Weber 38 Float Setting, Long Post

[MT63AFX]

Long Post:
Bought a 66Falcon SW 2 months ago and found out this thing has been 'beefed-up' with the Clifford performance kit. Things I found:
1: the OE 200ci block to have a 3.91 stroke, 250ci crank.
2: it had an LOM distributor. Replaced it.
3: it was using an OE-style mechanical fuel pump. Changed to an electric (solenoid, not rotary vane). Pump is an Airtex which puts out 32GPH @ 7-9psi.
4: it wouldn't idle at all, but ran off idle and sounded 'fat'. I've since learned on the Weber 38 the sound actually indicates a lean condition. Couldn't do anything/adjustments at the recommended starting points A: Idle Speed 1/2 turn in and B: Idle Mixture Screws 1 turn out. Did eventually achieve idle but the number of turns indicated lean, got Jet Kit.
5: the biggest confusion I have is the FLOAT SETTING, . Several different answers from several different sources, Clifford, Redline, Jeep Forum, and here. Drawings showing bottom of float 35mm-51mm from cover (no Gasket); Drawing showing 18mm to top of float parallel to top cover with gasket and 2mm of needle travel; another said 17-18mm and 22-23mm down position; All measurements were done without depressing the ball/spring in the needle. I recently had it idling with the float at 17.5mm , but read so much about how it should be 18mm I changed it and now fuel isn't filling the bowl. Pressure regulated at 3psi, then 4psi, and now 4.5psi. Today I bump it to 5psi (at 6psi it was getting into the throttle bores).
6: had to modify the float as offsetting the arm to attain 18mm it would hang up the Power Valve Screw.

Jetting as received:
Main Jet: 145
Idle Jet: 45 (changed to 50)
Emulsion Tube: F-50
Air Corrector Jet:170
Accelerator Pump Jet:70

Timing set at 16* (remanufactured non-LOM).
Anyone have a photo of how the float arm is supposed to be bent to attain the 18mm measurement?

Thanks, RodC

 

[bubba22349]

You more than likely have a 250 engine in your Falcon its a taller deck height block for the extra stroke length. The way to tell is they have a 4 bolt water pump and a SBF type bell housing bolt pattern. they are a great engine lots of torque and you can bolt about any trans to them easy. You will need to regulate the fuel pressure down the Webers don't like very much fuel pressure try 2.5 some people even run as low as 1.5. Good move on the distributor a 68 up points type or a DSIi both with a recurve will do wonders. Good luck in your tuning.

 

[MT63AFX]

You more than likely have a 250 engine in your Falcon its a taller deck height block for the extra stroke length. The way to tell is they have a 4 bolt water pump and a SBF type bell housing bolt pattern. they are a great engine lots of torque and you can bolt about any trans to them easy. You will need to regulate the fuel pressure down the Webers don't like very much fuel pressure try 2.5 some people even run as low as 1.5. Good move on the distributor a 68 up points type or a DSIi both with a recurve will do wonders. Good luck in your tuning.

My understanding is the 250ci was not available in 66 and since this block has a "6A24" casting date and a 66 assembly date "6B14" stamped on the left front ear/tab that coincides with the VIN tag date, so I'm under the impression the previous owner stroked it, don't what piston/rod combo he used. Using the primitive stroke measuring technique, sticking a long screwdriver through the spark plug hole and marking it at TDC and BDC and measuring nearly 3.75" between the magic-marker I figure it's larger than the stock 3.1" stroke. The WP has 4 bolts and I believe the BH is the later style with the 2-bolt starter?. Transmission is non-synchronized 1st. It has the Maverick big-log head, "D3DE" casting. The cam is not stock either, maybe a Clifford 244/206.
A little of my background: Ford retiree, 43 service. Served my Electrical Apprenticeship at Michigan Casting Center. Currently own Mickey Thompson's 63 1/2 Lightweight Galaxie driven by Butch Leal. Have a 57 COE for a carhauler. Owned FEs since I was 17. IMO, anything newer than a 66 has too much government meddling in the design of vehicles, .

