08-31-2016, 11:03 PM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Sorrento,LA
Posts: 0
|
400 vs 700 trans
I have an 89 Jeep Wrangler outfitted with a 350 dual feed carb, 400 turbo trans, 38" mud tires. It gets horrible fuel mileage. I have a 700 trans and debating on swapping it out for better fuel mileage. I don't plan on doing a lot of mud riding. What are your thoughts.
|
09-01-2016, 10:05 AM | #2 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Westchester, NY
Posts: 602
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
What gears do you have? And what is your cruising highway rpm? Those tall tires are going to calm your gear ratio down quite a bit, and if your not screaming on the highway it might not help much. Though I believe -and please someone correct me if I'm wrong - the 700 has a numerically higher 1st gear which would help you from a stop since you'd need less throttle to get moving.
Not sure what jeeps come with gearing wise, but a 3.55 combined with 38's would put you right at 2,000rpm at 65. Which is pretty good.
__________________
1968 C-10 Suburban - Original 396/TH400 2002 Transam WS6 - M6 - Black/Black - Evil Garage Queen 2000 Silverado - DD - Small lift+Body lift+35" Duratracs+4.88's + Eaton TruTrac - Monster Truck 2010 Cadillac CTS Wagon Sport - Wife's DD and the only classy car we have. |
09-01-2016, 10:12 AM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Sorrento,LA
Posts: 0
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
Just bought the vehicle last week from someone. Not sure what gears I have. I do know that the guy he got it from was using it as a rock climber. I will check and see if he knows what gears are in it. It has been highly modified.
Posted via Mobile Device |
09-01-2016, 01:51 PM | #4 | ||
"I ain't nobody, dork."
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Whidbey Island, Washington
Posts: 8,971
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
Fuel mileage is probably gonna suck no matter what.
Gary
__________________
'cuz chicks dig scars... My 1972 GMC 1500 Super Custom (Creeping Death) "long term" build thread. The Rebuild of Creeping Death after the wreck Quote:
Quote:
|
||
09-01-2016, 02:00 PM | #5 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Sorrento,LA
Posts: 0
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
Yea. I figured it would. Not looking for great fuel mileage but right now it's getting about 5 mpg
Posted via Mobile Device |
09-01-2016, 03:27 PM | #6 |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Weare,NH
Posts: 1,592
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
That seems exceptionally bad for a small block. Maybe look into getting it properly tuned and everything. Carb might be overkill for the application too. People usually slap on a "double pumper" cause it sounds cool, but really it's just blowing smoke like a brodozer diesel.
|
09-01-2016, 03:49 PM | #7 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Sorrento,LA
Posts: 0
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
I was thinking the same. Didn't see a need for that dual feed. I'm no mechanic so just trying to figure it out and get some ideas on what to do. I bought it drive and have fun with. Won't be rock climbing but may take it in the mud occasionally.
Posted via Mobile Device |
09-01-2016, 03:58 PM | #8 |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Weare,NH
Posts: 1,592
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
Could be would depend on how the engine was built as well. Could be you just need a smaller carb like an Edelbrock. There's also a new fuel injection system out called FITech, seems simple for anyone with basic wrenching skills to install and setup, plus it's cheap! It's self learning from what I understand so no need to pay a tuner. Maybe a better investment rather than tracking down a tuner that knows carbs these days.
|
09-01-2016, 04:53 PM | #9 | |||
"I ain't nobody, dork."
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Whidbey Island, Washington
Posts: 8,971
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
Quote:
Double pumper is referring to the rear accelerator pump and mechanical secondary linkage. You could get by with just a "single feed" Holley such as an 1850 that is 600cfm. You couldn't pay me to bolt on an Edelbrock. Gary
__________________
'cuz chicks dig scars... My 1972 GMC 1500 Super Custom (Creeping Death) "long term" build thread. The Rebuild of Creeping Death after the wreck Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
09-01-2016, 05:11 PM | #10 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Sorrento,LA
Posts: 0
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
Eric that injection conversion sound interesting. If you have more info please send it to me.
Posted via Mobile Device |
09-01-2016, 06:23 PM | #11 |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Weare,NH
Posts: 1,592
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
Here ya go take a look.
http://fitechefi.com/products/ They have the "fuel command center" for an additional $400 but it's really just a "swirlpot" which your mechanical pump on the engine feeds and has an EFI pump inside to feed the EFI. Being an 89 you should already have a baffled tank stock and you should be able to drop in a stock fuel sender with a high pressure GM EFI pump and plumb directly to the throttle body. Lot of reviews and installs of this system out there. |
09-02-2016, 10:23 AM | #12 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Westchester, NY
Posts: 602
|
Re: 400 vs 700 trans
I know that there are a couple of other systems out there, I've never heard of this one. It's fairly reasoanbly priced. Wish I would have known before I bought a new carb a few months ago. I am keeping this on my radar. Between the cost of the new carb and the the two O2 wide-bands I bought to tune the carb I could have just about bought this system. Think I might actually sell it all now. I've been DDing my burb and getting less than 10 mpg, going about 400 miles a week. Probably would pay for itself in a short amount of time.
Can you see you AFR on the hand held thing? Can you use it while driving? One or two O2 sensors?
__________________
1968 C-10 Suburban - Original 396/TH400 2002 Transam WS6 - M6 - Black/Black - Evil Garage Queen 2000 Silverado - DD - Small lift+Body lift+35" Duratracs+4.88's + Eaton TruTrac - Monster Truck 2010 Cadillac CTS Wagon Sport - Wife's DD and the only classy car we have. |
Bookmarks |
|
|