Skip Navigation Links.
 |  dual Holley 500s............ -- Pete's Ponies, 01/25/2003
anyone ever run dual 500 2 barrels on a dual quad manifold? It was just a thought running around in my head. Seems to be a real possibilty for several reasons. Just wanted to see if anyone had done it, thoughts? |
|  | RE: dual Holley 500s............ -- David Thayer, 01/26/2003
I ran two new holley 450's on a C7ZX (med riser) intake on a stock 390. Was waaaaay tooooo much carb, fouled the plugs after each 2 hours of driving!! |
| | | RE: dual Holley 500s............ -- Pete's Ponies, 01/26/2003
but they were 4 bbls right? Anyway, a 428 PI was basically a stock spec engine. Ford put dual 600s on the GT500 ( 67-early 68). They were known for being way over carbed. I would like to run dual 450s on an engine I am building for a Thunderbolt clone. It will have the heads and cam to support duals, probably 600s. However, dual 450 would probably make throttle response better at a slight loss of top end. The dual 500 2V idea is a crazy one that seems like it would work. Just wanted to know if anyone had tried ? |
| | | | RE: dual Holley 500s............ -- Royce Peterson, 01/26/2003
Pete,
A properly set up 8V Ford intake is magnificent. The off the shelf Holley carbs are not calibrated properly for this application and will indeed bog, foul plugs etcetera.
You do not know what you are talking about concerning the '67 Shelby setup. It is awesome in stock form. It gets screwed up in a hurry by bad gas or incompetent tuning.
A pair of 2V's will have poor response compared to the stock 600 CFM carbs because there are only two metering circuits. The stock 8V setup works so well because of the vacuum secondaries and the eight venturis.
Because of the different way of rating 2V carbs compared to 4V and 8V systems the 500CFM 2V carbs with mechanical actuation will bog more compared to the vacuum secondary 600CFM 4V's. They could nonetheless be tuned to work OK but never as clean running as a stock set of BJ / BK's.
Many people who ride in my 427 GTE with 8V Medium Riser and BJ / BK's are astounded because they have heard the same incorrect rumors that you just stated. I have had people say "Wow, is this thing fuel injected?" There is no bog, no hesitation. It starts up cold and runs perfectly clean. Plugs last a at least 2500 miles in stop and go driving, putting around shows and drag strip playing, that's how far the car has been driven since the 8V intake went on and the plugs still look like new with a little tan coloring.
Royce |
| | | | | RE: dual Holley 500s............ -- Pete's Ponies, 01/26/2003
true no 8V experience, but have talked to 8V owners at Shelby convention. I will be getting my own 8V experience soon with my 428 Thunderbolt. I am considering some dual 450s or possibly 600s. I am not going for original carbs, just a set that work well as tuned.
I fully realize twin 2V carbs lack some metering, but for high output, should be a simple setup. That was just some wondering on my part. |
| | | | | | RE: dual Holley 500s............ -- Royce Peterson, 01/27/2003
Pete,
A lot of the bad press that these systems get is self induced by owners and mechanics who just can't tune one carburetor, let alone two. If any carb gets left for long periods with today's complex formula gasoline there is hell to pay. Power valves rot out from the aggressive chemicals in the gas that become concentrated as it evaporates.
The other problem is when people try to use their "friend's" tuning tricks on a Holley. Sometimes these tricks include plugging the power valve, drilling the air bleeds or jets. Then when it leaves black smoke clouds, loads up idling or fouls plugs the explanation is " Well these 8V setups are like that". I say bull___t to that story.
If you ever get a chance to ride in a '67 GT500 that is set up like it came from the factory you will be blown away by the awesome driveability of it.
The original spec carbs are available brand new right now, Carl's Ford Parts has them in stock for about $900 a pair. A little more initial outlay than the 500 2V's and adapters but it will bolt on and work right straight out of the box.
Royce |
| | | | | | | RE: Whenever I read about someone... -- Gerry Proctor, 01/27/2003
Installing a set of 1850s on a dual-quad application I always think to myself -"Boy, bet that runs like crap!" The fuel and air metering is completely different between a carburetor used on a single 4V and those intended for multiple carb set ups.
