Questions: For Those That Have a Weber 32/36 Conversion

[Ks65Mustang]

Looking for input from those that have actually done the Weber Conversion or have a Weber on their Ford Six.

Did you use an adapter or the actual conversion?

Did you have problems with tuning the weber?

How did it affect your overall gas mileage?

I have a the large log I am getting ready to do the conversion with. I currently have a 1966 I6 200 small log head. I am averaging 24 miles per gallon, highway and in town. Highway only I get 26 mpg. While I would like a little more power when I need it I also don't want to have cruising mileage drop down to say 20 mpg. I know they claim the Weber will improve your mpg, but only give you more performance when you need it???

WHAT IS YOUR EXPERIENCE???

Thanks in advance!!
LMN

 

[chad]

I'm far from an expert but believe ur gunna hafta do the dizzy too. Pre '68 had the LOM/SCV carb/dizzy (work-together) system.
Let's wait for one of those experts to come along...

 

[Invectivus]

While we're waiting for the experts, there's some good info on classic inlines tech section surrounding 2V conversions:
http://www.classicinlines.com/DynoSwap.asp

When we compare the numbers from dyno #3A, verse dyno #3B, we see some very interesting results. First and foremost the advantages of mounting the 2V carb directly to the intake, verses using a 2 to 1 adaptor, are quite evident. We gained a maximum of 5RWHP when we used an adaptor, and 24RWHP when the carb was mounted directly to the log intake, or a gain of 6% verses 24% respectively. That's a huge difference considering we used exactly the same carb.

It's a good article comparing different carbs and different methods, though it doesn't address milage. From others, it's gathered that the 32/36 (or 5200) increases milage a bit over stock, and increases HP. The other 2Vs generally only increase HP while degrading milage a small bit. At least one person feels the carb is working too hard on the 200:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=66652

There's a lot of good info in that thread, but to reiterate, there are multiple 32/36s with a CFM spread between them. Some (the 5200s) are especially sized for 4cly enigines ~half the size of our sixes. Opening up the venturies (not for the faint of heart) can increase the flow.

I'm far from an expert but believe ur gunna hafta do the dizzy too. Pre '68 had the LOM/SCV carb/dizzy (work-together) system.
Let's wait for one of those experts to come along...

x2

 

[turbo2256b]

I did several swaps using carbs off Pintos and the adapter. Did some masaging to the adapter throat and opening in the log. Think the Pinto carbs were 250 / 240 CFM. With a 200 6 turning 5500 RPM or less seemed like a good match. Did a little jet changing. Idle circuit biggest pain if I remember right. With a hotter cam keeping the power valve from opening at low vacuum was a pain on some modles of the carb. Basic stock motor got around 29 to 32 MPG.

Best ever done was with a 200 using a 500 CFM Holley 2bbl. Blocked one side of it. Ran it as a 1bbl. It got 35 in town and 45 hiway.

 

[Invectivus]

Best ever done was with a 200 using a 500 CFM Holley 2bbl. Blocked one side of it. Ran it as a 1bbl. It got 35 in town and 45 hiway.

Wow

 

[Ks65Mustang]

Invesctivus,
Thanks for the link on the Dynoing. I have read most of the Classic Inline tech articles, very helpful, and confusing at least for me. Seems I find something extra that is required every time I re-read one.

My ultimate goal is due the direct mount, just don't know if I will have time to get it all done now in my time frame. Everything I read says we have to swap the distributor, fuel pump, oil pump. Head has been at machine shop for over a month and only part of the initial head work done.

Son will be home from college and will needing something to drive, I told him he could drive the mustang if he made the honors at college. He met his end now I have to do mine.

Although we both love working on it so, we will have time to do some weekend project on it while he is driving it.

 

[Invectivus]

So in the scheme of things (my opinion), the best bang for your buck would be switching to an electronic ignition, like the DS2, and you could do that when you toss the webber on it and ditch the SCV issue. You shouldn't have to switch your fuel pump, but rather get a fuel pressure regulator. Your oil pump should be fine unless it's show (ie-you don't need to change it in the process of swapping the carb/dizzy).

What are they doing at the shop? A month seems like quite a while to do hot tanking and trueing up the valves/seats. Also, where are you guys at? you might be able to locate a donor head to have the 2V conversion done while driving the current head.

 

[powerband]

Looking for input from those that have actually done the Weber Conversion or have a Weber on their Ford Six.
Did you use an adapter or the actual conversion?
Did you have problems with tuning the weber?
How did it affect your overall gas mileage?
I have a the large log I am getting ready to do the conversion .... they claim the Weber will improve your mpg, but only give you more performance when you need it???
WHAT IS YOUR EXPERIENCE???

> I run the Holley / Weber version of the 32/36 progressive on a big log through $14 - 2X1 adapter. The 5200 was offered by many manufacturers in many cars and many versions like the Weber... (@185-250CFM) , ( '63 Falcon waggin / 71-170 / T5-3.50 rear)
> clean "rebuilt" 5200 of questionable origin ran with typical off-idle bog. No difference with bigger or smaller jets (?). Found Ebay- dirty/as used Capri 2.8 liter (170cid) spec 5200 and ran great as-is (?). Swapped in jets to clean carb and still ran like crapp, bog-carb jets in 2.8 spec 5200 run fine (?) (see emulsion tubes ? ). Five years later 170 still runs great... Smooth consistent idle, economical (primary Bbl) light cruise performance and decent interstate ramp 2Bbl max-CFM performance.
> my 170 has stock bottom end/cam but big valve head work running @ 10:1 CR with decent mileage (on 93 octane )
> Direct mount mod is a great performance option, for MPG/daily driver, probably 2X1 adapter is viable option


Have Fu

8)

<> <>