A "run of the mill" 200 project.

Also, I killed the diaphragm in the stock fuel pump. I tried to rig up a 135GPH pump I had lying with a boost ref bypass regulator under the hood. It moved way too much fuel and it would aerate the fuel, causing it to lose prime from the tank, so I'm going to try a replacement mechanical pump and see how long it lasts. $24.99 at Vatozone. Worst case scenario it pops again and I go to a pump located at the tank.
 
So the build has been doing well besides a few little issues. I have some oil leaks that have been exacerbated by crankcase pressure but thats not a huge deal, just annoying. The car is a pleasure to drive, has plenty of power on the highways and acts consistant. Also, since putting about 1000 miles on it, I have had nearly no major issues. ABS charge pipe is still intact but I upgraded to actual turbo couplers because I was killing the cheap ones from home depot. Only other issue I have is vapor lock isssues at idle. This is the same common issue with all of the small sixes, except mounting the turbo has only exacerbated the issue. so sitting and idling in traffic or restart after shutdown is sometimes a chore since the fuel starts to boil, There is not enough fresh fuel flowing in to keep the temp cool at idle so it just boils up. At WOT and cruise this is a non issue, one, because the underhood temp is cooler from crusing, and 2, because enough cool fuel is coming in from the tank to counteract the boiling effect.

So besides those little issues, the wagon is DDable, reliably and is fun to drive. However, my gas mileage, as mentioned before is TERRIBLE. about 10-11 mpg MAX. If cruising at 30mph for the whole day I can get 13mpg but thats basically 1/8th throttle. My AFR through the power band is 12.9:1 at idle (which okish) but then drops to 10:1 all the way up to 11.5:1 at 7 psi. The AFR at 7 psi is great, but the rest of the time is horrendous. I should see a negative curve where low speed, no boost i am seeing maybe as high as 15:1.

So I started messing with the emulsion tube. my theory is that the factory emulsion tube settings allow for WAYY more leaning at high speed air flow, so when the fuel level drops in the bowl, it is getting the full leaness. So I decided to do some experimenting. I had originally plugged the HSAB (high speed air bleed) so no air could lean it out at ANY condition. It ran really well, but was super rich, as stated before. So I then drilled my jet to 76 (because I am cheap and don't have a kit yet) and tried plugging a few of the holes in the "flute" of the HSAB in the emulsion well with some copper wire and pulled the assist spring out from behind the PV piston, so that it only opens the PVCR at 0inhg instead of whatever the factory intent was (somewhere between 6inhg and 8inhg I'll bet). I got the same result, but had a leaner top end, because I left some of the holes open (toward the top of the flute, where the mid-speed fuel level should be) . My conclusion is that I need to drill emulsion holes higher in the tube (where the fuel level is higher for low speed driving) and completely plug the high speed holes. An alternative to that would be removing the tube completely, shortening it maybe 1/8" at a time and pressing it back in.

A question that I need answered though, is there anyone that supplies blank emulsion tubes for these holleys (1946 or 1940s series) or perhaps are they all alike?

I'll attach a picture for reference and take a picture of what I did when I pull it apart again, right now she is being relied on for transportation, as I am trying to sell a ford lightning. I know that it is said to just widen the PVCR, but I would like to see if there are alternatives to that, since it is a pain to figure out, and potentially costly if not executed correctly.
 
Picture of said "Emulsion Tube". Labeled "Main Well Tube" in the picture. This is from a 1940 technical manual I found online, but the same concept. The top of the tube leads to the HSAB in the mouth of the carb. This picture shows it upside down. If I could get blank ones or replacement ones, then I would be more willing to experiment, but I haven't found anything. It is about an 1/8th diameter brass tube with about 12 holes drilled in it.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled picture.png
    Untitled picture.png
    262.6 KB · Views: 288
Bang on. Well tubes on Holley 2/4-bbls are 4 or 5 holes deep with 25 thou holes. You add or subtract a hole holes to trim the air fuel ratio. Just like the 2-bbl 2100 and 4-bbl 4100 Autolites.


People used to add Weber well tubes to Holley 2 and 4-bbls with the Weber/Edelbrock/TMP kit.


The top surface of the fuel level changes with RPM. So emulsion/well tube calibration works by turning the tube upside down, and then soldering up holes to richen, adding holes to lean.

Compared to Weber emulsion tubes, your job is gonna be simple and fun....on a 1-bbl, 12 holes is about the same as most Weber well tubes.

You can solder and drill the brass tube. Like swanson 454 did on his 245 cube Jeep, and Airbert on Fordsix Pefromance did with his 1961 Falcon 200. .




