I don't know about Tab and Stewart, but I have driven my MGB with a 4
synchro non-overdrive, and with a 3 synchro overdrive, and without using the
overdrive. I drive 30 miles each way every day to work and back. I also
measure every tank of gas I use. I agree that my car isn't in perfect tune,
because I get about 23 mpg, and I should get closer to 30, but reguardless,
I get about the same using OD as I do not using OD. The biggest difference
is the comfort level (and I assume wear on the engine, but I haven't worn it
out yet). It is so much quieter, and more comfortable with OD, the even if
it got worse gas mileage (which it almost never should) I would use it
anyhow.
Phil Bates
Charley & Peggy Robinson wrote:
> Hi Tab,
>
> Forget the anti-OD bunch. They just feel that way. It's like having
> a toothache.
>
> ODs save gas and wear. How much is according to how you drive the car
> and the terrain you drive it over. It also depends on how efficient the
> car is to start with. If the car is a gas hog because the engine is not
> in tune, the OD may not help much.
>
> Look, I have a '69 B roadster. When I'm running on the freeway at 70
> mph and engage the OD, I have to back out of the throttle to maintain
> the 70 mph. Now, that has to mean something.
>
> I haven't had a chance to clock this car but in the '70 B w/OD that I
> had before, the OD was good for ~5 mpg on the flats, cruising at 70
> mph. I can vouch for these figures because I built the engine that was
> in the car, took it on a trip to CO, and put the OD in it later. After
> that we drove the car from TX up through OR and home. I was paying
> attention to gas mileage during both of those trips.
>
> There is plenty of anecdotal evidence, such as mine, to extoll the
> virtues of OD. There is also plenty of scientific data available to
> prove that ODs work.
>
> Ida no about the vibration, didn't read about that. Replacing the
> tranny to cure a vibratiuon seems chancy to me.
>
> CR
|