Click Here -> Please Consider Making a PayPal Contribution to the FordSix Forum!
2018 Contributors:
StarDiero75, curts56, DannyG, B RON CO, wsa111, Captainslow42, falconcritter
Econoline, THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER, 95FordFleetside, turbo6, Max_Effort, WorldChampGramp
cr_bobcat, C.S.Designs, pmuller9, gus91326, rwbrooks50, rocklord, drag-200stang, Big64my79Effie, CNC-Dude, gb500

2019 Contributors:
NJwpod, 1strodeo, mightynorseman, maxtrux, 6d7coupe, broncr, Phase3, 68Flareside240, bmbm40,
mustang6, WorldChampGramp, justintendo, BigBlue94, ags290, motorsickle1130, Rooster, ousooner919, ethanperry

Unknown->> M.Ketterer, T.Smith, J.Myers, P.McIntire - Please PM me (1966Mustang) and lemme know who you are!

Best 2100 size to use

Moderator: Mod Squad

User avatar
StarDiero75
Registered User
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:39 pm
Location: Bremerton, WA

Best 2100 size to use

Post #1 by StarDiero75 » Tue Mar 19, 2019 2:32 pm

Howdy guys,

With recent problems with my weber 32/36, I'm highly considering putting in an autolite 2100 since I plan to use that when i put my modified 1980 head on it.

My question is, they come in a wide variety, which is thr best to use on these engines?

A 1.01 comes off a 221 V8, so size is very similar

A 1.08 comes off most small block V8s, and this is the one I've heard is the best to use.

A 1.14 comes off 351s

Then the 1.21+ are big blocks

Would it be best to ise a 1.01 or 1.08? I'm looking for roughly same economy and slightly more power. But least work on jetting.

Thanks
Ryan
--1965 Ranchero w/1966 200, dual friction diaphram 9" Modern Driveline clutch and billet flywheel all balanced, 1985 SVO WC T5 with front shift, 1966 2.8 Ford 8", Weber 32/26 with VI adapter, CRT Performance HEI.
--1961 Studebaker Lark VI, OHV 170 l6 in the process of being resurrected. But it lives
--Creator of the only Weber 32/36 conversion video.

User avatar
rocklord
Registered User
Posts: 1323
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 11:25 pm
Location: Hurricane, WV

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #2 by rocklord » Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:55 pm

This might help:

ci/CarbChoice.html#2V
Dan

Currently Own
1965 Mustang, 200CID, 3Spd
1964 Corvair Coupe, 164CID, 140HP, 4Spd
1961 Corvair Lakewood wagon, 145CID, 80HP, 2Spd Powerglide Auto.
2017 BMW X3, 3.0L Dual Turbo, 300HP, 8-Spd Auto

User avatar
StarDiero75
Registered User
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:39 pm
Location: Bremerton, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #3 by StarDiero75 » Tue Mar 19, 2019 6:47 pm

Looks like 1.01 or 1.02 are my carbs. Thanks man!
--1965 Ranchero w/1966 200, dual friction diaphram 9" Modern Driveline clutch and billet flywheel all balanced, 1985 SVO WC T5 with front shift, 1966 2.8 Ford 8", Weber 32/26 with VI adapter, CRT Performance HEI.
--1961 Studebaker Lark VI, OHV 170 l6 in the process of being resurrected. But it lives
--Creator of the only Weber 32/36 conversion video.

User avatar
wsa111
FSP Moderator
Posts: 3243
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: South Carolina
Contact:

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #4 by wsa111 » Tue Mar 19, 2019 7:11 pm

Ryan, till you install the 80 head, your A/F tester will be a valuable tuning tool.
The Autolite carbs can also use a Holley power valve.
If too rich at WOT you may need smaller PVRC under the power valve.
67 mustang,C-4, with mod. 80 hd, custom 500 cfm carb with annular boosters, hooker headers, dual exh.-X pipe, flowmaster mufflers, DSII dist. MSD-6al & MSD-Blaster 8252 Coil. Engine 205" .030" over with offset ground crank & 1.65 roller rockers. 9.5 comp., Isky 262 cam.
2003 Ford Lightning daily driver. Recurving Distributors. billythedistributorman@live.com
Image

