Pirate 4x4 banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm looking for recommendations on how to get better fuel milage and more performance out of my fj40. As I see it there are 2 ways of going about it, either install a Chevy V8 or V6 or try enhancing my existing f2. I'm confused about the best enhancement methods for an f2 or if I should swap engines.

It's a 1965 vintage however the vehicle is a hybrid of many different year parts. Starting with the carb, I'm not sure it is even the correct model with respect to the F2 as SPECTOR has mentioned that I have an earlier model and they attempted to sell me another (they based that on the type gas pedal cord I ordered). Additionally I have been told that I might want to use a 38mm Weber kit as the 38mm will be trouble free all the time. Also adding it with headers and a non-USA distributor will gain the F2 more horsepower. Perhaps this is somemore of the "more money than sense" talk I have been collecting.

The timing, spark plug condition, air cleaner condition are all top condition. The tires are 32's however I have thinking of going up to 35's. As for the axles, I dont know which year they are or even if they are off the same year vehicle, as I understand that different years have diffrent gearing which will affect performance. The front must be pre 70's as the knuckles have been replaced with Toyota truck discs. Will the toyotasuperaxles.com solution have anything to do with the older 3.70 gearing getting upgraded to the 4.11? I've also been told that dayna 3/4 ton axles are best but that I would have to cut em down somehow (unclear as to what this means).

As for going the V8 way, it's been mentioned that a Chevy 305 V8 (are there more than one 305 type?) would give the FJ more power and fuel economy. Of course I could sell what I've got to go the already insatlled fj40 V8 way but I enjoy the DIY creed a bit too much. I've learned how to build homes, electronics, etc just by talking with folks and diving into projects, so selling and buying won't be the road for me.

I get around 13 to 11 miles per gallon (isnt 18 to 22 a realistic goal?) and not much speed out of the f2. I didnt find any recommendations at the site ih8mud and I dont want any complicated vortec type solution, I like it very simple. The ih8mud engines featured: 5.3/6.0 Vortec, 5.7 Vortec, GM 6.2/6.5 Diesel, al seem very high end. My end objective is mostly street driving and some offroad (green lanes and trails).

As stated I like to keep it simple and find all the solutions inexpensive at a pick and pull type place. Anyhow any info you might be able to supply me with will be greatly appreciated.

Best,

-Trent
[email protected]
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,814 Posts
If your rig is a '65, with a '65 motor, it is an F not a 2F. Also, I wouldn't try to get 22MPG out of it...that is most likely not going to happen. You may want to check out www.ih8mud.com and look up TBI conversions in the tech section. That is the best thing I can think of for fuel economy. Try searching for "Weber" as that has been discussed multiple times (I'd offer advice, but I run an Aisin right now, until I can do my TBI conversion). You might also want to try searching "F performance" or "2f performance" whichever the case may be. Good luck!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
18-22 MPG is a very realistic goal with a 2F...That's what I've been getting out of mine :D

Your axles should have come from the factory with 4.11 gears. Those are about perfect for a 33" tire, and if you want economy out of it, go with a 9.5" wide tire.

As for the engine itself, the weber carb's not going to help your milage AT ALL. A stock Aisan from a 78 is probably what would be best for you...Vacuum advance, with a minimum of smog controls. Also, the older style carburetors used a cable connection to the gas pedal, the 2F carburetors used a solid linkage.

For the distributor, you have basically 3 options:
1. HEI distributor out of a Chevy straight six. Good distributor, easy to find parts for, but some people claim to have problems with them. Most of that is probably due to not swapping the gear to the correct Toyota gear, though.
2. Get a Toyota non-USA distributor with vacuum advance, and get the Pertronix electronic conversion for it. I have also heard that this is a very good setup, and keeps the Toyota cap and rotor.
3. The factory Toyota distributor out of a '78 to '87 2F is electronic, and waterproof at the same time. However, these are becoming increasingly hard to find with a working vacuum advance.

(All of the above options assume you get a new carburetor with vacuum advance...up until '78, USA spec cruisers didn't have that)

As for the header, they should all be about the same, get whatever one strikes your fancy...it can't hurt, and would give you a little bit of power at the same time.

Anything you do inside the engine will probably lowey your MPG at the expense of power. If you get it tuned correctly, though, you should be fine. A cam and decking the head up to 0.01 will give you a bit more power, mostly in the upper end...My 2F settles into a groove about 72 MPH, and can run there all day, uphill or down, and gets about 18 MPG doing so. OTOH, I also run premium gas and my timing is set as far forward as I could get it without knock. (The premium gets me roughly enough better milage to make up for the cost, and it can't hurt the engine)

Anyways, the 2F is a great engine, don't just ditch it for a 30 unless you need to be doing stoplight drags or really, really big tires. (Even then you don't NEED the 350 if you get it geared right)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,964 Posts
If you are getting 18 MPG I think you are at the pinnacle of a 2F's efficiency and it isn't going to get much better than that unless you go with some sort of EFI system. Even witha TBI system and your engine in as healthy condition as possibly I think it would be near impossible to get 20 MPG, but then again I have little real world experience with the TBI setup on the 2F.