Thanks for responding,
RodC

 

[rocklord]

I was looking at the pictures of your engine and have one question.

Is the starter mounted above the oil pan or beside it?

If the starter's above the oil pan, it is a 200; if it is beside the oil pan, it's probably a 250.

 

[xctasy]

Its all splitting hairs, as despite the 25% capacity difference, the log 250 version can only makes less than 9% more power due to the long stroke, short rod ratio which screws over the Hp on it. The 38 DGES and 38 DGAS are the same carb only difference is what type of choke they have, manual, electric, or water. Great carb, there's no problem with high revs, and the 250 doesn't rev high enough to outflow that carb anyway. So jetting and set up of the 38 DGAS is normally just the same on the 200 as the 250, and indeed, the Australian Weber ADM 34 2-bbl 200/250 engines ran the same basic jetting. All that early 155 hp gross power rating for the US 1969 250(and the Aussie engine from 1971 to 1976), verses 125 for the 200 was just marketing beat up, the stock log 250 the world over has to be the worlds most latent engine. The last ratings of 92 for the 3.3 Log and 99 for the 4.1 Log in 1981 were the God honest truth, and SO too was the 121 hp forthe Aussie 3,3 and 131 hp for the 4.1 in 1983. 8% power difference in an engine which was 25% bigger from both engines in two continents is enough. The torque ratings were 25% differernt between each engine. Unless the head and cam and carb is updated to suit capacity, the 250 is awlays a low hp increase. Exceptions are when its worked with triple carbs or EFI. Then, a full house 200 might make 181 hp , but 220 hp was a 250, a gain of 21%.

What's for certain is your engine
1. isn't a US 250.
2. Im sure yours looks like a US 7.808" tall 200 cubic inch engine with 3.126" stroke to me. I have both, one in an 81 Stang, and the other a customers Aussie 1972 250 log head engine, and yours has the American D8 head, and the block lookes like the 200/3.3 low deck to me.

3. For your info. The 1971 to 1976 Australian 200/250 engine has a tall deck 250 block with 9.38" from sump split line to head gasket, 89 thou shallower than the US 250 WHICH WAS 9.469", but the Aussie had the 3.91 crank as an option, the US 250 had a 3.91" crank standard. The Oz 250 is still the most common log head engine around down here in the antipodeans, every 1971 on XY, XA, XB, Transit and Cortina seamed to get it as oppossed to its short stroke, 6.275" long rod 200 brother. Here's some picks. The distance from the distributor to block deck is taller on the Aussie and US 250 engines. The Aussie log 250 and later log 200's ran high mount starters, US 250 ran low mount.




As for float settings, you can use whatever set up instructions that cam with the Weber 38 in its orginal Ford Capri 3000 or Scimitar, AC ME 3000 or TVR application, and that was

The 32/36 DGAV and 5200 Holley Weber had similar set ups, but it depends on if you have a plastic or brass float.

But other sites have other recommendations, like this http://www.ladaniva.co.uk/baxter/resour ... erSwap.htm

While it's apart it would also pay to check that the float level is correct. The float valve and float are in the top cover. Redline Weber recommend DGV float settings to be 38.5/46.5mm (plastic float), and for aggressive off-road float drop should be limited to 44.5mm maximum drop. Weber North America advise 35/51mm for plastic floats with F50 emulsion-tubes, or 36.5/46.5 if using an F6 emulsion-tube.
Note that the older style brass floats have different settings to the plastic floats at 40/50mm (Redline), 39/50mm (Haynes), 41/51mm (Weber North America). Plastic floats are better off-road (less bouncy), and more reliable.

Brass vs plastic float settings (Formula Ford)

Brass vs plastic float settings for 32/36 DGV on a Formula Ford race car (click on image for bigger view). Note these are for an engine that spends its life at top RPM and on a flat surface - see above text for suggested settings.

