In article <vwt7e.38435$jR3.34501@edtnps84>, "Brian Smith"
<Halifax@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote:

> "Bubba" <wdg@[204.52.135.1]> wrote in message
> news:1vir51ts415j1tk7lsua42evsife2p844u@4ax.com...
> > Higher horsepower will translate into poorer fuel economy. I think for the
> > moment at least the muscle car era could be temporarily on hold.
>
> That's not always true. Higher horsepower allows the engine to work less and
> to maintain a more consistent speed while doing so, at least that is the way
> it works with trucks. A tractor trailer with an engine turning out 500-600
> hp returns higher mpg than a truck putting out 400 hp.
>
> Brian

Brian,
Great point. Over 30 years ago, my brother had a Chevy that had the
smallest 8 cyld. motor made by GM--it may have been a 327 but am not sure.
The gas mileage was about 18 MPG. About 2 years later, he traded it in on
a new Chevy that had a 350 engine which was about the largest 8 cyld.
motor made by GM--at that time. He was able to get about 21 miles per
gallon. I asked a professor at the local college about this since no one
in our family could figure it out. He explained the same points that you
made in your post. A larger engine does not has to work as hard as a
really small engine--esp. when it involves going up and down mountains
like we had in West Virginia.

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.