On a recent National Tour, l filled up to 10 1/2 gals on the stick, drove for the trip at an average of 37 - 40 miles per hour ( 60 - 65 km/phr ) and returned a great 28 miles per gallon ( US gallon ) for the day, thinking my calculations were wrong, l was told about 20 miles per gallon when l first started playing with my T, BUT 28 mpg is correct.
I started asking others with similar style cars, 13 T runabouts, roadsters ect ans l was surprised to know that their fuel consumption was within the 1 mpg.
OK anyone who owns a 26 Tudor, have you done this exercise and if so what were your results.
It would be pretty cool to see how the numbers change with time and model over a 20 year period.
If you have an auxillary trans please hilite this.

David,

Guess, since I don't have an odometer, but on a fifty mile drive, she used 2 gallons by the stick, so that would be about 25 mpg.

Alex

David, I posted this in early August, after we had returned from the Centennial. It refers to the trip to Richmond and back:

"We bought 75.2 gallons of gasoline and spent $298.46 on it. Our overall trip mileage was 15.2 mpg. Our best tank average was 18.3 mpg and the worst was 12.2 mpg. I haven't tried to figure out why the difference, and probably won't."

Much less than you seem to be getting. Maybe I'm running too rich.

On the Centenary Tour in Australia, I did 2388km of driving from home and back, including the the daily runs for the week. I took the opportunity during the drive from home to Echuca (820km) to measure the fuel economy for the first time since I've had the car. Once out into the flat country I was getting 17mpg when cruising most of the time between 58 and 67km/h.
That's for a 26 tourer weighing nearly 900kg which includes my weight and all the junk I took with me. As a general rule I fill up every 120km or so; the tank is usually 1/3 to 1/2 full by this time.
A friend who also has a 26 tourer claims about 18mpg. Having no side curtains with the top up would no doubt reduce fuel economy (parachute effect), but I didn't want stuff blowing off the back seat into the wilderness. Plus it's a worn, stock, and largely original engine that's never been out of the car.
Fuel economy was measurably worse in city traffic or going up lots of hills...I think the worst I got was around 15mpg. I could probably lean the mixture a little, but as the car runs well as is I prefer not to alter it.
I did see mention of the rather optimistic figure of 32mpg for Model T's in one of the recent newspaper/magazine articles; this would no doubt be for early wooden bodied roadsters with the top down. But, such articles written by journalists not familiar with the Model T often contain mistakes.

A Stromberg OF will give much better mileage, and the Schebler FA will give somewhat better than the original puddle carbs.

rdr

On my '25 roadster with a stock NH carb, I've gotten 22-25 mpg. I'm interested if anyone with a ruxtell or a high gear rearend would weigh in on this one. Jim Hudson

I would think the biggest difference might be seen between body styles..i.e. touring vs roadster. Folks responding to this survey should make sure to post what type of T they are driving....

Parasitic and aerodynamic drag aside, the biggest factors for fuel economy are high compression ratio, optimum spark advance and best mixture.

Parasitic drag is friction in the rolling parts and driveline. It's more or less constant, regardless of speed. More weight adds some to parasitic drag, but not proportional to weight.

rdr

John, Imperial gallons or U.S. gallons?

What about how many people in the car & what are their weight? On My drive, only me 215 lbs top down & windshield open.

Alex

James Hudson, I have a twin to your car, with a Ruckstell. I would say that it is in as good a mechanical shape as any, and tuned to the nines. I get terrible gas mileage, so bad that I never check it any more.

Dick, it's Imperial gallons (4.5 litres to the gallon)for my mpg measurement. Now, you've got me thinking what kind of gallons the "32mpg" was meant to be.

On a TT is it gallons per hour rather than miles per gallon :-)
- speed seems to be a secondary concern in a TT .... but still fun!

With our 06 N, on the New London to New Brighton tour, we made 23 miles to the gallon. Not a T, but the weight to horsepower ratio is similar, and I was happy with the mileage.

