FE intake

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Jan 19, 2012 | 11:30 AM

#31

MeanGene427

Tuned

Joined: Mar 2009

Posts: 360

Likes: 3

From: Napa

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddad457

Still got to disagree with you. Most of the bad rep the multiple carb setups got was due not to the carbs themselves but running them with points ignitions. ("the carbs never stay set"........yea, right! it's not the carbs causing the problems in the first place). Also trying to run em with old, worn out carbs is a major headache. Been there-done that with my first 3x2. I've run both a
As in one?
LR 2x4 (with 1850 600's) on a 427 and a 454 and currently have a 331 running a repop 3x2 (Mustangs Unlimited setup) Never had issues with any of them. And the difference in performance is like night and day. There's no comparison to a 4 bbl anything.
And that would be "the baloney" Pretty obvious you haven't worked with any of the modern setups
One of the mistakes is trying to run carbs that are too big, like those you mentioned using 500's on the ends. Huge mistake there IMO. They'd have had better luck with the 500 in the middle and the smaller carbs on the ends.
So, do you have any actual experience with this setup, or just "I think"? My statement was based on actual running setups done by some pretty experienced FE guys I know, who did a lot of work to make it function well, to have the eye candy and actual performance

I also went the wrong way once with the 427 and the 2x4, while I had the engine out of the car for a couple years, my bro-in-law borrowed the two 600's off it, so I was forced to use two 750's. The topend was severely limited vs the two 600's on the 454.
So your particular 454 setup couldn't use the additional cfm, or it was just poorly tuned
Just swapping to the 2x4 on the 454 from a 428PI topped with a single 750 was like night and day. The motor was litterally starving with the 750.

A stock PI intake (circa 1966) isn't what you'd call a modern 4V setup on an FE, okay but nothing special- might want to catch up on current events. And some of my NHRA CJ friends would be very surprised that their engines are "literally starving" with their 735's, seem to be running pretty good- but what do they know?

Jan 19, 2012 | 12:02 PM

#32

Bear 45/70

Post Fiend

Joined: Mar 2004

Posts: 6,056

Likes: 8

From: Union, Washington

Quote:

Originally Posted by MeanGene427

Yeah, my CJs ran fine with the stock 735 Holley, but they ran better with the 3X2 set up, like a tenth quicker and several mph faster with the stock engine. With a modded motor the difference was even greater.

Jan 19, 2012 | 06:10 PM

#33

baddad457

Hotshot

Joined: May 2003

Posts: 11,141

Likes: 25

From: south louisiana

Quote:

Originally Posted by MeanGene427

You know, for all your hype, you still haven't told us why a 3x2 falls short of a 4 bbl setup (no matter the vintage) Or doesn't perform as well as a 2x4. Possesing everything you have, in your list of toys, does not equate to being good at what you do. I've seen lots of guys who've had 4-5 wives and yet they still aren't good at relationships or being able to explain women. Explain to us why a 3x2 falls short. And why a modern 4 bbl intake and 4 bbl carb is better than other carbs. Simply bolting on a bigger carb (or carbs) and expecting more power is the biggest mistake anyone can make, regardless of if it's one carb or eight. At some point, in the throttle you'll loose vacuum, the more vacuum you lose, and you've prevented the very thing that pulls the fuel from the bowls. And funny you should mention guys running CJ's in drag racing, now you're implying that old stuff (735 vacuum sec and a 428PI/CJ intake) is better than the new stuff ? Which is it ? You can't have it both ways. I have a friend who's a master engine builder, but is the first to tell you he's completely lost when it coems to tuning a carb.