24.5mpg

[Night Wolf]

at 60mph with all the windows down and AC off.

Anything over 65 (more like 60) and the A/C on really kills my mileage :(

I'd be happy with 25mpg at 70 with A/C on.....

This is after the Motorcraft wires and Autolite copper plugs.... honestly no real MPG difference over the "new" Xact wires and Motorcraft fine point platinums they replaced.

Looking forward to more testing, I enjoy windows down driving, used to do it alot in NY... but Summers in the South.....

Still stinks, I've never owned a car where the A/C robs soo much engine power and flat out kills gas mileage either... heck even in my 4cyl Isuzu truck, the A/C (which kicks butt) is nearly transparent in operation.

Town Car though, becomes an absolute dog with the A/C on, you gotta give it alot of throttle input to do anything, which always results in down shifts.... with A/C off the thing feels like I'm not towing a 32' Airstream anymore.... and hogging nearly 4mpg on the highway? thats insane.

[davzog]

Not sure what your or model you have, but my 91 TC doesn't have the same A/C issues.

I notice very little difference in performance or mpg with the a/c turned on. In fact, from St Louis to Indianapolis with the A/C on at 70-75 mph I got over 24 mpg....on the way back in the evening without a/c I got almost 26 mpg...so about 1.5 mpg difference...

What a great road car.....:)

[Night Wolf]

'96 Signature with Ride Control Package (3.27 gears, stiffer springs, thicker sway bars) In nrealy mint running condition with a complete and full tune up as well as lots of extras replaced.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Lincoln/8-26-07/IMG_0333.jpg

With A/C on highway MPG goes down to 22mpg.

I'm just disapointed... the last try was the Motorcraft wires/Autolite copper plugs, everyone said that should help out... it really didn't do much. I've replaced every other "replace this cause it will really effect fuel mileage" things... 4 new O2 sensors etc...

I don't know why other people can get upwards of 25mpg with A/C on at 70mph+ When I was buying the car and reading reviews to see if a Town Car was for me, thats what I was reading, and thats what I bought the car with the assumption of.

[Largoyle]

You must remember that it "feels like you're towing a 32 foot Airstream" while the A/C is on, because even though the electric cooling fan is running, the mechanical fan is engaging and disengaging as needed. THIS is where you're loss of power comes from, not the A/C compressor. The A/C compressor uses less than 1 horsepower to operate. You stated that you "have to give it alot of throttle input" to get a response.. THIS IS KILLING YOUR MILEAGE, NOT THE CAR, OR THE A/C, OR THE PLUGS,WIRES, whatever...... make liberal use of the cruise control, it's not nearly as heavy footed as a human to maintain your speed. You must also remember that the hot, humid air will result in fuel mileage decreases.... I lose about 1/2 mpg average in the summer here in Florida... but I KNOW it's going to happen, so I don't blame anything else. You're driving yourself crazy chasing the proverbial "paper tiger"....there's nothing wrong with the way your car performes... you basically need to resign yourself to the fact that this is what it's going to do, and enjoy the car for what it is... a 4000 pound touring car.

[Night Wolf]

I would like to think it is the mechanical fan, but I just can't... I would hear the fan when it engages etc...

But... if you are driving and the EATC system is off, and I turn it on auto, I can actually feel the car get held back a bit that very second, if accelerating (anything less then WOT) and I turn the A/C on, same thing... driving around town is the worst for noticing the difference. Basically, as soon as I hear the relay to engage the compressor, engine performance takes a dive.

As for cruise control, I am a liberal user of cruise control, as soon as I hit the highway, its on, and this is where I am unhappy with my fuel econ, because that is what I bought this car for.

I know it seems like I am fighting an endless battle... I just don't understand why so many others can get 25, 26 or 27mpg+ on the highway, with A/C on and at speeds of 70mph+.... yet my car struggles to get anything near that.

I am the 3rd owner, it has always been in Tampa Bay, Florida until I bought it, I got it with 93.5k miles and it now has 104.5k miles. I've replace ALOT of things on this car.