He is calling the engine the F2 because some F engines say "F2" on the valve cover. But it is an original F engine. Some people curse F engines but a good running F I think is a sweet engine, depending on it's condition. But you'll never see 20 MPG out of an F, I would say 15 if you're lucky.

Most HEI problems do not come from using the Toyota gear - it simply won't work with that gear, the Toyota one is metric, the GM is SAE. They appear similar but I've tried to use the GM gear in a 2F and it didn't work.

The Weber 38 does in fact guzzle. To me it's interesting that rumors are floating around saying that this particular carb will increase your milage. I suppose if tuned to run lean, but I've had nothing other than decent power and piss poor milage out of a 38, even with headers and a decent ignition. On the other hand, IMO the 32/36 (which is what I run on my '75 40 right now) is an excellent carb for a Cruiser. Mine is running a little rich right now and I'm still getting about 12 or so MPG which I don't consider that bad, this is also with headers and 1979 electronic ignition. Bennett on this board runs a O2 sensor in his exhaust and a standard rich/lean gauge in his truck and it's awesome, especially for tuning. IMO a good running carb can probably deliver near TBI economy if tuned properly.

I would say generally make sure your engine is in top running condition before you put any money into it first. Then start with ignition, then headers, then a carb. A good running stock carb can be awesome too. I'm not sure if a later 2 barrell from a later F will fit on your manifold, you might have to switch manifolds. By then you might be as much as $1000+ into mods, so it might be worth while to look at a V8 swap from the beginning...

All Cruisers had 4.10 axle gearing until 1979. If it has front disk brakes it's from 1976 or later.

I hope all of this helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
168 Posts
For what it's worth, I have an F engine with a 2 barrel Holley, and get about 14-16 mpg. The only downside seems to be that it runs really crappy if the weather gets too hot (95+).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,081 Posts
I HAVE A HEADER I TOOK OFF A 71 F JUST SITTING AROUND OUTSIDE GETTING RUSTY, IF YOU WANT IT MAKE AN OFFER
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,404 Posts
I have never believed a claim of 20+ MPG on a US-spec petrol FJ40 and I'm not going to start now. Anyone who buys a petrol Land Cruiser and is concerned about mileage and fuel costs should sell it or complement it with a TDI Jetta or a hybrid Civic or something along those lines.

FWIW, my best *consistent* mileage with an FJ62 (carburated 3F, old-style distributor with a Pertronix unit inside, H55F 5-speed, 4.11 gears, 32 tires, 3" lift, no roof rack, no bullbar, no added weight) was 18-19 MPG, which was AWESOME. This is with NORMAL street/highway driving, going up to 70 MPG where posted. Since I added the SO, the rack, the bigger tires and a lot more weight, and with the engine tires, mileage has dropped significantly. I just can't see an FJ40 driven under the same conditions getting the same mileage; heck, even Toyota didn't make those claims when the truck was new, and we all know how unrealistic most manufacturer claims are. You don't think if it was possible to *consistently* get 18 MPG out of an FJ40, Toyota would have claimed just that? Think about it.

FWIW, most people that have done FI conversions to the 2F only report very minor fuel economy gains, most tout a smoother running engine, better pickup and better performance at angles, but no real fuel economy gains.

The Pertronix unit did in fact improve performance on my Land Cruiser, but it did not yield better fuel economy.

If you're serious about better fuel economy, you might want to consider a diesel conversion, but take into consideration:

1. They're expensive, which means you will have to drive the vehicle quite a bit to recover the initial conversion expense.

2. Parts can also be expensive and/or hard to find, depending on the engine of your choice, and there will be associated costs.

3. Take all diesel fuel economy in Land Cruiser claims with a grain of salt, in many cases they stem from Imperial vs. US vs. Standard gallon conversions. Find someone who runs a diesel Land Cruiser in the US and who *will* tell you the real fuel consumption, you'll be surprised. All those "it gets 30 MPG" claims you read, usually when someone is selling a 3B-powered Land Cruiser, are CRAP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,687 Posts
FWIW, most people that have done FI conversions to the 2F only report very minor fuel economy gains, most tout a smoother running engine, better pickup and better performance at angles, but no real fuel economy gains.
Yep... I think the BIGGEST advantage is just that cold start! I've notice the fuel level in the float bowl to be empty after sitting for a couple of weeks. Takes a bit of cranking just to refill the float, THEN get it running. Both my 40 & 60 tended to be "cold start beast" due to the extra cranking... but they always fired up. Yes, an electric fuel pump would help in that condition... but I like the stock fuel pump as I KNOW it will stop pumping when the engine stalls during a roll over. :D

Both my, 3.7 geared, fairly stock 40 and 60.... around 12 to 15 mpg. Calibrate your speedometer... you'll see "mileage paddle" [edit: on the side of the highway] with numbers, after a while you'll realize that are marked off in miles. Handy in calibrating the odometer readings...

