably tune-up items:
Does the vacuum advance work? Centrifugal advance?
Is the dwell and the ignition timing set properly?
Spark plugs and wires in good condition?
Idle mixture screws adjusted appropriately?
Engine in sound mechanical condition--no sloppy timing chain, no leaky valves or piston rings?

Lastly, there's a million other things that can affect mileage, such as brakes dragging, tires under-inflated, or three hundred pounds of sandbags (or Mother-In-Law) in the trunk or passenger seat.

The L-A-S-T thing you want to do if fuel economy is a factor is to drop some square-bore carb onto the manifold. The aftermarket is FULL of brand-new carbs that won't work as well as a PROPERLY FUNCTIONING Quadrajet. And Edelbrock hasn't made "direct replacement" carbs for Toronados--ever. The Edelbrock Quadrajet line was discontinued years ago; and even those had WRONG throttle levers and fuel inlet location. (I know--there's one on MY Toro, and I had to bend the throttle lever and fabricate new fuel tubing from pump to carb.)

[68 Toro]

I get 11.5 city, 14 highway.

[Schurkey]

Lastly, there's a million other things that can affect mileage, such as brakes dragging, tires under-inflated, or three hundred pounds of sandbags (or Mother-In-Law) in the trunk or passenger seat.

Another item that could make a huge difference in mileage on an early ('66--'67) Toro, or any Toro that's had a switch-pitch transmission installed is having the torque converter perpetually in the high-stall mode. I forgot that one first time around...

The opposite problem--torque converter perpetually in low-stall mode--would make the vehicle sluggish to accelerate at lower speed.

[Dracofrost]

Well, I had already done new spark wires and plugs, but after using a carb rebuild kit and cleaning everything else, I'm now getting about 12 mpg city. Nice change from 7. Haven't tested mainly highway driving yet.

[69W34]

Here is laundry list of items that affect both performance and mileage:

Driver Technique:
Carburetor Condition:
Time since last rebuild - Internal Problems - Mis-adjusted - $#!+Y gas
Motor Condition:
Compression - Timing Chain issues - Vacuum Leaks - Valve Issue - Sticky(ing) rings - $#!+Y
gas
Electrical:
Plugs - Wires - points /condenser - cap / rotor - weak coil - $#!+Y gas
Transmission slippage (however slight)
Brakes dragging again (however slight)
Tires - Pressure - and yup some tires just (bias/radial) roll better that others.
Front end alignment
lastly
D: any one or all of the above can wreak havoc on drive ability, performance and mileage

[Toronado66]

One could expect 14-18 city / highway give any number of factors, motor condition weather and driver technique. The 66-67 came with 3.21 gears considering its 4400 hundred pound weight and 425 cubic inch displacement, and 32 cent a gallon gasoline that was exceptionable.
IMHO Driver technique plays a bigger roll in fuel usage than some are willing to except. Case in point my wife gets 18+ around town with our 02 Caravan I get 20+

While I agree with the numbers cited as valid for 1966, today's numbers will be about 15-20% lower. Today's gasoline contains a minimum of 10% ethanol. When the EPA rates cars now, they measure the cars using real gasoline (no ethanol) then they subtract 10% to correct for ethanol. Add in the additional problem that today's octane is 91 not 96 so our cars are not running with as much advance as they did 30 years ago, and you get an even lower mpg.

Darwin Falk
TOA#7

[Schurkey]

One could expect 14-18 city / highway give any number of factors, motor condition weather and driver technique. The 66-67 came with 3.21 gears considering its 4400 hundred pound weight and 425 cubic inch displacement, and 32 cent a gallon gasoline that was exceptionable.
IMHO Driver technique plays a bigger roll in fuel usage than some are willing to except. Case in point my wife gets 18+ around town with our 02 Caravan I get 20+

While I agree with the numbers cited as valid for 1966, today's numbers will be about 15-20% lower. Today's gasoline contains a minimum of 10% ethanol. When the EPA rates cars now, they measure the cars using real gasoline (no ethanol) then they subtract 10% to correct for ethanol. Add in the additional problem that today's octane is 91 not 96 so our cars are not running with as much advance as they did 30 years ago, and you get an even lower mpg.

Darwin Falk
TOA#7

Two problems with that:

1. Todays gasoline is not rated for octane the same way it was in '66. The numbers are not directly comparable--but as a guess today's advertised numbers are 5-6 numbers lower than they would be if rated by the old method. If the engine doesn't ping--you wouldn't need to retard the timing.

2. E-10 has about 3--4 percent lower energy content than gasoline without ethanol. The 10% figure is too high.