Weber61440xxxFxemulsiontubes.jpg


Turn the stock issue F5 or F50 e tube upside down with Main jet at top and air corrector at the bottom.

The normal F5 is pretty much the same operationally as the F50, but its a different section width and has an external as well as internation section change, plus different holes.

F50_F6_F7.jpg



Upside down E tubes. Left hand side, F50, which is near enough to your F5.

Then F6 then, far right, his custom F7.


He then turned it into the F This

F7_Mod_4.jpg


F6's and F66's are other common replacements. Airbert (Mr Neuman) found an F56 too

F50_F5_F6_F7_FTHIS_F56_F66_F_Newman.jpg

Posted on Fordsix years ago from U-tube link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pkFSA_rRFI

Sources for the same well tube you have are:-

All 1940 (Generic replacement Autolite 1100)
1945 (Mopar Slant six)
1946/1946c ( Fox I6)
Feedback 1949 (Tempo/Topaz/Tracer before CFI/TBI)
Feedback 6145/6146/6149/6153 (Tempo/Topaz/Tracer before CFI/TBI).

Note Well:-

No log head I6 was ever electronically controlled by any feedback carb.


Not fuel only EECII,
not fuel and ignition EECIII,

not fuel and ignition EECIV,
nor did any ever have an MCU control unit.

Like the Hi Po 5.0 2 and 4-bbl carb GT and RS V8's from 1982 to 1985, there was no electronic feedback system to control air/fuel or EGR or ignition by feedback wire except on startup part of Duraspark II. Like those, the I6 ran Duraspark II, and everything was controlled by playing off ported and manifold vacuum against the EGR needs, with the Orange Throttle Kicker ( for A/C vehicles some years) the only semi feedback device.


An easy method of electronic control is 200 Hz Pulse Width Modulation on the 6145 carb, a 4 cylinder 2.3 version of the Holley.


Note....some of the info is dead wrong, as no I6 3.3 or 4.1 was ever feedback

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/thre ... ue.668379/
 
How did people convert the Holley type with the Weber type? The Holly type just looks like some plain rolled brass tubing where the Weber type looks like a turned piece of brass. I found some hobby brass tubing in 1/8" and 1/16" sizes (I am honestly unsure of the size of the original). What I may do is get some of this (at $3 a package of 4) and cut them to an equivalent length and solder the end shut like the stocker. Then start playing with the holes. Also the stocker appears to be pressed into the upper half of the carb. Any suggestions on how to get it in and out without maiming the tube or the carb half?
 
Derangedfords90":38o0c1ed said:
How did people convert the Holley type with the Weber type? The Holly type just looks like some plain rolled brass tubing where the Weber type looks like a turned piece of brass. I found some hobby brass tubing in 1/8" and 1/16" sizes (I am honestly unsure of the size of the original). What I may do is get some of this (at $3 a package of 4) and cut them to an equivalent length and solder the end shut like the stocker. Then start playing with the holes. Also the stocker appears to be pressed into the upper half of the carb. Any suggestions on how to get it in and out without maiming the tube or the carb half?


I have little experience with modifications to the 1946...for the 4 years I had it, I never had to do anything to it...best carb ever.

Normally, the well tubes are profiled for volume and stage depth and location, so they don't swap.

It lookes like you can refashion yours if you find a replacement 1945 or 1946 or whatever carb on your island.

This might help...the old Autolite arrangement. That set up had a needle hanger K cluster that went through the well tube, so it won't be anywhere near the same.

The principal of remaking one is similar....find one from anthor Holley 1-bbl carb car, or find some stock, and by American smarts, solder something up. Not sure about the locating tab, or how you might get past that, but a good jewler has fine tools, and can cut the basic shapes with ease.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=70651&p=541760#p541760
xctasy":38o0c1ed said:
For anyone else with this problem, the four and five hole brass emulsion tubes are called well tubes, and are part of the whole K cluster. The idle jet in 27 to 32 thu sizes goes down the tubes.

They are different to 2-bbl 2300 and 4-bbl 4150/4160 Holleys, which use 6 hole well tubes with 25 thou holes typically, although there are a few types of a slightly different nature. The key thing for Autolite and Motorcraft 2100/2150's and 4100's is that as long as the pattern and sizes are the right ones, you can take em off, and remake them, or solder them. Jeeps used the carb as well as FoMoCo...its around!