From my experience, the Jeep guys are the best.uptillnow recons you can eliminate the pressure regulator if you use the viton seal, as he states on page 1 and page 31 of the post following. The best method is probably the Jeep forums swatson454 on speed talk. They use the DCOE set up, same as DGES/DGAS, but it uses your 18 mm DGAS/DGES reference base.

See Page 31 http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f8/weber ... dex31.html

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/attachme ... m-0364.jpg

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/attachme ... g_0366.jpg

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/attachme ... t-dcoe.jpg

 

[Frankenstang]

It's always a little tougher for me to tell from the driver's side, and it's not like xctasy needs my corroboration...

The distance from the distributor to block deck is taller on the Aussie and US 250 engines.

...but the distance and curvature above the fuel pump boss is another giveaway. Here's a web pilfered US250...
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forums/a ... ag0210.jpg

 

[MT63AFX]

I was looking at the pictures of your engine and have one question.

Is the starter mounted above the oil pan or beside it?

If the starter's above the oil pan, it is a 200; if it is beside the oil pan, it's probably a 250.

Starter is above pan rail.

Block Numbers:

Casting Date "6A24" 1966, January 24th

Assembly Date "6B14" 1966, February 14th (stamped on left front ear/tab)

This is the original block to this car.

I measured the stroke with a long screwdriver, TDC to BDC, and it measured 3.75"-ish, greater than the 3.1" stroke of a 200ci

Photo of stroke measurement:

http://www.supermotors.net/getfile/9890 ... g_0266.jpg


RodC

 

[MT63AFX]

Its all splitting hairs, as despite the 25% capacity difference, the log 250 version can only makes less than 9% more power due to the long stroke, short rod ratio which screws over the Hp on it. The 38 DGES and 38 DGAS are the same carb only difference is what type of choke they have, manual, electric, or water. Great carb, there's no problem with high revs, and the 250 doesn't rev high enough to outflow that carb anyway. So jetting and set up of the 38 DGAS is normally just the same on the 200 as the 250, and indeed, the Australian Weber ADM 34 2-bbl 200/250 engines ran the same basic jetting. All that early 155 hp gross power rating for the US 1969 250(and the Aussie engine from 1971 to 1976), verses 125 for the 200 was just marketing beat up, the stock log 250 the world over has to be the worlds most latent engine. The last ratings of 92 for the 3.3 Log and 99 for the 4.1 Log in 1981 were the God honest truth, and SO too was the 121 hp forthe Aussie 3,3 and 131 hp for the 4.1 in 1983. 8% power difference in an engine which was 25% bigger from both engines in two continents is enough. The torque ratings were 25% differernt between each engine. Unless the head and cam and carb is updated to suit capacity, the 250 is awlays a low hp increase. Exceptions are when its worked with triple carbs or EFI. Then, a full house 200 might make 181 hp , but 220 hp was a 250, a gain of 21%.

What's for certain is your engine
1. isn't a US 250.
2. Im sure yours looks like a US 7.808" tall 200 cubic inch engine with 3.126" stroke to me. I have both, one in an 81 Stang, and the other a customers Aussie 1972 250 log head engine, and yours has the American D8 head, and the block lookes like the 200/3.3 low deck to me.

3. For your info. The 1971 to 1976 Australian 200/250 engine has a tall deck 250 block with 9.38" from sump split line to head gasket, 89 thou shallower than the US 250 WHICH WAS 9.469", but the Aussie had the 3.91 crank as an option, the US 250 had a 3.91" crank standard. The Oz 250 is still the most common log head engine around down here in the antipodeans, every 1971 on XY, XA, XB, Transit and Cortina seamed to get it as oppossed to its short stroke, 6.275" long rod 200 brother. Here's some picks. The distance from the distributor to block deck is taller on the Aussie and US 250 engines. The Aussie log 250 and later log 200's ran high mount starters, US 250 ran low mount.