Royce is dead on. If you use the right carbs to start with, most of your problems go away or never arrive. Most of the carburetion problems with multipule carb set ups are self-inflicted wounds. |
| | | | | | | | RE: Whenever I read about someone... -- Pete's Ponies, 01/27/2003
if you know what the metering differences are, I would like to hear it. I am an automotive instructor, so you will not loose me :o) At $900 for a pair, that isn't going to happen. |
| | | | | | | | | RE: Whenever I read about someone... -- Gerry Proctor, 01/28/2003
The area where you find the main difference is in the air and fuel metering in the idle circuit. If you look at the specs for a single four barrel Ford Holley application vs a Ford Holley dual quad set up, the idle air bleeds are a different size and the metering blocks are different. I'm working from a foggy memory on this but the single four application uses a .0019 air bleed orifice while the dual quad uses a .0041 air bleed. I don't recall what the main air bleed sizes are. The idle fuel circuit is also slightly different. That is why the metering blocks and throttle bodies have different part numbers. This is also why putting a brace of 1850 or 3310 Holleys on a dual quad intake doesn't work very well at idle and light cruise. They tend to run rich when not on the enrichment and main metering circuits. You can only partially address this through the idle air bleed. This is a great reason to get a brace of Webers since the emulsion tubes for both the air and fuel circuits are fully tuneable. Of course, by then the $900 for the correct dual quads will seem cheap by comparison.
If you want proof you can see for yourself, go to Edelbrock's web site and notice that they offer two 500 cfm performer carbs. One is for the single quad apps, the other for the dual quad apps. The only difference is in the air and fuel metering circuits.
The bottom line is still as Royce wrote. A properly set up multi-carb system is astounding both in performance and aesthetics. |
| | | | | | | | |  | Webers -- Chip Huffman, 01/28/2003
Gerry and all,
I have a 48IDA Weber setup on an original H/M manifold, not the ribbed repops you buy now. I would like to get it set up properly. Does anyone on here have any experience with them? I can work on the 67 GT 500 sets with success but the Webers, not yet.
Chip
|
| | | | | | | | | | RE: Whenever I read about someone... -- Pete's Ponies, 01/28/2003
so basically, the potential is there for a leaner idle and low speed circuit. Potential meaning you still have the idle adjustment screw to effect the final A/F ratio at idle and low speed. I wonder if drilling the throttle plate butterflys is a bandaid that helps in this scenario
( without the proper carbs) ? |
| | | | | | | | | | | RE: Whenever I read about someone... -- Gerry Proctor, 01/29/2003
This is one of those things that isn't well understood beyond how folks THINK the mixture screws work.
The idle mixture screws control the emulsified mixture amount not the ratio although there is a ratio balance achieved through throttle opening and the idle mixture screws but if your mixture is real fat at idle, you will never make it leaner by twiddling with the mixture screw. The idle A/F ratio is determined by the idle air bleeds in the throttle body and the fuel by the idle fuel bleed passages in the metering plate. The only way to change that ratio is by fiddling with the air and fuel bleeds which is not easy or recommended unless you name is Barry Grant.
Most fat idle mixtures are caused by having the throttle butterfly exposing the idle transition slot beyond .060" which causes fuel to be pulled through the main circut while the engine is at idle. The purpose of this slot is to smooth the transition from the idle circuit to the main circuit. There are some tricks that are fairly common in engines that can't achieve a stable idle without excessive throttle opening which exposes the transfer slot.
One method is to slightly open the secondary butterfly by turning the set screw under the secondary diaphram (you have to flip the carb over to see this screw) to assist the idle speed without introducing additional fuel but this isn't entirely successful since there will be some fuel coming from the secondary well since there will be some air flowing through the venturi. Not quite as much as would be coming though the transfer slot, but still some.
The other method is to drill two small holes in the primary butterfly to allow more air through the throttle body while keeping the throttle plates closed to the transition slot. You have to start small with the holes...under 1/16" and work your way up until you can achieve a stable idle without exposing the transition circuit. This will allow the additional airflow the engine needs to idle without dumping extra fuel into the mixture.
