Gas Mileage

Lee ODell

Can a 212 powered Hudson PU get 20 MPG like the 308 Hudsons at highway speeds. What gear ratio would it take or any other changes? I got 24 MPG with my 1964 El Camino with a supercharged 350 engine, turbo 400 trans and 3.08 gears. So I considered supercharging the 212. That might put the power in the 125 to 150 HP range. Has anybody done this? Another option is to instal the 2005 Chevy PU 295 hp engine with automatic O/D trans my son Rick got for me to put in the PU. Lee

Jon B

I've never gotten more than 18 mpg with my 212 (1937), but maybe it's possible. That was an 'honest' mileage, with odometer readings corrected for actual Interstate "mileposts", taken over several tankfuls over varying terrain and at varying speeds, not in a controlled "economy run" situation. You hear all sorts of claims of good mileage but you have to wonder whether they were real-life or inflated by erroneous odometers. It is ironic that some modern, high-horsepower cars do better than the plain old 4- and 6- cylinder cars of the 30's and 40's, but modern technology has improved the efficiency of engines. So, a modern 295 hp engine might indeed do better in your car than the original 101 hp engine.

terraplane8

Brough supercharged the 212 as an option with his 1936-on range, after he lost the right to use the Hudson Eight engine to Railton. He used a Centric supercharger at 3 1/2 lbs with 140hp compared to the standard engine at 100 hp, both using a 7:1 head.



0-60 was 9.8 secs for a 21 cwt weight sans driver. The closed car did 0-60 in 14 secs with a 26 cwt weight sans driver. Economy was 14-19 mpg Imperial.



With 3 main bearings and splash feed, bottom end longitivity may be an issue.



Economy: I'd suggest upping the compression ratio to improve the efficiency, also a vacuum advance ditsributor should help if it hasn't got one.



As an aside, the AAA found that the record-breaking Hudson Eights were getting 20mpg at top speed during the record setting long distance runs in the late '30's. That's at an average speed of around 90mph.

Lee ODell

Jon B & terraplane 8, thanks for your imput. What gear ratio would make best MPG? 140 hp is more than I expected it would be with 3 1/2 lbs. I had thought about adapting a supercharger from a 90's T-Bird. That might be closer to 5 lbs. boost. Yes, with only 3 mains there might be some durability issues. I don't know how durable a 212 crank is. Since it won't be a race car I don't think being a splasher would be a problem because each scoop creats alot of oil pressure. Under normal driving there is no boost and maximum boost is only under full throttle. The later drive train is tempting and probably more dependable. In either case I need to get it running to see if it is worth keeping it original or semi original. I appreciate any ideas offered. Thanks again. Lee

terraplane8

There are some great videos on youtube of a Packard Straight Eight rat rod that is McCulloch supercharged at 5lbs boost. It's a 330 cu in or thereabouts flathead engine

found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opJilgQDZyo&feature=channel



It's got me thinking of doing the same to one of my '36 Hudson Eights. It would certainly make for an extremely quick and fun modified Railton Light Sports Tourer replica given that they did 0-60 in 8.8 back in '35.



I'd think an axle ration of around 3.5:1 would be fine for the 212 in terrain that didn't have big mountains rather than the normal 4.1:1 ratio. It will depend on your vehicle weight and engine efficiency.

Geoff

Don't get carried away with expecting a big boost in fueol economy by upping the rear end gears. Even though the engine is turning slower, it is still doing much the same amount of work. The laws of physics dictate that, within average parameters, it takes a given amount of energy to move a given mass through a given distance. Take your normal bicycle for instance, and try pedalling it uphill in high gear - it is actually much harder work than changing down a few cogs. so the effort you put in is greater, even though your legs are pumping slower. The same with a motor car engine. The Borg Warner overdrive is a 30% step-up, but you will be lucky to get a 5% improvement in economy. However, you will get a quieter ride, and less engine wear. The same if you change the rear end ratio. Howeve,r you iwllhave to change gears earlier when going slow, or going up hills, so bang goes the economy again! Havign said all that, I have a friend who fitted Holden rear end of 3.5:1 under his '37 Terraplane coupe, and it performed quite well, but did necessitate more 2nd gear use. And no, I would never contemplate going back to having no overdrive in my Jet. I also have my Essex geared up from 5.6:1 to 4.6:1, and would never go back to the old stump-puller ratio again.

Geoff.

Unknown

I have a 1953 super wasp (twin H) in my '46 PU and best mileage Iever got was 12 !