Rob

John, probably U.S. gallons (3.7 liters).

Over the 5 day Scottish Centenary tour I reckoned I was getting about 23-25mpg (Imperial) with a Stromberg OF on an alloy bodied 1909 touring, top down, with 4 people on board for 3 of the days, 2 up the other 2. No high speed work, country back roads a lot of the time and quite a few hills. That's just using the daily tour mileages and my fuel receipts for the week, so it's only a ballpark figure.

When anyone asks me, I tell them that I have no odometer and no gas gauge, so I have no idea, then I show them my stick to measure the gas.

I've done a simple recalulation on my fuel economy for the Echuca run from mpg (US gals) to mpg (imperial ) 28 US mpg = 31.8 IMP mpg.
So l deduct that 32 mpg (imp) is not only possible it is factual albeit in a 13 T runabout with the top down and 2 people of average size.
Now thats not bad fuel economy from a car that is 95 years old !
Cheers David

David,

I had always understood that the Imperial gallon was 1.2 US gallons. In that case 28 mpUSg = 33.6 mpIg.

Is your car fitted with a Z or other high-compression head?

Seth

Our T is a 26 Tudor. You can read that as a brick. On a recent 855 mile trip measures by GPS, the overall mileage was 17.8 mpg and involved both in town/sightseeing and open road driving conditions with a mix of flat and hilly terrain.

Here are the specs of the trip:

Drivetrain; Basically stock, Rebuilt in 2003 W/aluminum pistons
Approx mileage since rebuild, 6000
Bored .020 over and balanced
Mag and coils with New Day timer
Hein-Werner Ricardo head
Holley NH
Standard 3.63 gear with 21" wire wheels
Best Mpg, 21 Worst, 15 (discovered an intermittent coil)
Driving conditions;
Cruise speed, 40-45 mph
In town/sightseeing 35% vs. Open road, 65%
Outside temps(F), 40-50 15% 50-60, 65%, 70-80, 20%
Passengers, 2 adults, 75% vs. 4 adults, 25%
Winds, Head 60% Tail 40%
Plenty of luggage

The motometer indicated that the engine never warmed up completely until the 80 degree day. The mileage was about what I expected although, I feel that the cooler temps did impact the mileage by a point or two.

Dave DeYoung

G'day Seth, No Z head, standard 13 Head, Nice alumin Domed pistons, balanced throughout, one of Chaffins 270 lift cams , standard size valves, still running the standard mag system really light car l thinks does the trick !
PS top down , no parachute to pull !!!!

G'day to you as well, David.

The domed pistons provide a compression increase - the best way to improve the thermal efficiency of the engine. So, you are cheating a bit.... But, so what that you are!

Thanks for your response!

Seth

Howdy Guys,
I'm surprised carburetion was not mentioned on these MPG quotients. On a recent tour I "enjoyed" a NH 'straight through' carburetor with an original '14 aluminum intake manifold on my '27 coupe. Hill climbing in high gear was great with this heavy car but I was probably getting about a dozen miles out of a gallon. Upon arriving home, I immediately reinstalled the original NH Vaporizer for it's usual 24 MPG. This latter style carb is known for it's lackluster vehicle speed but incredible fuel economy. In my case probably a doubling of MPG.

Ah good point, 13 T with rebuilt ( by Russ Potter ) Kingston Y ( 4 ball ) with Larger aluminium intake, also from Chaffins, what a difference that makes to both the engine performance and the fuel economy.
Hello George, 27 coupe would be about the same weight as the Tudor wouldn't it, and you can get some good speed up into the hills, that sounds pretty good, do you have a Ruxtell or aux transmission fitted ?

Hey John H, are you heading to the Sydney Rally in 2010, if you are we'll see you up there.

David, I'll certainly be there. It's a great place for T runs but not quite as good for fuel economy as Echuca was.