However, the correct solution to multi-carb set ups is to use carburetors that are calibrated in the air and fuel circuits to perform as advertised. I have no idea on Weber tuning but all carburetors work on the same principal so it's only a matter of tuning and testing to get them dialed in. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | RE: Whenever I read about someone... -- Pete's Ponies, 01/29/2003
Gerry, I do understand that the mixture screw controls an emulsified fuel supply; it is not "straight fuel". That being said, there is still some air that passes by the throttle plates ( and this air is picking up no fuel), so looking at the entire picture, you can effect the overall idle A/F ratio, just not as simple and dramatic as one might think.
I was interested in your thoughts as to adding holes in the butterflies in this particular situation. I know you have to go slow etc. I am not a novice with carburetors, just never have worked on a dual 4 setup. Only multiple carbs have been foreign engines and bikes. I teach carburetors to my students, probably lost theory in must schools. I, however, like students to know where our newer engines "came from".
I appreciate any insight in this endeavor you can give me. I will be tackling the 2x4 with "normal " carbs. It is a money thing. Too many play toys :o) I am at this time finishing my 68 1/2 CJ, building a chopper, restoring a 240Z and restoring/building a Thunderbolt clone with a 428. It is this car that will get the dual 4s. So $900 won't be going to a set of carbs. Did I mention I am restoring another 68 1/2 CJ and a 73 Q-code Mustang for customers?
Point is I am busy, but very interested in my Thunderbolt project. I want to make reliable, but thrifty, decisions on the carbs. Thanks Gerry. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Have you considered... -- Gerry Proctor, 01/29/2003
Just sending the carbs out to a shop like Jet, The Carb Shop, BG or one of the many other tuners and just have them re-calibrate them to function well on a dual quad? Essentially, they put restrictors in the fuel bleeds and enlarge the air bleeds. It's really not too much more complicated than that but, like any area of significant expertise, you're not paying for their time but for their experience.
You can do the holes in the butterflies but it's a real crap shoot as to what the outcome will be. Can't say I've ever done it as a method of achieving a good A/F ratio idle balance but your logic path makes sense. I don't know enough about carbs to say what cascading events may occur. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Idle Circuits -- John, 01/29/2003
The problem with 2X4 Holleys is, as noted earlier in this thread, the idle circuits. Although the engine may draw the right mixture at speed, as the air fuel ratio is governed by the main venturis, the idle circuits are set with the assumption that only one carb is on the engine. Two carbs...twice the needed fuel at idle. The mixture screws are only a "fine" adjustment, so you can turn them in all the way and it's still too rich. The idle jets must be reduced in size until they are close enough to allow the mixture screws to lean out the engine to a stall. They can be replaced, or a small wire bent into a "V" with little feet bent on the ends, can be inserted in the jets. The secondary idle circuit (used to bleed off fuel in a lightly used car so it doesn't get stale) don't really require the same attention. You can fiddle around with the wires till you get it right and probably spend $900 in float bowl gaskets, or you can get someone to give you out of the box units with the correct vacumm balance covers. Pony Carbs supplied me with two units that work perfectly with my Offy 360Deg manifold (which many hold in disdain). You guys with other FE's out there might be faster, but I havn't seen a Chevy yet that was. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | RE: Idle Circuits -- Pete's Ponies, 01/30/2003
again thanks for everyones input. I will check on modification cost to see where that puts it. If nothing else, messing with cheap 1850s is no real loss if I can't get it right. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | RE: Idle Circuits -- c.roberson, 02/07/2003
Itried for over two years too find the right combo to make a pair of 600s work by the time I succeded I had spent about the same amount of money as what a new set from carls would have cost, and still wish I had they would be worth a lot more than the modified carbs I have now, Do yourself a favor and take a little more time and save up for the right parts youll be glad you did and it will be done right the first time |
 | 67 428 ltd -- curt4nu, 01/21/2003
I just found a Q code 67 ltd. I am stuck between a rock and a hard place. The car is in excellent shape and has 65 k on it. it is blue with white top. I am in need of a standard bore cj block, i am sure this is an A block. I really don't want to break up this car unless i have to. just woud be a treasure to someone else i am sure. What would the car be worth? i have pics too. the vin is 7g62Q155291, and if there is a web site to decode lt's vin could someone please let me know. Oh ya i am sure my wife would have a fit if i brought home another car, lol,
curt |
| | RE: 67 428 ltd -- Tim B, 01/21/2003
Here's a VIN decoder:
http://www.lovefords.org/Vin/ford/6069/1967.asp
It might be worth getting a Marti Report too.