Tom :usa:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
878 Posts
It's hard to come under 12l per 100km with a stock 3b and 32" tires. But it's also hard to come over 15l per 100km.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
60seriesguy said:
I have never believed a claim of 20+ MPG on a US-spec petrol FJ40 and I'm not going to start now.
I would edit that to say "consistantly gets 20+"...I got 22 MPG for a couple of weeks...but the timing was so far advanced I couldn't go over 60 without horrible, horrible spark knock. Got that backed off as soon as I had the chance, and that's when it settled at about 18. It's amazing what a difference that makes.

Henry, when you say the "old style distributor", do you mean the "non-USA" older style? Or just the late, non-FI 2F?

Edit: I think I've forgotten to mention that I also have a rebuilt 2F, and that at least partly accounts for the milage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,404 Posts
That's what I meant, *consistently*. But when you quote fuel consumption, it's consistency that counts, right? I once drove from Flagstaff to Phoenix with a 30 MPH tail wind, downhill, and the fuel mileage exceeded 20 MPG, probably closer to 21 MPG. But that's not consistent.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who religiously checks fuel consumption, and, barring extraneous circumstances, I can figure out if something's wrong just from the change.

So, yes, I meant *consistent* fuel consumption above 18 MPG. Don't believe it, won't believe it.

What I meant from the old-style distributor is that, the non-US style, manual vaccum advance, little cap with the cheesy clips, same as on really old Cruisers style. That's what came stock in mine! :)

I apologize if I caused any confusion with my earlier post, I was referring to constant fuel consumption over long periods of time under any circumstance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
641 Posts
I don't have any experience with 2f fuel economy because I am on my first cruiser and I've got a 2bl Holley that runs so rich it wont idle:D . However, one thing I notice about this discusion is that one of you is talking about a fj40 and one an fj60; I would assume the 40 is MUCH lighter than the 60 witch has everything to do with fuel economy. Thats why a Vortec 5.3L gets 12mpg in a 3/4ton chevy(estimated) and 22mpg in a fj40(claimed). Also, it is obvious that the 40 has a very well tuned, rebuilt engine and probably runs far more efficiently than new in 1970 something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
I knew what you were talking about ;)

Henry, have you ever thought about putting FI on your 3F? That seems like it'd be worthwhile, easy, and would work well for the rock crawling you southerners do :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
missingmy84toy said:
I would assume the 40 is MUCH lighter than the 60 witch has everything to do with fuel economy.
Yes/No.

A cube does not bode well for efficiency at speed. The 60 designers at least pretended to know about aerodynamics, while the 40 wasn't really designed to go fast in the first place. Uphill and accelerating, I would bet that the 40 could beat out the 60 easily, but in any other case, with the same exact engine, I would say that the 60 would win. But that's debatable :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,404 Posts
I've considered FI a couple of times but I am very pleased with the overall performance of my 3F and *terrified* of being left out in the bush with a faulty computer. When my carb was in good shape, my truck would run FINE at virtually every angle, I think it just needs a good rebuild. I also need a clutch and lower gears, both would vastly improve offroad performance...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,606 Posts
economy and carb rebuilds

My 83 fj60 has an 85 2f, head shaved .090 for more compression, Mark Whatley 250 cam, stock electronic ignition, sor 2 piece header, stock rebuilt carb by Eric Chandler. (He's in your chapter Henry, and does fine work...) I get about 16 IF I keep my foot outta the gas, and run 60mph and no more. Avoid the weber 38/38 if you want mileage. Fine carb, runs well, does well off road, it wants pressure regulated to 3lbs, but it's downfall is it has 2 big barrels that both open at once. The later model factory aisin is swell...small primary, vacuum actuated secondary...Chefout
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,444 Posts
I got 22mpg once..
Once,

16-18 you are doing VERY well.

But I also like Holley's and no one else seems to ;)

I was running the holley, 2.5" exhaust, flowmaster, hyfire 3 on a electronic dist.

I was doing from 45-55 with 32" tires, 3.70 gears and in 4wd almost the enitre time (between Tonopah and Hawthorn in the middle of what qualifys as a blizzard there)

It is amazing the difference doing 55 nets you. 65-70 and your mileage goes down...



Tune it up, and run it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,729 Posts
The most significant increase I ever got in fuel mileage was from slip streaming a tractor trailer for 200 miles on I5. I went from getting 14 MPG all the way up to 15. :D

You do have to pay attention to driving when you are 40 ft behind the trailer going 70 MPH.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,719 Posts
i didn't read the whole thing but if you want economy sell it and get a mini truck

you will NEVER get economy out of a fat pig
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top