As for float settings, you can use whatever set up instructions that cam with the Weber 38 in its orginal Ford Capri 3000 or Scimitar, AC ME 3000 or TVR application, and that was

The 32/36 DGAV and 5200 Holley Weber had similar set ups, but it depends on if you have a plastic or brass float.

But other sites have other recommendations, like this http://www.ladaniva.co.uk/baxter/resour ... erSwap.htm

While it's apart it would also pay to check that the float level is correct. The float valve and float are in the top cover. Redline Weber recommend DGV float settings to be 38.5/46.5mm (plastic float), and for aggressive off-road float drop should be limited to 44.5mm maximum drop. Weber North America advise 35/51mm for plastic floats with F50 emulsion-tubes, or 36.5/46.5 if using an F6 emulsion-tube.
Note that the older style brass floats have different settings to the plastic floats at 40/50mm (Redline), 39/50mm (Haynes), 41/51mm (Weber North America). Plastic floats are better off-road (less bouncy), and more reliable.

Brass vs plastic float settings (Formula Ford)

Brass vs plastic float settings for 32/36 DGV on a Formula Ford race car (click on image for bigger view). Note these are for an engine that spends its life at top RPM and on a flat surface - see above text for suggested settings.

From my experience, the Jeep guys are the best.uptillnow recons you can eliminate the pressure regulator if you use the viton seal, as he states on page 1 and page 31 of the post following. The best method is probably the Jeep forums swatson454 on speed talk. They use the DCOE set up, same as DGES/DGAS, but it uses your 18 mm DGAS/DGES reference base.

See Page 31 http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f8/weber ... dex31.html

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/attachme ... m-0364.jpg

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/attachme ... g_0366.jpg

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/attachme ... t-dcoe.jpg

Well one thing is for certain it is the original engine block to this car and may be one of the few things that is original to this engine.

1: Head is a "D3DE" Big-Log

2: Came with an LOM and replaced it with a reman "C7DE" distributor (Faron may see it over the winter, lol)

3: Measured stroke with a long screwdriver and the marks were nearer to 4" (3.75) than 3"

Photo of stroke measurement;

http://www.supermotors.net/getfile/9890 ... g_0266.jpg

4: Spent a lot of time reading the Jeep forum's swatson454

Thanks for responding,
RodC

 

[MT63AFX]

It's always a little tougher for me to tell from the driver's side, and it's not like xctasy needs my corroboration...

The distance from the distributor to block deck is taller on the Aussie and US 250 engines.

...but the distance and curvature above the fuel pump boss is another giveaway. Here's a web pilfered US250...
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forums/a ... ag0210.jpg

Here's a photo of the FP mounting boss:

http://www.supermotors.net/getfile/9890 ... g_0267.jpg

 

[bubba22349]

OK you do for sure have a 200, but the problem is that the 250 crank stroke lenght won't fiscally fit in a 200 block as the cam is too close to clear the rods. About the max stroke length that fits in a 200 block is 3.46. Good luck

 

[MT63AFX]

Its all splitting hairs, as despite the 25% capacity difference, the log 250 version can only makes less than 9% more power due to the long stroke, short rod ratio which screws over the Hp on it. The 38 DGES and 38 DGAS are the same carb only difference is what type of choke they have, manual, electric, or water. Great carb, there's no problem with high revs, and the 250 doesn't rev high enough to outflow that carb anyway. So jetting and set up of the 38 DGAS is normally just the same on the 200 as the 250, and indeed, the Australian Weber ADM 34 2-bbl 200/250 engines ran the same basic jetting. All that early 155 hp gross power rating for the US 1969 250(and the Aussie engine from 1971 to 1976), verses 125 for the 200 was just marketing beat up, the stock log 250 the world over has to be the worlds most latent engine. The last ratings of 92 for the 3.3 Log and 99 for the 4.1 Log in 1981 were the God honest truth, and SO too was the 121 hp forthe Aussie 3,3 and 131 hp for the 4.1 in 1983. 8% power difference in an engine which was 25% bigger from both engines in two continents is enough. The torque ratings were 25% differernt between each engine. Unless the head and cam and carb is updated to suit capacity, the 250 is awlays a low hp increase. Exceptions are when its worked with triple carbs or EFI. Then, a full house 200 might make 181 hp , but 220 hp was a 250, a gain of 21%.