For a 67 LTD 4 door HT, 428 (+45%) NADA says:
Total Price low $2,284 $4,314 high $6,453
Same in a 2 dr HT with a/c (+10%)
Total Price $2,829 $5,231 $7,866
With low original miles and original condition you may get more possibly. It really would be a shame to remove the 428. Try and keep it in there, it's worth more that way. See if you can find a "loose" 428!
Send me some pics, I'd love to see it! My dad had a new 68 LTD, I've always liked them. |
| 428cj block identification -- Carson, 01/20/2003
I have the chance to purchase a supposedly 428cj block. The man does not not if it is a 428cj for sure. Is there any id numbers i can look for
Thanks |
| how long, in inches -- ponyboy, 01/20/2003
O. K. boys, I need some fresh creative heads here, my 390 block is from a 67 t-bird, the heads and exhaust are gt the whole thing is sitting in a 67 s code mustang.
I ordered a oil dip stick/tube from a GOOD dealer. My motor guy swears the tube is not long enough, if he lines up the bracket/hole to the exhaust bolt, the tube ALMOST touches the block. Iv'e looked up pics of 67gt/428cj dip stick tubes, and they look like the one I have, but....the bottom line IS the thing will not fit. I'll even take the the length, or how long they are suppose to be. or any other half baked ideas, Why this sucker isnt fitting |
| | its probably a fullsize car tube.... -- hawkrod, 01/20/2003
the GT tube has a tab welded on at a different point. i think the fullsize tab hits the bottom bolt on the exhaust manifold but on a GT it goes to the bolt on the front of the manifold you know, about 2 inches different or so. hawkrod |
| | | RE: its probably a fullsize car tube.... -- ponyboy, 01/22/2003
JURY IS STILL OUT.
I talked to a guy thats got a 428cj, he measured his from where the tube is exposed at the block and comes up with 18 7/8", another source tells me a 67 bird 390 tube is about 13 1/2 inchs long, and the gt 390 is 10 5/64 long.
Once again, my 390 came out of a 67 bird with the different heads and gt manifolds the motor fits into the compartment of my mustang, does that mean I have a gt 390?
If I find a 67 390 t-bird tube, the bracket will NOT line up with the new manifolds.
so the whole "tap it in untill the hole lines up with the bolt is a moot point.
Still confused (and cold) in wisconsin...
|
| | | | All 390s have same dims., except exhaust manifolds. [n/m] -- Mr F, 01/22/2003
n/m |
| | | | | RE: All 390s have same dims., except exhaust manif -- ponyboy, 01/22/2003
Same diameter, perhaps but the lengths? differ. The one I bought from (carls), the
length is 10 1/4 long. Another ford guy swears the t-bird ones are 13 1/2. still in wisconsin and still cold.
As long as I have your ear, do I have a gt 390 motor since the rebuild? and addition of the heads and manifolds? Thanks again... |
| | | | | | RE: All 390s have same dims., except exhaust manif -- hawkrod, 01/22/2003
since 1965 there are only about 1/2 dozen tubes. the CJ and GT are the same and a little over 10 inches long but 66 GT is different. the 65/66 tbird is special and is about 13 1/2 inches but 67 and newer tbird is the same as a passenger car but i don't have the dimensions. the tube you have is designed to bolt to the lower exhaust manifold bolt on a regular car manifold. because you have GT manifolds the tab can not be bolted to the lower hole and the front hole of the GT manifold is too high making the tube too short. your friends dimension is for his dipstick not the tube as the dipstick is about 18 inches from the cap. and yes the difference between a tbird 390 and a mustang 390 are pretty much the heads and exhaust plus the cam, carb, and distributor so by changing those things you have in effect created a GT engine. hawkrod |
| | | | | | | RE: All 390s have same dims., except exhaust manif -- GT Dave, 03/09/2003
As of the Tbird, GT heads. Is it the 8 or 14 bolt heads that are on the Mustang GT "S" code? |
| | | RE: its probably a fullsize car tube.... -- Bob Sprowl, 01/23/2003
Hawkrod has it right. The dipstick varies based on whether it has GT or standard exhaust manifolds.