*edit*

Largoyle, I just read you live in Largo, I lived there (Clearwater) for a year and a half while I went thru tech school. My '93 Cadillac Coupe DeVille was stolen from my apartment complex there :(. My Town Car was bought new in Oldsmar, where it stayed with the 1st owner until 2001 with 70k miles. 2nd owner lived in Seminole, and haf it until 2005 and put 23k miles on it, then from what I gathered, it was traded in at Walker Ford and kinda floated around used car lots from 2005-2007, only getting about 150 miles put on it durring that time, thought that was kind of odd... it was sitting in a car lot before I even moved to Florida. I bought it from West Coast in Oldsmar back in April with 93.5k.

Cosmetically the car is in great shape, not a ding or dent... I only noticed a couple issues on the test drive, but after I bought it thats when I really started slowing finding out about all the broken things... basically the previous owner let everything that went bad, stockpile, and didn't fix anything, probably just got fed up with it at one point and traded it in or something. Everything that is known or common to go bad on these cars, has, and I've fixed it all, the exceptions being the intake manifold, which was already replaced before I bought the car, and the air springs, which look to be in very good shape. I paid $3,500 for the car, and if I had known the extent of the problems of the car, I would have offered $3k and no more (sticker price was $4k) but even then, I feel like the car is worth it... I am able to perform all the work myself though, if I wasn't this would be an absolute money pit.

When I bought the car, I was aware of 3 things, the driver door was sagging (chipped the rear door) the passenger window woudln't work and there was a knocking sound over bumps.

What I didn't know was that the blend door acutator was shot, and the heater core was leaking... I tested the A/C, worked great, it was 95* outside, I never thought to check the heat, the BDA was unplugged (plastic gear stripped) and the door was manually put in the max cold position. Replaced both, but didn't find out abut the bad heater core until after the BDA was changed... then the POS aftermarket core went bad so I had to remove the dash a 3rd time for the Motorcraft core.

sway bar links were shot (that was the knocking noise) and a ball joint was completly shot (I've replaced all 4 ball joints and tie rod ends)

lower control arm bushings shot

all 4 power windows broke, I fixed them... twice... fixed for good now :)

I dunno, this is all just off my head, there is alot more too, its all in the maintenace log I keep with the car.... Besides that its got a full and complete tune up, all fluids changed etc... fuel filter was soo clogged I coudln't even blow thru it.... yet despite all that, the first trip from FL to GA I got 21.7mpg at 70 with A/C on... which really isn't all that different then what it gets now at 70 with A/C on.

Engine/trans is in good shape tho, from what I can tell the engine is pretty clean inside, runs great, I use Motorcraft synthetic blend 5W-30 and a Motorcraft filter.... I think most of these things went bad while the 2nd owner had it, thus only having it for 23k miles, and they didn't bother to fix anything.... it stinks, but now the car is in perfect running and driving condition :)

[98TC-Cartier]

Well that 3.27 rear end is costing you 6% or 1.5 mpg in your fuel economy compared to most other TC's with the stock 3.08.

[Tman70]

Hi, Night Wolf. From what I'm seeing in the posts here, my concern would be directed to the wiring for the A/C. Either something is tapped into it or there is a bad (or no) connection somewhere on the way to the ECM. When the ECM is told that the A/C clutch engages, it immediately changes a variety of feeds to compensate for the additional load it knows is coming when the compressor starts turning. Possibly the compressor (system) is overcharged or restricted in some manner causing excessive load. Or your tensioner pulley may be starting to go bad. Another possibility is the ECM may be bad. Check and see what number it is and if it's the correct one for your car (post the numbers here). Also, try resetting it by disconnecting the battery for 5 minutes, then taking it for a 'drive cycle' ride. Hope you figure it out!