What's for certain is your engine
1. isn't a US 250.
2. Im sure yours looks like a US 7.808" tall 200 cubic inch engine with 3.126" stroke to me. I have both, one in an 81 Stang, and the other a customers Aussie 1972 250 log head engine, and yours has the American D8 head, and the block lookes like the 200/3.3 low deck to me.

3. For your info. The 1971 to 1976 Australian 200/250 engine has a tall deck 250 block with 9.38" from sump split line to head gasket, 89 thou shallower than the US 250 WHICH WAS 9.469", but the Aussie had the 3.91 crank as an option, the US 250 had a 3.91" crank standard. The Oz 250 is still the most common log head engine around down here in the antipodeans, every 1971 on XY, XA, XB, Transit and Cortina seamed to get it as oppossed to its short stroke, 6.275" long rod 200 brother. Here's some picks. The distance from the distributor to block deck is taller on the Aussie and US 250 engines. The Aussie log 250 and later log 200's ran high mount starters, US 250 ran low mount.




As for float settings, you can use whatever set up instructions that cam with the Weber 38 in its orginal Ford Capri 3000 or Scimitar, AC ME 3000 or TVR application, and that was

The 32/36 DGAV and 5200 Holley Weber had similar set ups, but it depends on if you have a plastic or brass float.

But other sites have other recommendations, like this http://www.ladaniva.co.uk/baxter/resour ... erSwap.htm

While it's apart it would also pay to check that the float level is correct. The float valve and float are in the top cover. Redline Weber recommend DGV float settings to be 38.5/46.5mm (plastic float), and for aggressive off-road float drop should be limited to 44.5mm maximum drop. Weber North America advise 35/51mm for plastic floats with F50 emulsion-tubes, or 36.5/46.5 if using an F6 emulsion-tube.
Note that the older style brass floats have different settings to the plastic floats at 40/50mm (Redline), 39/50mm (Haynes), 41/51mm (Weber North America). Plastic floats are better off-road (less bouncy), and more reliable.

Brass vs plastic float settings (Formula Ford)

Brass vs plastic float settings for 32/36 DGV on a Formula Ford race car (click on image for bigger view). Note these are for an engine that spends its life at top RPM and on a flat surface - see above text for suggested settings.

From my experience, the Jeep guys are the best.uptillnow recons you can eliminate the pressure regulator if you use the viton seal, as he states on page 1 and page 31 of the post following. The best method is probably the Jeep forums swatson454 on speed talk. They use the DCOE set up, same as DGES/DGAS, but it uses your 18 mm DGAS/DGES reference base.

See Page 31 http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f8/weber ... dex31.html

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/attachme ... m-0364.jpg

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/attachme ... g_0366.jpg

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/attachme ... t-dcoe.jpg

Thank you for the links

RodC

 

[MT63AFX]

OK you do for sure have a 200, but the problem is that the 250 crank stroke lenght won't fiscally fit in a 200 block as the cam is too close to clear the rods. About the max stroke length that fits in a 200 block is 3.46. Good luck

Are there any internal modifications to be able to use a 250ci crank in a 200ci? Or, aftermarket rods? Getting a hold of the man that built this is hard to do (I bought it from his son).

Stroke measurement:

http://www.supermotors.net/getfile/9890 ... g_0266.jpg

RodC

 

[rocklord]

Are there any internal modifications to be able to use a 250ci crank in a 200ci? Or, aftermarket rods? Getting a hold of the man that built this is hard to do (I bought it from his son).