Few parts people know that and so the wrong part was ordered - delivered. I would just move the bracket, but then I'm not a concurs type. |
| | I'm with Tom - if it doesn't fit then its the wrong part. [n/m] -- Mr F, 01/20/2003
n/m |
| | RE: how long, in inches -- Charlie, 01/23/2003
here is an original 67 gt 390
 |
| WHAT happened to general forum?? -- Bob H., 01/20/2003
drop it too?? |
| | | ?? MAY BE IT'S Me ,but -- Bob H., 01/21/2003
since the weekend I cannot see the icon foe general forum the whole forum has changed and all I see is FE forum |
| | | | A full site re-design is in progress. Stay tuned. :-) [n/m] -- Mr F, 01/21/2003
n/m |
| | | | | always do gits me through the day -- Bob H., 01/21/2003
N/m |
| | | | | | Thanks for saying so, Bob. :-) [n/m] -- Mr F, 01/21/2003
n/m |
| Oil Pumps -- Dallas Fridley, 01/20/2003
I am using my FE to race with. What is the best Oil Pump for use in the high RPM range? (7500-8000)
Thanks |
| C8AE-H heads and long 427 cast manifolds -- Brian Nichols, 01/20/2003
Has anyone run this combination? I am worried about exh leaks as the exh port floor on the head is lower than the port size of these manifolds. I do have the option to run C6AE-R heads also. The engine is a 428 with TRW L2303 pistons for my 64 Marauder, 4 speed. I would also like to use my aluminum 1C3 intake as 1st choice, iron C.J. 2nd choice. Any feedback ?? |
| | Use the "R" heads........ -- kevin, 01/20/2003
as they will drop the compression to a more acceptable level. The "H" heads are gonna be up there around 10.5.1, and that will prove challenging to buy gas that will work OK. The R's will make it about 9.8, which seems the limit for a car that weighs 3,800 #'s. The Low Riser intake you list will bolt right up, as well as the exhausts. It will also look "correct" compared to having the extra bolt bosses sitting there. If you install some CJ sized valves, and do a little porting, they are a very good head. One word of caution, you need to check the piston to valve interference if you have a cam that has a duration @ .050 lifter rise of more than 235 degrees, or a low Lobe Center Displacment angle or simply LC, (lobe centers). This is not to be confused with "intake centerline", which is just the intake's centerline in relationship to the crankshaft. These pistons have valve reliefs that are marginal at best, for even the stock size valves. If you have power steering, you will need to raise the engine about a 1/4" with washers under the motor mount stud. That will allow them to clear the slave cylinder without hitting due to vibration. Its easier than dropping the cylinder down. Looking for any 64 Marauder parts? |
| | | RE: Use the "R" heads........ -- Brian, 01/20/2003
Thanks for the input kevin. I was leaning to the R heads, just for manifold fitment. Cam selection looks like EDL2106. This cam worked real well in my 69 R code Cougar, however it did have the heads and intake combo from Edelbrock also!
P.S. always looking for Marauder parts! |
| Testing for Vacume Leaks -- Chuck Brandt, 01/20/2003
When assembling a new engine or working on a running engine with problems, is there a way to effectively test for vacume leaks on an assembled engine. Could you close the valves and block off the carb flange and use a leakdown tester? If so how would that work?
Is it reasonable to expect it to hold a vacume before it's run or does it have to go through some heating cooling cycles first?