[Tman70]

Hi, Night Wolf. From what I'm seeing in the posts here, my concern would be directed to the wiring for the A/C. Either something is tapped into it or there is a bad (or no) connection somewhere on the way to the ECM. When the ECM is told that the A/C clutch engages, it immediately changes a variety of feeds to compensate for the additional load it knows is coming when the compressor starts turning. Possibly the compressor (system) is overcharged or restricted in some manner causing excessive load. Or your tensioner pulley may be starting to go bad. Another possibility is the ECM may be bad. Check and see what number it is and if it's the correct one for your car (post the numbers here). Also, try resetting it by disconnecting the battery for 5 minutes, then taking it for a 'drive cycle' ride. Hope you figure it out!
http://www.lincolnsonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=50810&highlight=drive+cycle

[Largoyle]

NightWolf,
That's cool that at one time we were neighbors almost... LOL ! Please don't take my posts as caustic in any way.... I say alot tongue in cheek, and don't ever want to sound pissy.. it would be "un-Southern"...hehehehehe.... After everything you've done with your car, you should be getting a bit better mileage... I'm honestly at a loss as to what could be troubling you. Lillibell even with the 3.27 rear end in it gets 26-28 at 70 mph A/C on......runs like a Swiss watch ! I'll keep my thinking cap on and see if I can help you out.

[moez1010@yahoo.com]

A 1.5 mpg difference on the way back from a trip could be differnce in grade.

i always do better coming back from TN to MI. Better in Ohio barring Cinncinati
because it's flat vs Ky where it is mostly hills.

Air sensor as in MAF sensor is often looked at later than sooner and usually after after spark and fuel.

I just started looking at the PCM as the reason for some things that have been happening lately.

PCM controls curcuits with diferent voltages and amperages, If a curcuit that
is protected by a 25 AMP fuse heats and bonds to another cuurcuit that has a 7.5 amp fuse that curcuit is dangerous and a fire hazard.

I believe the reason why the cruise switch curcuit that shorts has found ground through the PCM.If not the ground then something on the positive end is happening.

I havent seen the inside of one YET but I pulled a Ignition control module off an old 84 Ramcharger Prehistoric PCM. It has a High end temp cut out switch right on the outside to ut power in case of heat. Would cut power to that relay.

Now they do the breaks with the ground because there is less heat created.
But if connection is loose or weak current will find a way to ground or an arc will burn away contacts fast.

Once that switch for the cruise is protected and can blow 5 minutes after
you leave the dealership and you might never know. That path is gone and whatever is wrong in there will be looking for a new route. If it finds the curcuit to the instrument cluster watch out for a flaming dashboard.

Engine controls are probably seperated from accesories and such so car will run good while the other things are getting screwy around it

Anyone has pictures of the inside works of PCM or a cut away view i would love to see it

Good Luck

[Mark9]

Let me savor the moment: A number of our valiant members have once again performed the test of switching from platinum plugs to copper and, SURPRISE-SURPRISE, found no difference.

It seems that when those poor little uneducated electrons are called upon to jump a gap (typically 0.042" to upwards of 0.065" at times) under combustion chamber pressure they simply don't give a damn what the material is that is providing the pathway that they're "leaping" from - copper/steel or platinum. I would, however, be the first to say that those Bosch fine wire plugs scare the hell out of me, visually anyway; but, quite a number of "sophisticated" European car manufacturers prefer them in their highest performing machines. Being a plain 'ol shade tree mechanic here in the hinterlands of the "new world", I don't have the sophisticated dyno facilities and a team of Engineers to run the literally thousands of tests that the manufacturers (and probably the loyal followers of Little Debbie Snack Cakes) perform in their search of the best spark plug for their respective machines. I used the more easily done testing method: "Swap the damn plugs back and forth and find out what the hell works best"; i.e., first run platinums, then copper, then back to platinum, then back to copper, on three of our "herd" (all Ford products and one Mitsubishi 3000 GT). Finding absolutely no difference in performance (0-60 mph and 1/4 mile times) I came to the rather lowly opinion that the only difference is that the platinum tips wear longer because Platinum doesn't erode under the extreme condition found in combustion chambers. Copper plugs only have copper part way down the porcelain core. Some "Platinum" plugs also have copper cores - but their difference is they have Platinum (or Platinum plated) wear tips on the wear suface. Probably why you can run Platinums over a 100,000 miles (if you're on the El Cheapo side, that is) - and have to swap out "Copper" plugs every 25,000 - 35,000 miles because the steel tip has rounded over due to erosion from the high voltage leaving the electrode, along with the heat and pressure encountered.