Here is some really good tech info to show how.

http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/vinta ... tions.html

http://68vert.blogspot.co.nz/2011/11/this-old-carb.html

While I was cleaning the venturi clusters, I noticed that one of the emulsion tubes of the primary cluster was cracked. I read up on this a bit and found it to be a fairly common problem. Some guys leave it alone, others solder the crack. I decided to try to remake the tube. The tubes are .2175" inches outside diameter with a flare on the end of .279". I found that 7/32" brass tube from the hobby shop is only 125 thousandths too large and 9/32" tube is 225 thousandths too large. After a few failures, I figured out how to accurately solder the large tube over the small tube to kind of simulate a properly expanded flare. The emulsion holes in the tubes are right at .040" and I had some .040 drill bits handy (1mm) so I laid a piece of transparent tape over the holes of a good tube and transferred them to the fabricated tube. Finally, I chucked up the tube into my drill press and sanded the "flared" end down to .279". I then pressed the tube into the venturi cluster making sure to aim the holes in the same direction as the originals were. By the way, I did try to find an old carb, venturi cluster, or even replacement tubes but came up empty (for less than $25). Otherwise, I wouldn't have bothered.

Looks like it is a common 2100/2150/4100 Autolite and Motorcraft problem. Knowing how much the Holley and Holley Weber carbs respond to customized well tubes, this is an important first step if you fail to get the performance and idle characteristics you expect.
 
Derangedfords90":2yv9xoz3 said:
How did people convert the Holley type with the Weber type?

A 4160 style metering plate with Weber or modified Weber emulsion tubes/well tubes. You can then play around with all spects of fuel air, without dropping the float boewl. Doesn't apply to your carb, sadly, but the cahnge in well tube hole pattern results in this kind of visual change.

Holley+well+emulsion+sm.jpg


Weber+ET+emulsion+w-+well.jpg


xctasy":2yv9xoz3 said:
If everyone used a 4-bbl 4150 or 4160 series Holley, you could make any cam and intake system work. In some cases, a 2-bbl will have very poor perfromance and fuel distribution with I6's. The trick of opening the secondary throttles a little for airflow, and then adjusting idle mixtures and only drilling throttle plates if there is an idle to transition tune problem has worked for years on little OHC Pintos, Foxes and Rangers with 6299, 8007 and 6895 Holley 390 cfm carbs. You can run those on a 2 or 2.3 with the biggest cam, and they idle nice. The 350 or 500 2-bbl is very touchy with respect to cam timing, so are the bigger versions of the 2100 and 2150.

If you want to get the best out of a Holley, with none of the horrible split line and adjustment hassles, grab any old 7448 350 or 4412 500 cfm 2-bbl Holley, and run the Weber Power Plate (found used on the internet as Weber, Edelbrock or new from TMP Carbs).


Smaller venturis cost you power on a Holley or Autolite/Motorcraft 2-bbl. This is not true of DCOE Webers or dcnf or IDA and IDF down drafts, somtimes the venturi can be too big for the throttle. On the US Holley or Autolite/Motorcraft 2-bbls, the throttle bores and spacing can be nice and large, so the casting can support upsized venturis if the casting is epoxied or JBWelded to as much as 1.56" by fly cutting or 3M paper boring with a broom handle awl and drill, and the only issues that stop people making the bigger 1.21's and 1.33's work is air bleed, well tube, squirter, power vlave and and accelerator pump calibration.

Anytime you get better progression and economy with a sub optimal flow smaller carb is because its air fuel trim is out of wack. Running an smaller carb because you can't calibrate the bigger one for use when the bigger one has the right air flow is not the smart way to go. Again, the way they come prepared, none of the 2-bbl Holley/Autolite/Motorcraft carbs like large duration cams, its very easy to get fuel standoff and reversion problems, typical of the smaller i6 with big cams and automatic gearboxes with stock 1650 stall ratios. They have multiple problems with distributor calibration being out, cam being to big, stall being to low, and then the owner dropping out of a bigger carb to a smaller one.

The kits have been around since the early 80's. It has long gone out of major US production from Edelebrock and Weber, but new from TMP, it is expensive, and there are some debates about how ideal the Weber IDA well tubes are in a Holley application, but they work, and can make a seamless Air Fuel ratio.

That allows you to run bigger venturis, and the Autolite/Motorcraft venturis cost you power at 1.08 to 1.21 inches. A 500 Holley with 1.375" venturi or
a 650 series 2-bbl venturi size of 1.4375 with an upsized 1.75" throttle can be operated with ease when you use this kit.

You get two plates in the kit because its generally for 4150 or 4160 4-bbls, but you only need to run the one with the accelerator pump




70 idle jet, 150 air corrector,
155 main jets, 110 air correctors,
Two IDA F11 emulsion tubes

and a 120 micron Power Valve Channel restriction will make the engine run clean and responsive.

