oletrucks
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [oletrucks] ' 79 305 and S-10 motor mounts

To: jelerath@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [oletrucks] ' 79 305 and S-10 motor mounts
From: Bruce Damen <little-castle-contracting@cadvision.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 20:05:30 -0700
i had a 305 in one of my cutlusses ...it was ok power wise ( no 350 power thou)
but as far as great gas mileage,  it was a pig on gas, as bad as the 350.    im
in the opinion of if your buying an engine go with the 350....if its free thats
a different matter...your cam problem is solved when ya rebuild with a better
cam

Bruce
1949 chev1/2 ton

jelerath@us.ibm.com wrote:

> I'm not a proponent of the 305, but doesn't if get better than 2 mpg?
>
> Jon Elerath
> jelerath@us.ibm.com
>
> ADvent@thuntek.net@autox.team.net on 02/18/2000 03:28:58 PM
>
> Please respond to ADvent@thuntek.net
>
> Sent by:  owner-oletrucks@autox.team.net
>
> To:   Andy Johns <andy51chevy@mindspring.com>
> cc:   oletrucks <oletrucks@autox.team.net>
> Subject:  Re: [oletrucks] ' 79 305 and S-10 motor mounts
>
> everything else being equal, the 305 will give you about 2 mpg.
>
> Andy Johns wrote:
>
> > Thanks for all the in put.  The reason I looking at a 305 was the better
> gas
> > mileage though.  What would the gas mileage difference be between a 350
> and
> > a 305?  I'm working on a 16 year old's budget so gas mileage is
> important.
> > I was recently told that anything less than a 327 would have to work so
> hard
> > to move the truck, that there wouldn't be much difference in Gas mileage.
> I
> > have heard of much smaller engines in the AD's though.  Is this guy off
> his
> > rocker?
> > The junk yards around here say $500 for a sound 350, and a 305 would be
> > $375.  That is another reason I chose the smaller engine.
> > Thanks,
> > Andy Johns
> > 1951 3100
> >
>
> oletrucks is devoted to Chevy and GM trucks built between 1941 and 1959

oletrucks is devoted to Chevy and GM trucks built between 1941 and 1959

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>