There's a '65 Mustang for sale locally with a sign on the window that claims it gets 38 mpg.
It's a 6 cyl with an automatic (2 strikes against it).
All my classic American iron has always had bigger motors and big thirsty 4 bbl's, so I am not too sure about this. I wanna say BS.
Is it possible it's true?
28 maybe with some 2.6x-2.7x gears with the 3 speed auto, proper "working" converter, and bigger tires to throw the speedo off.
at 40mph
downhill
in a hurricane
while being pushed.
But what do I know my K code 67 used to get 12 on the freeway.
Thought so.
Really not even sure why I asked. It's so far past the BS scale that the only logical answer is serious mental instability.
I was driving a Metro when I saw it. Pissed me off.
Sounds like they misplaced a decimal point.
No, not at all.
But I understand the need for the occasional sanity check.
I suppose if you pulled half the spark plugs, measured in British gallons and coasted down a hill in neutral ...
a friend of mine had a 67 Mustang with a 289 and 4 speed that would get mid 20's if he drove it nice. but it was too small and slow so he traded it towards a big 68 Mopar convertible of some sort with a 440 that doesn't even get 10 mpg..
In reply to SVreX:
A 6 will get around 22 at best. My '65 with a 4 bbl 289 gets around 14 at best with a 3:1 gear.
C'mon, somebody coulda swapped a Bluetec in it. 
I'm calling this BS. I inherited a '65 6cyl back in the late '90's. The best I ever got, ever, was 18mpg. It was an automatic, and I'm sure a stick would get better, but I can't imagine by much.
By comparison, here are my other Mustang examples:
'65 289 4V, about 12 to 13 mpg was average, automatic as well.
'70 Boss 302, also about 12 mpg, 4-speed
'67 XR7-GT Cougar (390 4-speed), very, very lucky if it could make double digits. Usually 6 to 8 mpg were average. On the interstate i could squeek maybe 11 or so out of it.
My Dart, with a similar spec sheet (225 slant six, 3 speed automatic, probably 2.93 gears), would get maybe 20 mpg on a good day. My (not so serious) guess is his odometer's reading in kilometers.
The only way it has a chance to get 38 mpg is if they did an engine swap. And a trans swap. And a taller rear end. And aero. And a tail wind. And downhill. And drafting a semi.
My first car, a '64 Plymouth Savoy two door sedan with no options at all save for pushbutton Torq-flight with the 225 ci six and a single barrel Holley would pull about 20mpg mixed with 22mpg on highway only trips. We're talking manual brakes, manual steering, factory radio delete.
I don't think 38mpg is impossible with a Mustang like that but I'd think massive weight reduction and a VW TDi swap would be a start. That Ford six is pretty much junk, isn't it one of those with a integral cast head that combines the intake manifold with the head? All sorts of weird issues there.
For sale by individual or dealer, just out of curiosity.
Yeah, it's not right.
To whatever guy that was, why would pulling spark plugs help your fuel economy? Like dumping fuel down holes for fun?
My older brother has a 38,000 mile 62 Corvair with a 102 and a 4 speed - gets 33 mpg on the original motor with rebuilt carbs
scardeal wrote: The only way it has a chance to get 38 mpg is if they did an engine swap. And a trans swap. And a taller rear end. And aero. And a tail wind. And downhill. And drafting a semi.
off a cliff.
I agree it's BS but occasionally freak things do happen. Many years ago we drove to the coast in my grandmother's 76 Buick century with a factory 4bbl 350. Just for kicks I checked the mileage on the last long open highway stretch while she was driving.
30mpg.
No kidding, I did the math about 10 times. Now, I can't say if we had a tailwind, but that tank was steady cruising at about 60 the whole time. That was the only time I was in that car on the open road so I never was able to recheck it.
My '68 Barracuda got 19 MPG the first weekend I had it. That was with a 318 2bb. Gets better than half that now but has double the horsepower. Stupid grins on my face more than doubled too. 
Like Matt & Pres589 said, some of the slant six cars could hit low 20's.
The guy that has my old Imperial is getting 15 MPG around town. It has touched 19 MPG on occasion steady highway cruising to the beaches every summer weekend. And that's a 440 in a 5000 Lbs tank. 
38 MPG in the Mustang? Nah, either the odometer or his math is off.
An ad listing the 1965 Mobil Economy Run doesn't list a 6-cylinder Mustang, but has a Falcon 170 getting 25.61 MPG.
Others:
Valiant 24.04
Corvair Monza 20.29
You'll need to log in to post.