There, I've said it and I'm glad...

So the battle rages on pitting the Dark Forces of COPPER against the wholesome goodliness of PLATINUM. In the end there really is no real winner - only in the minds, and satisfaction, of the vehicle owner.

.

[98TC-Cartier]

I believe the reason why the cruise switch curcuit that shorts has found ground through the PCM.If not the ground then something on the positive end is happening.

No, the always hot side shorts to ground via the switch body and the brake lines it is threaded into. Which is why Ford is retrofitting a fuse on the supply side to the switch.

[gadget73]

I noticed before I replaced the AC compressor on my car, it loaded up the engine a lot more. My compressor was also fairly loud. The reman compressor is silent, and doesn't seem to put as much of a load on the engine. Could be the compressor is giving out, or the system is overcharged as mentioned.

[Matthew]

I really can't believe we're starting this topic over again. (http://www.lincolnsonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51845) :confused:

AND AGAIN. (http://www.lincolnsonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52606)

[98TC-Cartier]

I'm sure it will happen again and again until he gets rid of the car with the gas guzzling 3.27 final drive.

[Night Wolf]

Hi, Night Wolf. From what I'm seeing in the posts here, my concern would be directed to the wiring for the A/C. Either something is tapped into it or there is a bad (or no) connection somewhere on the way to the ECM. When the ECM is told that the A/C clutch engages, it immediately changes a variety of feeds to compensate for the additional load it knows is coming when the compressor starts turning. Possibly the compressor (system) is overcharged or restricted in some manner causing excessive load. Or your tensioner pulley may be starting to go bad. Another possibility is the ECM may be bad. Check and see what number it is and if it's the correct one for your car (post the numbers here). Also, try resetting it by disconnecting the battery for 5 minutes, then taking it for a 'drive cycle' ride. Hope you figure it out!

I too was thinking there may be an A/C system issue.... perhaps bad compressor or something? A/C works pretty darn good though.

I don't think the ECM is bad, but it could be. I have reset the computer and did a drive cycle, it was listed in the owners manual, this and that for this many miles/minutes etc... I did it all.

[Night Wolf]

NightWolf,
That's cool that at one time we were neighbors almost... LOL ! Please don't take my posts as caustic in any way.... I say alot tongue in cheek, and don't ever want to sound pissy.. it would be "un-Southern"...hehehehehe.... After everything you've done with your car, you should be getting a bit better mileage... I'm honestly at a loss as to what could be troubling you. Lillibell even with the 3.27 rear end in it gets 26-28 at 70 mph A/C on......runs like a Swiss watch ! I'll keep my thinking cap on and see if I can help you out.

I was thinking the 3.27 would effect the mileage, but it really isn't THAT much of a difference.

BTW I lived at the Reserve at Clearwater... horrible management! My Coupe DeVille was stolen there :( For almost a year I worked at the Advance on East Bay dr. in Largo :)

[98TC-Cartier]

Oh it does, and the faster you travel, the worse it is. The engine has to turn 6% faster in all gears to compensate for it compared to the 3.08. 6% more revs = 6% more air and fuel mix. And once you are above the lean burn cruising rev range that is prob programmed into the ecm, the fuel consumption rate will rise even further as the a/f mix richens up a little to prevent engine damage under high rpm running conditions.

Most fuel maps have a nice lean cruise area right where the revs are stable for the fuel economy tests. Outside of that rev range the mixture riches up to produce hp and not damage the engine due to over lean running.

I'd guess as you have the optional final drive, there is no change in the ecm to accommodate it. So you are always running out of the lean burn rev range.


Note to Largoyle, there isn't an automotive a/c compressor made that only uses 1 hp. More like 15+ hp on a towncar. The one on the 07 BMW Z4 uses 11hp. see dyno graph at http://blogs.automobilemag.com/1007156/tech-talk/your-cars-hidden-turbo-boost-button/index.html



Running full synthetic engine oil, atf and final drive oil will gain you back some of the mpg as there won't be the same friction and pumping losses.