Thanks, Chuck
|
| | It depends....... -- kevin, 01/20/2003
on who did the valve job, and installed the intake. If you leave off the rocker shafts, and make a plate with a fitting, you can put a Mityvac on there and test the intake valve/seat, as well as the manifold seal. You would have to plate each exhaust port individually to test, but the shafts can be on, just turn the motor over. I used to do the chambers with a plate after doing the valve job. After a while, I would use my mouth (I acid cleaned all my parts) on the ports, and suck till I was blue in the face (not really). I could tell if there was any leaks (never in my work, but I found it in others). If a suspect leak was found, I used the vac. I got real good results and extremly long life by doing the following. After all the other work to guides etc was done, I ground the seats to a 45 degree angle. Doing this right takes some time, as it is easy to do a "quickie". I used a Serdi cutter, then followed up with traditional stones (very fine finishing grade) on the sealing surface, redressing the stones a lot to keep them perfect. Then I would grind the valve face to 44-3/4 degree's to get a slight interference fit so it would touch the outer edge first. This will allow the valve to be elastic enough to stretch it lengthwise a hair, allowing it to keep the seat self cleaning as it rotates. You cant believe how many shops do it the other way, and put a full 1 or 2 degree interference angle on them. This allows the valve to "slam" and with no springboard effect, pounds out the seats fast, due to the "guttering" effect it causes. I used the stones as a final touch to get the vac to hold. Without, machined seats have a hard time holding a vac on their own, no matter what you may hear from the shop doing the valve job, and the hype from Serdi, Winnona, Kwik Way, etc. The cutter is so fast, the profit is much larger, due to time constraints. Would you run your rings on freshly bored cylinders? No, you know they need to be honed with a stone to get the best seal. A cutter still tears metal away, even with the slightest pressure. Lapping compound can help, but only if you get Clover brand extra fine. That Permatex crap is good for nothing modern. |
| Chassis -- Ryan J. Shannon, 01/18/2003
I have a 69 mach one with a 428 car. The car is built for racing and I'm looking for someone who has had chassis work done to their car to find out what works the best for this application. |
| | What sort of work? What kind of racing? [n/m] -- Mr F, 01/20/2003
n/m |
| hydraulic roller cams in 428 -- Geoff McNew, 01/18/2003
Anyone out there have experience using a roller hydraulic cam like Crane's in a 428-CJ/SCJ?
The $cost, vis-a-vis custom length pushrods and more expensive (& heavier?) roller lifters I can fathom, but am I missing something less obvious? e.g., does the overall valve train weight with the heavier lifters require extreme valve spring rates? I'm running a 428-SCJ with CJ heads, adj. rockers and dual springs with a Crower hydraulic currently. |
| | RE: hydraulic roller cams in 428 -- Bob Sprowl, 01/18/2003
Are you missing something obvious? Yes and no. The heavier lifters need strong springs. But the springs necessary to reach high RPMs cause the lifters to collapse before you get to those RPMS.
So what is needed is a rev kit that pushes on the lifter body and NOT the hydraulic plunger. But no one makes this.
So you can't get there from here.
And all of this just came to me as I wanted to use one. I have been trying figure out why people have reported hydraulic lifter problems with these cams and why they fail to rev very high. These cams do make great power but I have not heard ot any that rev over 5500. (And few that get much over 5000.)
|
| | | RE: hydraulic roller cams in 428 -- Geoff McNew, 01/19/2003
I follow your thinking, thanks....and since I'm not even half way leaning towards the concept of broken lifter chunks as lifestyle choice I'll pass on the roller hydraulic idea. But, you'd think if you could make them work, the performance potential for a CJ motor would be truly great with all that extra effective duration to combat the head restrictions. I wonder, did any 427's or 406's in racing use ever get rev kits? I'm not familiar enough. |
| | | | RE: hydraulic roller cams in 428 -- Bob Sprowl, 01/19/2003
Isky made some FE rev kits many years ago for there solid lifter roller cams.
I think I will run the small Crane Hydraulic roller in my stroker 427 since nothin else makes as much low and mid range power. It will make my 7 Litre a real sleeper as the idle should be close to stock. |
| | | | How to make it work. -- Royce Peterson, 01/20/2003
The problem here is the weight. If you were to use titanium valves, retainers, keepers and pushrods along with a needle roller rocker setup the springs would not have to be so strong as to defeat the hydraulic roller lifters at higher RPM.
While this would allow you to have your cake and eat it too, the cost of the cake would affect the sweetness of the taste.
Royce |
| | | | | O.K., decision -- Geoff McNew, 01/21/2003
Will go a tad warmer on the cam, still a Crower split duration flat tappet hydraulic, 236/242 @ 0.050" .590"/.588" with 112 separation...dual springs, 145# seat / 375# open, and go with Erson roller rockers & shafts. |
| | | | | RE: How to make it work. -- Bob Sprowl, 01/23/2003
Titanium valves, retainers, keepers and pushrods and very costly. And used NASCAR stuff while much cheaper does not fix out FEs without a lot of reworking.
FE stands for freaking expensive! |
|