bloody carby Q's again

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anonymous
  • Start date Start date
No man, it's just that Americans can't handle the idea that a hot Aussie six can chug-a-lug a 500 cfm 2-bbl, 390, 465 , 470, 525, or 570 or 600 cfm 4-bbl carb without spilling it!

The Holley guys are just looking after 80% of the customers they know about...V8 guys. You don't fit in there scheme of things. Your a die-hard performance nut who wants grunt, not a weazy little jug.

It's just now that guys like Mustangaroo and MustangGeezer, Ricksmol, and Jimbo65 are discovering that a big carb isn't a bad thing on a 200 cuber. How much more when you have 25% more cubes? And what if it has an alloy head and a cam with much more lift, and duration? I've not seen a 500 cfm carb do 200 hp on a street car, or a 350 cfm do more than 130 hp. The 465 does 280 on a race car, and will cut the 225 hp at about 4800 rpm with a 280 degree cam with 510 thou lift and some head work.

The 350 and 500 2-bbl Holleys are just babies. Those other listings (390, 465 , 470, 525, or 570 or 600 cfm 4-bbl) are what you should look at.
 
Hullo guys,
I would have to agree that the six cylinder engine can use more air flow that the diet of single two barrels that are generally used.
But I am going agaisnt the flow of late and say that I believe that to position a four barrel carb in the middle of a six cylinder would not be the best way to get it to run.
In a high rev type situation the fuel and airflow would be sufficient to overcome the inherent distribution restricions.
Just my thoughts because if you look at the six cylinder systems The outer cylinders have 18 inches of travel within the manifold to the inner cylindes of 4 inches.
I believe a multi carb sytem would be far better. Smaller but more rather than larger in the middle.
Noel.
 
Back
Top