[Night Wolf]

[/QUOTE]I really can't believe we're starting this topic over again. (http://www.lincolnsonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51845) :confused:

AND AGAIN. (http://www.lincolnsonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52606)

Yup, and this time instead of saying "its a V8 4,000lbs car, live with it" Maybe there is some answers, or atleast narrow what may be wrong.

So if you have nothing of value to add, or really don't want to hear about another thread on gas mileage, then I'd simply reccomend that you just don't even bother to read my threads about it, then you don't have to worry about it.

I'm sure it will happen again and again until he gets rid of the car with the gas guzzling 3.27 final drive.

You really think the 3.27 gears are the sorce of the problem? I dunno... I wonder what folks with the tow package and 3.55's are getting, or even Crown Vic Police Interceptors with lower gearing. I just don't see a 3.08 vs 3.27 bringing my mileage down by 3-4mpg.

I wonder what RPM the engine is turning at various cruise speeds, and what RPM does it produce peak torques? Engines are most efficent at the RPM that they produce peak torque... so if you can cruise at that RPM, thats where you (normally) get max econ.... depends on the car tho.... too fast and the aerodynamic limitations of the body start to overcome the gaines by the engine.

The Town Car is/was made for extended highway driving, thats just what it does, and everyone raves about the decent (25mpg+) highway mileage of these cars. I know they are capable of it, I come from the land of full size [GM] cars with V8's that can, and do achieve such mileage.

On top of other things I've done to the engine, I've replaced the PCV valve, coolant flush with new t-stat etc... she runs at perfect operating temp all the time. I fuel up only at Chevron/Shell/BP[Ammoco] and I use regular 87, the times I did use premium on a few trips, there was no difference, and 87 is what it calls for. I've also ran Seafoam thru the engine, I am a believer of it. You know, when you hook it up to a vaccum source on the intake manifold and run the engine while it sucks the Seafoam thru, then shut it off and let it sit about 15mins then run it? Really cleans alot of gunk off the engine, I've always had good luck with it. I've also cleaned the throttle body iwth carb cleaner and a toothbrush, it wasn't bad at all, but now its shiney. Probably woudln't effect mileage, but alternator has new voltage regulator and brushes.

[Dereck]

Hi

I really can't believe we're starting this topic over again. (http://www.lincolnsonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51845) :confused:

AND AGAIN. (http://www.lincolnsonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52606)

I'm sure it will happen again and again until he gets rid of the car with the gas guzzling 3.27 final drive.

That's what I was thinking.





....and this time instead of saying "its a V8 4,000lbs car, live with it" .

That's what I was going to say.

I don't think there is anything wrong with Nightwolf's car but just incase he actually finds the gas milage holy grail I am going to keep watching this thread :D

Regards

Dereck

[wmd]

Hi
I have a 93 Cartier with the handling package and have always been happy with the fuel consumption especially since I also have five older Lincolns as well that love to be at the gas station. These cars with the factory Handling package came with the 3.27 axle but they also came with 225 tires and I think that the tire size has to compensate somewhat for the 3.27 axle. I drive this car fully loaded to Clearwater Fl. in the fall and back to Winnipeg in the spring. I watch the fuel usage often because it also is an indication to me of the engine management efficiency. I find that the best fuel usage in my case is at 60-65mph. The a/c on or off definately makes a difference. Because I drive this route over 2000 miles, I drive in all kinds of conditions. Two items that are the most detrimental to the mileage are speed and headwinds. Over 70 mph. and the fuel usage will drop 2-4 mpg. A bad sidewind and especially a bad headwind can drop the mileage 4-6 mpg. A real friendly tailwind produces the opposite affect. The average mileage for me on these 2000 mile journeys has been from 22-28 mpg as shown on the car dash. I remember on one trip we were bucking a horrid prairie headwind 200 miles from Wpg. and I could only get 18mpg. at 55mph. When I needed new tires I installed 235/70 Michelins. The car looks and handles great. One thing that we all can check that nobody has mentioned is that you odometer is correct as driven on a measured mile. I have found incorrect output gears installed in error from the factory on a few cars. Check the fuel consumption on your car with Speed and Headwinds in mind and see if you experience the same as I do.:)
WMD

[Matthew]

Actually my "contributing" comment would be the same as the last time I bothered. You're achieving within 0.5 MPG of the window sticker of the day the car was brand new. And it's not brand new now.

