Actually, I am a certified Ford mechanic..... certified in 1962 at fords factory school boy program.... and I favor the carbs more than the fi.... I am like caddy,,, I aint never seen a holley that I didnt like or understand .... we went to school on them.... ande I am like most old school mechs... the more things you add to a system the more opportunity for a failure....
'I bought the truck right straight out of a junk yard,,, not wrecked ,,,supposedly had a locked up engine... it had everything i wanted,,, auto, air , ps , pb, 85 swb... but with 1st year fi on it... after i discovered that the engine wasnt locked up, the starter was just wired up wrong... i pulled the engine , went all the way thru it... all new everything, forged pistons, ho caM... new wires, plugs, cap, rotors , fuel tank, fuel pump, and the wierd filter assembly... it has always run good, but will not get any mileage... if i could get 18 to 20, out of it , I would be as happy as a pig in slop....I have a 1964 Buick riv. with a 425 in it , with a 600 cfm holley on it and it will get 18 mpg all day... both vehicles have 3.08 lockers in them... the Buick has double the power and gets good milage for a engine that is 125 cubes bigger than the 302... ok my math aint too good,,, and here the 302 has all the fancy computer , injection, cold air induction, ect. and cant do better than 14... something is definitly wrong with this picture...
i have seriously thought about putting a nailhead buick in the truck,,, I have 3 of those laying around.... of course I would have to change out everything...
or change over to a carb, and keep the 302.... decisions , decisions...

 

What trans is in that Buick?

Few things to consider right off the top:
1) the rolling resistance of truck tires is MUCH higher than that of an average muscle car tire. (so, start by putting 27" tires on your truck)
2) the frontal area of a truck is MUCH higher than that of an average muscle car. (so, smooth out the front end, lower the truck a bit and chop the windshield half a foot)

Then, if the Buick is running a 4-speed to your truck's torque converter auto, you should
A) Make sure the torque converter is locking up properly, if that C6 is a lock-up trans. (I don't know about Ford trans, I come from a GM background)
B) If not, switch to a lock-up trans.
C) Be proud that you're getting 18mpg in that Buick. That's damn impressive, especially if it doesn't have an overdrive gear.

 

Ya'll do realize that alot of these suggestions are going to cost him more money that it currently costs him to pay for gas, right? Why not start with the basics and go from there?

- As others have suggested, do a tuneup (including replacing the 02 sensor[s]; may cost a little bit, so be aware)
- Keep your tires at the proper air pressure. If you're running big tires, they're probably hurting your mileage some.
- Make sure your front end is in proper alignment.
- Make sure your brakes aren't dragging.
- Make sure your transmission isn't slipping.
- Take it easy on the gas pedal.
- Take a minute to plan your route when you're going places. If there's a shortcut you can take, or a different road that lets you avoid stop signs or red lights, try taking that road.

Shark Racer, I apologize if I sound rude, but I disagree with the idea of chopping the top to get better mileage. True, it could help with aerodynamics, but it's not practical, and unless he does it himself, it's going to cost quite a bit...and what's he going to do about a windshield?

Personally, my plan to get better mileage with my truck is to swap in a manual transmission, hopefully a ZF5, as well as regear the rear end to complement the transmission. With that setup, I would have an overdrive gear, and wouldn't have to turn anywhere near 2800RPM to maintain 70mph as I do now.

 

Sorry TKM, that section was more of a joke. If anyone took my "turn your truck into a Honda Insight" seriously and started grinding bits of their truck off and fiberglassing over their headlights, well... sorry.

I think his Buick is getting amazing mileage, but it's really hard to compare a car to a truck, even weight-for-weight, engine-for-engine, there are serious aerodynamic differences between the two.

My 500hp Corvette gets about 75% more fuel economy than my truck, despite the fact that they're close in displacement and the 'vette has a 270 horsepower advantage. It's also over ONE TON lighter, has much less frontal area and less drag overall.

My F-250, with roughly one full tank of two, weighed in at 5200#. No options, 460/T-19/4x4 with a winch on the nose.

