<![CDATA[Economy]]>legacy image
...Discuss

[/end e-Ass kicking]

]]>https://fargostreet.com/topic/7530/economyRSS for NodeThu, 28 May 2026 07:35:07 GMTSun, 03 Sep 2006 00:54:39 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Mon, 04 Sep 2006 17:39:16 GMT]]>

MisterCMK wrote:
Who in their right mind would get an F150 with the 4.2 or 4.6

Who in their right mind would get a ford anyways?:icon_thumright:

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/115174https://fargostreet.com/post/115174Mon, 04 Sep 2006 17:39:16 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Mon, 04 Sep 2006 17:32:33 GMT]]>

2slo50h wrote:
What about the idea of a Carburated V-8 making over 40mpg.
Sad to say it has happened before most on this site were born.

Discuss.
how much HP did it make?

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/115171https://fargostreet.com/post/115171Mon, 04 Sep 2006 17:32:33 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Mon, 04 Sep 2006 05:18:13 GMT]]>What about the idea of a Carburated V-8 making over 40mpg.
Sad to say it has happened before most on this site were born.

Discuss.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/115103https://fargostreet.com/post/115103Mon, 04 Sep 2006 05:18:13 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Mon, 04 Sep 2006 00:42:01 GMT]]>

91nbtsi wrote:
This thread = gay.
nah, what this thread turned into = gay. The origin was quite humorous

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/115000https://fargostreet.com/post/115000Mon, 04 Sep 2006 00:42:01 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 21:39:54 GMT]]>you = gay

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114976https://fargostreet.com/post/114976Sun, 03 Sep 2006 21:39:54 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 21:17:30 GMT]]>This thread = gay.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114975https://fargostreet.com/post/114975Sun, 03 Sep 2006 21:17:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 21:16:05 GMT]]>Who in their right mind would get an F150 with the 4.2 or 4.6

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114974https://fargostreet.com/post/114974Sun, 03 Sep 2006 21:16:05 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 21:06:23 GMT]]>

StangerBanger96 wrote:
Your car is putting out 400 ft/lbs of torque?
nope, but neither is an f150

Engine type 4.2L OHV 12-valve V6 4.6L Triton® SOHC 16-valve V8
Engine electronics Electronic ignition system, Electronic ignition system,
EEC-V computer EEC-V computer
Displacement (cu. in.) 256 CID 281 CID
Horsepower (SAE net@rpm) 202@4,350 248@4,750
Torque (lb.-ft. @rpm) 260@3,750 294@4000

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114968https://fargostreet.com/post/114968Sun, 03 Sep 2006 21:06:23 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 20:20:44 GMT]]>

HandoEX wrote:
I can't see my car making under 200 whp. Here's a guy with a dry sprayed f series CL with the same mods as me from St Paul on stock tune...
legacy image

That always happens to me. Fack:icon_shaking:
I thought u were talking about from the factory, I know your car isn't THAT powerless with spray!

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114957https://fargostreet.com/post/114957Sun, 03 Sep 2006 20:20:44 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 19:37:21 GMT]]>4 bangers all the way baby :icon_cheers:

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114950https://fargostreet.com/post/114950Sun, 03 Sep 2006 19:37:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 18:57:07 GMT]]>

wannabe wrote:
thats pretty easy when ur car only makes 145 hp... lol. Wow, last night was ridiculous.... after u left, things got stupid!
I can't see my car making under 200 whp. Here's a guy with a dry sprayed f series CL with the same mods as me from St Paul on stock tune...
legacy image

That always happens to me. Fack:icon_shaking:

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114941https://fargostreet.com/post/114941Sun, 03 Sep 2006 18:57:07 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 18:48:20 GMT]]>

tjamz wrote:
My WRX WHEEL Torque>F150 (gas engine) Flywheel Torque

Your car is putting out 400 ft/lbs of torque?

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114939https://fargostreet.com/post/114939Sun, 03 Sep 2006 18:48:20 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 17:19:45 GMT]]>

HandoEX wrote:
My Honda makes more tq than hp. Seriously.
thats pretty easy when ur car only makes 145 hp... lol. Wow, last night was ridiculous.... after u left, things got stupid!

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114932https://fargostreet.com/post/114932Sun, 03 Sep 2006 17:19:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:42:32 GMT]]>24 town, 34 highway 2.0L 200whp, 150tq.......and all the comfort of driving in leather too 😉

P.S. Yes, it is a low torqu 4banger, but the light weightness of it makes up for it. Just ask Shane on his lotus on how the light weight makes his car handle;)

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114930https://fargostreet.com/post/114930Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:42:32 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:41:51 GMT]]>My Honda makes more tq than hp. Seriously.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114929https://fargostreet.com/post/114929Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:41:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:30:19 GMT]]>I get 30mpg in vtec all day long.

Infact I don't know if I ever left vtec since I got it.:drunken_smilie:

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114928https://fargostreet.com/post/114928Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:30:19 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:10:59 GMT]]>

MisterCMK wrote:
honda civic torque < f-150 lugnut torque

My WRX WHEEL Torque>F150 (gas engine) Flywheel Torque

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114927https://fargostreet.com/post/114927Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:10:59 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:08:07 GMT]]>

adog wrote:
Did you have to replace much of the fuel system for that? I've been pondering switching myself, if I can find large enough injectors.

I didn't change anything in the fuel system. Theres a debate over whether you need to get rid of all the rubber pieces in the fuel system or not since ethanol can break down the rubber and cause it to flake off, but in reading about other subie owners that are running E85 w/ no changes for a couple of years with no problems, I'd say that I'm willing to try w/o making any changes for a while.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114926https://fargostreet.com/post/114926Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:08:07 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 14:56:22 GMT]]>

MisterCMK wrote:
honda civic torque < f-150 lugnut torque

LOL:icon_thumleft:

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114925https://fargostreet.com/post/114925Sun, 03 Sep 2006 14:56:22 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 07:36:24 GMT]]>

tjamz wrote:
I was getting 30mpg last time I checked (on the way to SCN). Now that I've made the switch to E85 and a reflashed ecu(and still using utec), we'll see how things are.

BTW, my car has never felt/launched better than since I put E85 in

Did you have to replace much of the fuel system for that? I've been pondering switching myself, if I can find large enough injectors.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114916https://fargostreet.com/post/114916Sun, 03 Sep 2006 07:36:24 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 06:04:10 GMT]]>honda civic torque < f-150 lugnut torque

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114914https://fargostreet.com/post/114914Sun, 03 Sep 2006 06:04:10 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 06:03:11 GMT]]>F150 MPG > Honda MPG
More links....I like this quote

Ford is developing a new "Hydraulic Hybrid" system that is 300 percent more efficient than the system used in the Toyota's Prius

http://www.chryslerforum.com/m_4021/tm.htm

http://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1585002&page=3

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114913https://fargostreet.com/post/114913Sun, 03 Sep 2006 06:03:11 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Economy on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 05:55:37 GMT]]>

wannabe wrote:
legacy image
...Discuss

[/end e-Ass kicking]

I say fart can.

It's fwd nothings going to be better on gas then fwd.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114912https://fargostreet.com/post/114912Sun, 03 Sep 2006 05:55:37 GMT