Stroke measurement:

http://www.supermotors.net/getfile/9890 ... g_0266.jpg

RodC

A 250 crank will not physically fit and rotate in a 200 block; the cam is located too close to the crank centerline, that and the 250 crank bearings are larger than the 200s. Ford moved the cam farther away from the crank centerline in the 250 to allow a larger throw; that is why the double roller chain from a 200 won't fit a 250. The 250 rods were lengthened (4.715 to 5.88)to keep a decent rod/stroke ratio (1.5) which dictated the deck height increase from 7.808 to 9.47. The Australians did the same thing on their 250 but the cam is positioned in a different place, and the deck to only 9.38"

See how many bolts hold the water pump on; three it's a 200, four it's a 250. Also the US250 never came with a high mount starter (above the oil pan).

I was thinking how you could come up with a 3-13/16" (3.8125") measurement in a 200 and believe I came up with the answer.
When you measure the stroke, a stiff thin wire like a coathanger should be used and it has to be held as vertical as possible. If you don't, everything is measured at an angle. With the sparkplug hole located where it is, and with its orientation, the screwdriver you used is probably touching the opposite side of the cylinder at BDC; when the piston comes up you are able to move the screwdriver closer to the spark plug hole. This could cause a larger measurement than the 3.126" for the 200.

At an angle, you should be able to insert a screwdriver (or a thin wire) 4.5"+ into the 200 cylinder.

Whatcha think?

 

[MT63AFX]

Are there any internal modifications to be able to use a 250ci crank in a 200ci? Or, aftermarket rods? Getting a hold of the man that built this is hard to do (I bought it from his son).

Stroke measurement:

http://www.supermotors.net/getfile/9890 ... g_0266.jpg

RodC

A 250 crank will not physically fit and rotate in a 200 block; the cam is located too close to the crank centerline, that and the 250 crank bearings are larger than the 200s. Ford moved the cam farther away from the crank centerline in the 250 to allow a larger throw; that is why the double roller chain from a 200 won't fit a 250. The 250 rods were lengthened (4.715 to 5.88)to keep a decent rod/stroke ratio (1.5) which dictated the deck height increase from 7.808 to 9.47. The Australians did the same thing on their 250 but the cam is positioned in a different place, and the deck to only 9.38"

See how many bolts hold the water pump on; three it's a 200, four it's a 250. Also the US250 never came with a high mount starter (above the oil pan).

I was thinking how you could come up with a 3-13/16" (3.8125") measurement in a 200 and believe I came up with the answer.
When you measure the stroke, a stiff thin wire like a coathanger should be used and it has to be held as vertical as possible. If you don't, everything is measured at an angle. With the sparkplug hole located where it is, and with its orientation, the screwdriver you used is probably touching the opposite side of the cylinder at BDC; when the piston comes up you are able to move the screwdriver closer to the spark plug hole. This could cause a larger measurement than the 3.126" for the 200.

At an angle, you should be able to insert a screwdriver (or a thin wire) 4.5"+ into the 200 cylinder.

Whatcha think?

I think you make a very good point about the measuring variables, center of piston vs outer edge. I thought I made a valiant effort to take that into account where the screwdriver would land on the piston at BDC and the .75"-ish seemed soooo close to 3.91" stroke. I had made my marks at the VC lip/flange and trying to keep the screwdriver perpendicular as the piston descended. This definitely a 200ci OE block. Was there also a difference in the number of core plugs between the 200 and 250? Mine has five if it matters and the as I said previously the starter is above the pan rail.
I believe what you said regarding the clearance issues in the cam/crankcase cavity.

Thanks For Your Input,
RodC

 

[bubba22349]

This definitely a 200ci OE block. Was there also a difference in the number of core plugs between the 200 and 250? Mine has five if it matters and the as I said previously the starter is above the pan rail.

Both the 200 & 250 have 5 freeze plugs so best way to ID them apart is water pumps the 200 has 3 bolts holding it on a 250 has 4. Than its the deck height differance and the back of the block ie the bell housing bolt patern 250 has the same as a 6 bolt bell SBF V8. On stroking a 200 to a 221 to 228 cu in. check the link below it goes into the details for parts needed.

http://www.classicinlines.com/stroker200.asp