Emulsion tube is based on hp level expected, intake runner type, and the venturi size, but the five emulsion tubes cover that off.

That will get you started.

It allows you to carb to a better, bigger carb size, but has a transition circuit, and there is now the right access and info on 61450xxx Weber emulsion tubes and main jets and air correctors.

Most importantly, you can run a standard high pressure fuel pump, and even change idle jets with the engine running. Its set up for a standard Holley float height, but has been used in competition Cleveland race engines for years down in Australia, and it eliminates all the hassles of the truly awful vertically jointed Holley float bowl.

In an i6, the throttles can be run parallel to the crank, and then the power valve will never be uncovered under acceleration. The float level isn't optimal with the stock five kinds of 61450 series IDA emulsion tubes, but that's irrelevant because the choices work for the power levels, fuel pressures and float levels you's see from a front float bowl.

http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=33417
http://www.theturboforums.com/threads/3 ... f8c9649a43
 
So, I'm still planning on messing around with the carb a little longer, just to say I did, but I just discovered this :
http://www.ebay.com/itm/OEM-Motorcraft- ... 2186165234

I also found out that I can get a 64lb/hr injector for this unit (far larger than the stock units). I am sure this has been discussed over in the megasquirt section, but I may go that route. I have been wanting to get into the megasquirt scene for a while.
 
Small update, and a bit of a sad one at that. The engine has developed a noise. Without pulling it apart I can only speculate that I may have butted a ring. So, unfortunately I will be pulling it and swapping the 351w I have on the stand in it, only because I have it. I will be pulling it apart and looking for what happened in the name of science, and if the damage is not horrible will probably rebuild it. I think I'm going to keep it to put into a bronco II or ranger. Probably do some sort of EFI system and put some more boost to it next time. Thanks all for the help! Updates to what happen will follow this post!
 
Derangedfords90":2b49ovi3 said:
Small update, and a bit of a sad one at that. The engine has developed a noise. Without pulling it apart I can only speculate that I may have butted a ring. So, unfortunately I will be pulling it and swapping the 351w I have on the stand in it, only because I have it. I will be pulling it apart and looking for what happened in the name of science, and if the damage is not horrible will probably rebuild it. I think I'm going to keep it to put into a bronco II or ranger. Probably do some sort of EFI system and put some more boost to it next time. Thanks all for the help! Updates to what happen will follow this post!

images

I'm a Lava Luva not a hater...

Buy one of these bro' Six Shooter mortif :beer: :wow:

s-l300.jpg



Lincs200, Does10s, First Fox, and now Re-arangedfords90!

I feel like I'm aiding an abetting both sides of the fight here, either option will be the coolest!
 
So I promised I would post my results of a tear down on here, and I have not made good on that promise yet....better late than never.

So I took the opportunity to teach my 6 year old daughter how to leak down test the 200 on the stand.

Much to my surprise, the leak down test yielded no more than a 10% differential across all cylinders. If I recall correctly, it may have been even less! The percentage of leak down on all cylinders was well within specification as well! I did not have the opportunity to pull the pistons out of the block, however, and I am currently away for work for a few months, so probably won't get around to pulling the pistons out.

I did find upon tear down of the top end that the valve seals had literally disintegrated, and I even had to tap one of the valves a bit with a hammer to get it to seal up for the leak down test. This could indicate that my miss was more related to poor upkeep, or possibly weak valve springs.

Due to these findings, I can tentatively conclude that perhaps my "rough around the edges" turbo build may have survived upwards of 1000 miles without permanent damage.

As I have indicated in other posts, I intend to attempt to EFI the engine to see what it will really do, but if folks want to mess around with doing some low-buck turbo things, my method will get you there, especially if you aren't worried about making any internal upgrades to the engine. I would recommend at a bare minimum a refreshment of gaskets and seals, because it looks like that may have been my problem.

More to follow.... in a few months.
 
Derangedfords90":vb12dtbf said:
Hey all,
So I just introduced myself a week ago here and have been doing some research before I post.

My goals are:
150whp minimum
Same fuel mileage (around 17 mpg)
Under $1000 budget

What I have:
1980 fairmont wagon
200ci i6 (appears original, no mods)
C3 (appears to be reman. Shifts well)

What I plan to do:
Autolite 2100 swap
T04E .57 trim eBay turbo (or similar)
Run 6 psi regularly. When I get saucy bring it to 10 psi.
C3 shift mod (from some light research it appears turbocoupe and merkur guys modify these things to hold up behind 2.3ts, so I figure a low horse 200t will be fine)
302 valvesprings (for insurance)

My plan is to do the Powervalve mod on the autolite and attempt to keep the main jets at 12-13:1 at cruise and drop to 11:1 under boost. I haven't figured out where my base timing should be. I have read that some lock out the mechanical advance and just use the vacuum advance. I'll try to go with this method as well to help with the cruise mileage. I figure if I can't get enough retard out of the stock distributor for boost I'll put a water meth jet in the carb hat.

