weber tri power jetting very close

64falconsix

Well-known member
Supporter 2022
Supporter 2018
I ordered several more jets last week in order to finally get the tri power tuned. Idle and low cruise has been decent just a slight bit rich at 12.5 to 13.5 on the AFR and high cruise and WOT extremly lean. with .65 idle jets in all 3 and a 170 main in the center and 155 main in the ends. after changing to a 180 main in the center and 165 on the outters keeping the .65 idles in all I have finally happy with the jetting with just a little fine tuning to lean the idle out a little. idle is now 13 to 13.5 , cruise is 13 to 13.5 and WOT is 12.5 to 13. I have a noticable increase in low and mid range power at part throttle and WOT and the exhuast sounds healthier at WOT. I am at sea level and the weather has been in the lower 80s here. for fuel I have been running shell 92 octane ethanol blend. the local chevron was the last station anywhere close to have 100% gasoline and they stopped carrying it a few months ago. I know all setups are different but I hope this helps with a starting point for someone else.

Charlie
 
8) charlie, since you are going extremely lean at WOT, try going to an air corrector jet one size smaller than what you have now. that should be like upping the main jet by three sizes.
 
The WOT ratio is right on the money. Maximum power is 12.5-13.1.
Your cruise is a little rich. For best mileage you should be in the 14.5 area at cruise.
If you lean the center carb main jets, you will have to richen up the WOT circuit on the center carb.
I am just going from experience from past tripower carb setups.
I'm sure a weber expert can guide you further.
 
falcon1963":18yr4apq said:
The WOT ratio is right on the money. Maximum power is 12.5-13.1.
Your cruise is a little rich. For best mileage you should be in the 14.5 area at cruise.
If you lean the center carb main jets, you will have to richen up the WOT circuit on the center carb.
I am just going from experience from past tripower carb setups.
I'm sure a weber expert can guide you further.

my bad, i missed your WOT readings. falcon1963 is correct. you may want to step down one size on your primary main jet to lean out your cruise mixture slightly.
 
Thanks for the input. I ordered few more jets that came in today. I will try one size smaller on the main.I have a size up for the ends if I need them. I will change them after work tomorrow.
 
falcon1963":3la8iay7 said:
Your cruise is a little rich. For best mileage you should be in the 14.5 area at cruise.

Thats for a catalic converter equiped car. It's to keep the cat from overheating and melting.

For a non cat car somewhere in the range of 16.2 to 16.5 works best.

If you try to adjust your cruz AF I would keep a close eye on milage, plug condition, AF ratio and if you have it exhaust gas temperature.

You know you've gone to lean when you get little balls on your plugs, your exhaust gas temp starts to spike up and when your milage drops off.

I have a chart that shows a lot of these relation ships but was unable to copy it to here.
 
69.5Mav":2e0z78vh said:
falcon1963":2e0z78vh said:
Your cruise is a little rich. For best mileage you should be in the 14.5 area at cruise.

Thats for a catalic converter equiped car. It's to keep the cat from overheating and melting.

For a non cat car somewhere in the range of 16.2 to 16.5 works best.

8) i disagree considering that the stoichiometric a/f ratio is 14.7:1. you can go a bit leaner in cruise mode, but not much or you get into issues like detonation and a lean miss.
 
The info I quoted came from an emissions curves chart from Toyota.

Of course you have to pay attention to Lean misses and detonation but engines will run allot leaner then 14.7. That is the point at which the Catalytic converter works best not the point of best fuel economy.
 
8) are we talking a carbed or an efi engine? it does make a difference because with efi you can tightly control the fuel mixture, and you dont have to worry about fuel drop out in the intake. you also dont have to worry about fuel stand off either with efi.

one more bit of information, the stoichiometric air/fuel ratio was determined long before catalytic converters were even thought of, most likely sometime in the early part of the 20th century if not before.
 
rbohm":32c3t8xt said:
are we talking a carbed or an efi engine?

Either. We are talking about steady state cruze here.


rbohm":32c3t8xt said:
stoichiometric air/fuel ratio

That is the ideal balanced ratio. This however is not best for power so why would you expect it to be the best for cruze?

Through out the daily driving regimen the AF varies from richer then 14.7 to leaner then 14.7 it is only in the steady state driving that it reaches a constant value and as such the leaner you can make the mix while maitaining speed the better your gas milage will be.


Taken from manifold versis ported vacumn advance


:arrow:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=63354

I did not write this article, it is written by a retired GM/Chrysler Engineer, goes by JohnZ on another forum.


As many of you are aware, timing and vacuum advance is one of my favorite subjects, as I was involved in the development of some of those systems in my GM days and I understand it. Many people don't, as there has been very little written about it anywhere that makes sense, and as a result, a lot of folks are under the misunderstanding that vacuum advance somehow compromises performance. Nothing could be further from the truth. I finally sat down the other day and wrote up a primer on the subject, with the objective of helping more folks to understand vacuum advance and how it works together with initial timing and centrifugal advance to optimize all-around operation and performance. I have this as a Word document if anyone wants it sent to them - I've cut-and-pasted it here; it's long, but hopefully it's also informative.

TIMING AND VACUUM ADVANCE 101

The most important concept to understand is :beer: that lean mixtures, such as at idle and steady highway cruise, :beer: take longer to burn than rich mixtures; idle in particular, as idle mixture is affected by exhaust gas dilution. This requires that lean mixtures have "the fire lit" earlier in the compression cycle (spark timing advanced), allowing more burn time so that peak cylinder pressure is reached just after TDC for peak efficiency and reduced exhaust gas temperature (wasted combustion energy). Rich mixtures, on the other hand, burn faster than lean mixtures, so they need to have "the fire lit" later in the compression cycle (spark timing retarded slightly) so maximum cylinder pressure is still achieved at the same point after TDC as with the lean mixture, for maximum efficiency. :!:

Toyota a well recognized and respected manufactorer published in their sales broshures an emission chart that included a band for best economy centered around 16.1 AF. I believe them.
 
I have almost the same package and am ready to install the carbs they are weber 34 ich's Would you list the jetting and settings you ended up with it would help me get started. I basically drank the clifford kool aid.
 
185's in all 3 carbs is giving the best A/F numbers and my top end power is much better. I'm considering openning up the venturi's to 31mm from the stock 29mm that should kick up my CFM from 300 to 350 allowing me to run the larger jets.
 
Back
Top