stock 200. Is this 2100 a good idea?

[colocounty4]

Hi! I have access to an Autolite 1.14 at a good price. C5ZF-G. I was looking for a 1.08 or maybe even a 1.02 but the 1.14 is what has surfaced. I have a street driven stock 200 with a Holly 1940. I'd like to swap to a 2V but I want the size that will give me the most low-mid torque. Is this one too big if low end is what I'm after?

The future will see an ignition upgrade and CI Headers but that's about it. I will use a spacer for the carb at first until I get around to milling the log to take it without a spacer. Which could be years.

What do you think?

it's all about the torque.

 

[rbohm]

8) the two barrel carb is going to be more reliable than the one barrel will be, and the size is not going to be much of a problem especially since you are going to upgrade the motor in the future. i put the same carb on a 170 in a 66 falcon and got an improvement over the one barrel carb.

 

['68falconohio]

colocounty4,
Sent ya PM.

Stephen

 

[CZLN6]

Howdy Back CC4:

And welcome to The Forum. The Autolite your acquired is a good choice for your mild 200. It will be an excellent choice if you add a performance valve job to the carb header and ignition upgrades in the future. If this 1.14 has brass vent tubes you've got my preferred piece. At 300 cfm it is on the "Too big" size range, but the annular discharge boosters will make it alot more forgiving then your current Holley 1940. Since you'll be running it through a funnel adapter, which increases velocity even more, it should be close to ideal. The 1.14 is a better choice then the later 1.08. The 1.02s, designed for use on '63 & '64 260 V8s are about as close to use on a 200 as you can get, but they are getting very scarce and expensive. The main differences between the 1.02 and 1.14 will be in idle circuit A/F mix, with the 1.14 being richer, and 1.02 having a slight edge in idle quality and low speed response. The 1.02 will not have the top end of the 1.14, because it is rated at 245 cfm.

If well tuned and driven the same you should see an improvement in driveability, economy and performance over the Holley 1940 with either Autolite. It would be helpful if you would tell us more about your car and your location- I'm guessing Colorado, which raises the issue of elevation.

Again, Welcome and keep the info coming.

Adios, David

 

[colocounty4]

Hi!

CZLN6 - thanks for that response!

I do live in Colorado. 6000 elevation where I am. I've always heard you lose 3% of your power every 1000 feet in elevation. 18% is a lot to give up with my stock 200! My wife's Kia Sedona embarasses my little 6 off the line. She has promised never to shame me like that again!

My dad bought the car new when he lived in Kansas. He says, "son, you can feel the difference in altitude let me tell you." Of course it was new then and he hasn't driven it at sea level in about 30 years. But he remembers these things. Can't remember stuff like how much a stamp costs, but he remembers the important stuff: every mile and every $ that has gone into that car.

He ordered the car as follows:
Standard red on Rangoon 2+2
200, 4sp Dagenham, 3.20 gear ratio
manual steering, manual drums,
no a/c, no washers, no whatever else they had. He did spring for a radio and back-up lights.

The head was warped from the outset and he got a warranty replacement head in late 1966. That explains my black block, blue head and red valve cover. Can't be too many out there like that!

With the planned the ignition and headers in the future along with a valve job and hogging out the manifold to take the carb w/out the adapter, would you go with the 1.02 or the 1.14 at my altitude for street driving? I have a decent chance of getting either one. My search for a 1.02 has just picked up a new lead. I have no idea what jets to use for either option.

Thanks again, :thanks:
Mark

 

[63falconragtop]

Hi Mark,

Sounds like we're on the same path. I've got a 63 rag top with a 200 out of a mustang. I want to do a 2v swap so I stopped into the forum to see about best recommendations for carb and adapter. I've heard Stovebolts Holley Weber carb is a great way to go, but I'm looking for the most recommended. My 200 is bone stock and did I mention....I too am in Colorado...Longmont.

Anybody that can chime in on these mods...it would be great.

Rick

 

[CZLN6]

Howdy Back:

Both of you should know that the stock Autolite 1100 carb, with a SCV, is married to the Load-O-Matic distributor. If you're planning to change to a non-SCV carb you should consider upgrading your ignition to a '68 and later that has both centrifugal and vacuum advance. Both the 2100s and the H/W 5200s have a ported vacuum source for the later type distributors. The 5200 H/W are a nice upgrade for an otherwise stock engine. Tuned correctly they give good drievability and great economy. THe 2100s are my favorite because of their simplicity and durability. They are also relatively cheap.

Mark- given your long term plans, I'd be inclined to go with the 1.14. It is very forgiving at lower engine speeds because of it's annular discharge venturi boosters. Also with the thin air of Colorado a little more won't hurt. Your 3.20:1 rear-end ratio will also be very helpful at your elevation.

Rick- What year is your engine? What Trans? You may want to start your own thread to get specific.

In both your cases, know that FoMoCo recommends an additional 5 degrees of initial advance for elevations about 3,500 ft. If you haven't done this yet, you'll notice the difference.

Adios, David

 

[63falconragtop]

Hi David and Thanks for the reply,

My 63 has, what I've been told is a stock 200 out of a 65 Mustang, with a matching C-4 auto...with no other information. I dropped in a Petronix set up, which helped. Yesterday I installed Clifford 6 into 2 headers, but haven't hooked up the exhaust system past the headers yet. I'm not planning too much performance in the near future, just the 2v carb. It sounds like the Autolite 2100 running ???CFM would be a viable option.

Thanks,
Again

 

[colocounty4]

for my altitude (6000 feet) I've decided on the 1.14. if I was at sea level, I would have chosen a 1.02 I think. That's just me.

When you say the Petronix helped, in what way? performance? Idle? Starting? I haven't done the ignition yet and your engine (before you installed the headers) is just like mine so I'm curious. Speaking of which, let us know how you like the headers!

 

[rbohm]

8) an electronic ignition will make starting easier, and the engine tends to run smoother since the fuel burn is more consistent.