I want to try boost referencing the stock fuel pump first and go from there on fuel.

From the experienced guys, what kind of hurdles can I expect from this plan? Do you see any holes? Any other recommendations? Are my goals achievable? Thanks in advance.

As someone who has done this you are going to spend a lot more than 1k. I made a post called "just a little 200" where I outline my whole build. Feel free to message me if you have any questions.
 
thatblue_67stang":35njrzw9 said:
As someone who has done this you are going to spend a lot more than 1k. I made a post called "just a little 200" where I outline my whole build. Feel free to message me if you have any questions.

I have already proved that it was possible to do for under $1000. This is an old thread. I just updated it the other day with the results of a partial tear down.

However, I will say that only the turbo portion was $1000 and my 200 was in much need of some basic maintenance (Which I did not perform).

I will say that the performance increase that I managed from a stock engine and minimal modification to the fuel, ignition, and base engine was quite impressive. It met all goals besides retaining fuel mileage, where if I had spent more time trying to modify the carburetor, I might have figured it out. Maybe I'll put it back together with the carb first again get a control out of a max effort on the carburetor, then attempt efi and see what the gain is on fuel economy. Budget-minded of course.

I may reach out to you for some advice on building a nice version. With that being said, feel free to message me if you have any questions on making a budget 200 turbo build! Lol.
 
I certainly enjoyed your budget 200 turbo build as well as that of First Foxes, it's easy to do performance builds when there is a much bigger budget, not so when you are trying to hold to a very modest one. I will be interested in what you find out as the cause of the failure. Good luck (y) :nod:
 
bubba22349":qm144cdt said:
I certainly enjoyed your budget 200 turbo build as well as that of First Foxes, it's easy to do performance builds when there is a much bigger budget, not so when you are trying to hold to a very modest one. I will be interested in what you find out as the cause of the failure. Good luck (y) :nod:

Thanks man! It was difficult to keep budget. As I noted, upgrading of fabrication tools really was the expensive part. And I'm sure if I had done top end work like timing chain and valve springs along with the accoutrement of what those would have needed it might have bumped me over the $1k mark.

As for "failure" I am not sure if the engine actually sustained a failure. The leak down test revealed no failure. Like I said there was some carbon from leaky valve seals that made valve seal weak but that's it. If there is still an issue it would surprise me, I would expect a broken ring land to reveal itself in a leak down test.

So again, I will further update when I pull the pistons. I am kindve dreading that because I would rather not look at the bearings.

Thanks again for the praise!
 
Sounds like the engine is in decent condition with the leak down test ressults, having a good ring seal yet my best educated guess is that bearings are probably still decent too. It's likely it's just the head that needs some repair or upgrading. Even doing a complete freshening up with a low dollar rering kit that comes with all the gaskets, seals, rings, and rod bearings at ($100.00 to $125.00), plus a little work on the head, with fresh 302 valve springs or better, a good valve job, maybe the timing chain set if it needs it. This is all it would take get it going again and running even better then it did before, I think you might still stay real close to keeping it within your budget. I have my eye on an 80 Fairmont Futura near me that hope to pickup if can get the funds together in time. Good luck. (y) :nod:
 
Derangedfords90":tjymrvkt said:
thatblue_67stang":tjymrvkt said:
As someone who has done this you are going to spend a lot more than 1k. I made a post called "just a little 200" where I outline my whole build. Feel free to message me if you have any questions.

I have already proved that it was possible to do for under $1000. This is an old thread. I just updated it the other day with the results of a partial tear down.

However, I will say that only the turbo portion was $1000 and my 200 was in much need of some basic maintenance (Which I did not perform).

I will say that the performance increase that I managed from a stock engine and minimal modification to the fuel, ignition, and base engine was quite impressive. It met all goals besides retaining fuel mileage, where if I had spent more time trying to modify the carburetor, I might have figured it out. Maybe I'll put it back together with the carb first again get a control out of a max effort on the carburetor, then attempt efi and see what the gain is on fuel economy. Budget-minded of course.

I may reach out to you for some advice on building a nice version. With that being said, feel free to message me if you have any questions on making a budget 200 turbo build! Lol.

I realized after I made the post that this was very old. I love the work you did. If u can find out how to make it not eat fuel like mine does then please tell me haha.
 
Back
Top