 

please don't ditch the efi, its more hassle than its worth (I wen't from CFI on my capri to an edelbrock, and it will soon be going back to being a fuelie with a megasquirt setup)

just try to understand the efi, alot of people just won't give it a chance. my 88 averages 18 and can get over 20 on a flat road with the cruise set at 65. I drive it really nice and stay on top of maintenance

first of all, don't start ripping smog stuff off, alot of it is needed for it to run correctly. and stuff like egr will actually help fuel mileage.

for example, I have a buddy that has an 88 swb the only differences between our trucks is that mine is an extended cab lwb and it has the 5 speed, his has headers, an AOD, an exhaust system (mine still has two cats!) and is alot more attractive. his had the engine rebuilt (reciepts showed that it was by a shop) but it was installed by the owner. the guy that owned it had disconnected and plugged most of the vacuum lines, completely threw away the smog pump (ok, i'll admit that one is junk) and didn't even bother with a bung for an O2 sensor. it was getting 9mpg...

on top of a tune up, we redid all of the vacuum lines, installed an old O2 sensor that i had laying around ("well, the car it came off of ran good, hopefully its good!") cleaned the egr, iac, and the throttle body, adjusted the tps sensor and TV cable, and bumped the timing up a little bit. it is still throwing codes that it is running lean, and that the egr isn't closing(those two would most likely be both caused by the egr) it also now has a 4" lift and 33's but is getting 13mpg. keep in a mind that a lean code means that the computer is trying to compensate by dumping fuel in. there is still work that needs to be done, but it is accomplishable, just be open to fuel injection and be willing to learn something new.

and the only time that i have had a fuel injected car leave me stranded was a fuel pump, which can happen to a carb just as easily. it is built into the computers to have a failsafe for as many scenarios as possible, even limp-home mode, which does exactly that.

I love my edelbrock (as far as i'm concerned, their design and tunability is superior to a holley) and I have even seen the 2100 on the 360 in my highboy get close to 14mpg. I know that they can be built to run just as well and be just as efficient, but the tuning process to get it to run as well as a fuelie takes way longer.

my bronco has the best as far as i am concerned, it has a wide band o2 sensor, its fully programmable, and it has half the wiring of a factory EFI setup.

oh, and dont think that just because you don't have overdrive doesn't mean that your being robbed of highway mileage, as you have some pretty tall gears. Gear Ratio Calculator type the differences between you and me (3.55's and my m5od) and there is only about a 650rpm difference in high gear, a difference yes, but not huge. however your in town mileage would be worse because your starting ratio (1st gear and final combined) isn't as low, making the truck work harder to take off from a start.

want another example? my capri had an AOD and 3.73's. didn't work bad, most say 4.10's for the AOD, but i hate automatics. i just bought one of those richmond 5 speedshttp://www.richmondgear.com/07pdfs/RG23.pdf where 5th gear is direct but it has a lower than usual 1st gear (it was designed to be a super t10 with one more low gear).

if i drop down to 2.73 gears, i have the same "launch" ratio as the AOD w/3.73's, but with tall gears and direct drive it is only spinning 200rpm faster. not to mention that direct drive is more mechanically efficient and quieter(the power isn't getting sent through 2 different gearsets inside the tranny, instead it goes straight through)

there you have it, your ninja nugget for the day!

 

Ninja nugget indeed....I learned alot!

Yea I've heard that about the newer Vettes get decent mileage. I read that some get 24+ city/highway, and almost 30 if you're cruising.

 

Glad someone else shares my sentiments. My '68 Galaxie now has a mild 460 with a 750 CFM vac secondary Holley with straight leg boosters, ported heads, long tubes, etc. ... C6 trans, 3.00:1 gears in the 9" rear. A get a solid 17-17.5 MPG at ~80 MPH. Tried slowing it down to 70 MPH with no noticeable difference in MPG. I thought it was funny the 460 gets very similar MPG as the 302 I used to have in the car. I have a toploader I was debating rebuilding and swapping in but I think I'm going to go with a TKO600 for the overdrive, will be shooting for low 20's for highway MPG. Basically should be comparable MPG to a newer 4.6 Crown Vic but a lot faster and much nicer to look at.