You could always just take readings while you're going downhill.

P.S. I have heard that having the windows down will drag the MPG down. All the wind tunnel testing is done with the glass closed up tight. Run the vent and you might get your goal there.

[PROSTOCK]

Actually my "contibuting" comment would be the same as the last time I bothered. You're achieving within 0.5 MPG of the window sticker of the day the car was brand new. And it's not brand new now.

You could always just take readings while you're going downhill.

P.S. I have heard that having the windows down will drag the MPG down. All the wind tunnel testing is done with the glass closed up tight. Run the vent and you might get your goal there.

Dang man, you beat me to it.... I would also offer that those who claim to get 25+MPG are an anomaly. If your disgusted with the MPG's sell the TC and get your beloved Caddy. What you've spent in time and money searching for the "Holy Grail" in MPG, would have bought a few gallons.

[Mark9]

Just had to jump in.... The most often used "dailey driver" I use in our herd is a '96 TC. I live in the foothills (6000 feet elevation is foothills?) and drive the freeway into the city daily - 7 days per week at really dumb speeds (average around 75 mph). And I put on about 35,000 miles per year just on this vehicle. Tank after tank after tank of fuel averages out to a consistant 18.3 mpg.

Recently, we made a couple trips over the Sierra Nevada mountains to vist friends in the an Francisco area. During the trip my wife was constantly on my case about watching my speed because the California HP had put out an ample amount of publicity that they were cracking down on speeders on that route (I-80). So I held the speeds to just about 65 mph. During the trip I kept a careful eye on the mpg indication, but really didn't drive to get the best milage. Oh, I didn't use cruise control at any time.

Lo and behold, when I arrived in the Bay Area I had averaged 25.2 mpg. Same thing on the return trip. In both trips the mpg was just about the same. Back in my normal driving routine, the mileage once again dropped to 18.3 mpg proving that you pay at the pump for heavy foot driving.

Bottom line is that I believe that a "good" driver can get very good milage if he desires - and the TC is capable of it.

Forgot to mention, one of my daughters made essentially the same trip in a '97 T-Bird, 4.6L engine with more horsepower, and averaged a little over 26 mpg...

.

[Matthew]

Lo and behold, when I arrived in the Bay Area I had averaged 25.2 mpg.

I think the difference between what you achieved with 25.2 and what the OP achieved with 24.5 (2 to 3% difference) could easily be explained by the rear end gearing ratio.

[JeepOwner]

Nightwolf, I have the same gearing as you do and only get 24 on the freeway at 60ish. 70 with AC on and I get 23. 93MPH and I get 21.3 with cruise and AC on.

[greggyc]

I'm curious about this also...as some of you have seen I have a 2000 TC and a 92 MGM. The TC gets around 22 most of the time even with tune up and interstate driving. My Merc gets 23 max with plugs, wires, IAC, fuel filter, air filter, new tires and trans fluid change and only 90,000 miles with the AC off and 95% interstate driving now.
So, I also am wondering about gas mileage as I have NEVER seen 25, 26, or 27. The window sticker on the Merc says 18-25...my grandmother says she has always gotten 23 since she bought the car new, but she drives like a granny and lives in a small country town in south TN. I don't know what kind of gears it has in it, it is a GS model with no towing pkg. If I could get up to 27 or even 25 I'd be thrilled!

[ImTheJoker4u2]

Keep in mind that these cars are about as aerodynamic as a brick..Below 60 I average about 24. Anything above 60 starts sucking gas in my ride. and Im running a V6:confused:

[mark95man]

We always got in the mid to high 20s on our cars. The trick is no jack rabbit starts or panic stops. You get 0 MPG @ 0 MPH. Look ahead for traffic conditions and slow down early when required. For those flying by you, you'll catch up when they are stopped. Yes, V-8s can give better MPG than I-4, I-6 or V-6 engines. It's all in the RPMs to get the car moving and keep it moving. Our 95 (sold) and our 08 GM get in the 24 to 27 MPG, our 96 (sold) and our 07 TC got slightly less due to the size & weight difference. A recent rental car, 08 TC, had 18.3 MPG on its display--it was reset. After 3 weeks & 2,700 miles, the display had 24.6 MPG. Just a different driver who drove differently to get to 65+ MPH. Our miles to empty display usually reads in the 442 to 480 mile range. I use gallons pumped divided by miles driven to give true MPG. If you live in a large city with lots of stop & go, it's a different story.

[alohawolf]

Hi, Night Wolf. From what I'm seeing in the posts here, my concern would be directed to the wiring for the A/C. Either something is tapped into it or there is a bad (or no) connection somewhere on the way to the ECM. When the ECM is told that the A/C clutch engages, it immediately changes a variety of feeds to compensate for the additional load it knows is coming when the compressor starts turning. Possibly the compressor (system) is overcharged or restricted in some manner causing excessive load. Or your tensioner pulley may be starting to go bad. Another possibility is the ECM may be bad. Check and see what number it is and if it's the correct one for your car (post the numbers here). Also, try resetting it by disconnecting the battery for 5 minutes, then taking it for a 'drive cycle' ride. Hope you figure it out!

I was thinking overcharged myself.

I have a 97 TC, and I just got the AC Clutch freed up and my A/C works great, I only notice a slight MPG hit when its on, and no change in over all performance.

[gadget73]

Keep in mind that these cars are about as aerodynamic as a brick..Below 60 I average about 24. Anything above 60 starts sucking gas in my ride. and Im running a V6:confused:

Actually the 90s Towncar is pretty decent as far as aerodynamics go. I think I've seen .34 as the coefficient before. If you were talking boxes, yes those have the aerodymanics of a brick.

[Night Wolf]

Holy brought back from the dead thread batman!

I just fixed the Town Car (under intake manifold hose) as it has been parked in the driveway for months. Between my classic BMW convertible and Jeep (both manual trans, and so much fun to drive), I just wasn't driving it anymore... I think I may have gone thru 2 tanks of gas in the last 6 months? I convinced myself to sell the car, but don't think I could bring myself to it. Now that it is fixed, I've been driving it, and will be driving it this week.

Along with pulling the intake manifold, I replaced all 8 spark plugs with NGK V-power (had Autolite copper in it) so far from driving, my fuel mileage actually seems to be better. We'll see what it comes out to be.

[ImTheJoker4u2]

Nightwolf, I have the same gearing as you do and only get 24 on the freeway at 60ish. 70 with AC on and I get 23. 93MPH and I get 21.3 with cruise and AC on.

dude who sets the cruise at 93?:eek:

[Night Wolf]

Actually the 90s Towncar is pretty decent as far as aerodynamics go. I think I've seen .34 as the coefficient before. If you were talking boxes, yes those have the aerodymanics of a brick.

From what I've read, both the '90-'97 and '98+ TC have a 0.36 COD, and the 80's boxes have 0.37. Not sure how true those sources may be tho.

It isn't just the shape/COD of the car, but the large frontal area multipled by the COD to produce total drag area.

[Night Wolf]

dude who sets the cruise at 93?:eek:

lol, my BMW has been known to have the cruise set at much higher speeds then that (and still return impressive MPG)

I've found that the Lincoln actually drives better 85mph+ then at 70, but gas mileage just takes a big dump at those speeds, and faster.

[nmikmik]

I just came back from a trip to Phoenix with a lots of side wind (strong) but not sure how much it matters. On the way there driving rite at speed limit or a little below or above - so somewhere between 63 & 78 mph. I got 24.5 mpg on the same set up as a night wolf has, a 97 TC & touring package (tires are old if it matters, but at 35 lbs pressure) A/C was on from about halfway there, so not a true test.

My 93 gets (used to before i started fixing it :o) just a hair more at the same speeds but - assuming because of the gear ratio, but 28.5 at 62 mph.