CZLN6
VIP Member
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 11:07 am
Location: Idaho Falls, Id
Contact:

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #5 by CZLN6 » Tue Mar 19, 2019 7:25 pm

Howdy Star:

Here are a couple more FYIs for you-
1.01 & 1.02 Were both used on 260 V8s
*1.14 were used on 1964 - '67, 289s and 302s
1.08 were used on 1968 -'73, 302s
*1.23 were used on 1967 to '70, 351s
1.21 were used on 1971 - '73, 351s
The stars(*) denote the earlier version and have different internals (K cluster)causing the later versions to run slightly leaner and cleaner.

All have annular discharge boosters. All are incredibly easy to rebuild. Jets are unique to Autolite except for the very earliest, from 1960 and earlier. They were Holley. Ironically, the Holley power valves are interchangeable with 2100 and are much more accurate and come in a wider variety. Stock power valves come with a rebuild kit. Most 2100s- 1.08 and earlier can be used with no changes (with the exception of cleaning and rebuilding) when adapted to a 200 engine. Slight variations to the accelerator pump arms may be necessary. 1.08s were used on a variety of vehicles with a 302 engine- from Falcons and Mustangs to F100s and Galaxies so internal adaptation was made by changing the internal K-cluster. So, for your use look for 1.01 or 1.02 from a Falcon for best internals for your situation.

Hope that helps you understand a few more details. Good luck.

Adios, David
Last edited by CZLN6 on Wed Mar 20, 2019 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
co-author of the Falcon Performance Handbook
http://www.falcon6handbook.com/

bmbm40
Registered User
Posts: 1218
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:25 pm
Location: Carson City, NV

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #6 by bmbm40 » Tue Mar 19, 2019 7:42 pm

Very interesting information regarding the model numbers and the K cluster lean/rich operation. Good to know, thanks.
66 Bronco-1970 250, NV3550, DSII, 4 turn ps, uncut, 1" bl, 2.5" sl, front disc, twin stick D 20, 30 x 9.50
NEXT- direct mount 1.08 on D8 head, power brakes, rear limited slip, 3G, electric fan, electric upgrades, custom curved DSII, header, 31" tires

New guy? Get the Falcon Performance Handbook and Ford six high performance parts from https://vintageinlines.com

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4736
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

Best 2100 size to use

Post #7 by chad » Tue Mar 19, 2019 8:04 pm

keep it goin, guys.
Close to another sticky?
Nice tech info for our carbs § ?
or 'sm block engine §" ?
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

User avatar
StarDiero75
Registered User
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:39 pm
Location: Bremerton, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #8 by StarDiero75 » Tue Mar 19, 2019 8:10 pm

wsa111 wrote:Ryan, till you install the 80 head, your A/F tester will be a valuable tuning tool.
The Autolite carbs can also use a Holley power valve.
If too rich at WOT you may need smaller PVRC under the power valve.

Its a wonderful tool. It's just gonna drive me crazy till i get the carb all tuned haha

So in your honest opinion, should i ditch the weber 32/36 and go to the 1.01 Autolite? I want something more user friendly.
--1965 Ranchero w/1966 200, dual friction diaphram 9" Modern Driveline clutch and billet flywheel all balanced, 1985 SVO WC T5 with front shift, 1966 2.8 Ford 8", Weber 32/26 with VI adapter, CRT Performance HEI.
--1961 Studebaker Lark VI, OHV 170 l6 in the process of being resurrected. But it lives
--Creator of the only Weber 32/36 conversion video.

User avatar
StarDiero75
Registered User
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:39 pm
Location: Bremerton, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #9 by StarDiero75 » Tue Mar 19, 2019 8:12 pm

CZLN6 wrote:Howdy Star:

Here are a couple more FYIs for you-
1.01 & 1.20 Were both used on 260 V8s
*1.14 were used on 1964 - '67, 289s and 302s
1.08 were used on 1968 -'73, 302s
*1.23 were used on 1967 to '70, 351s
1.21 were used on 1971 - '73, 351s
The stars denote the earlier version and have different internals (K cluster)causing the later versions to run slightly leaner and cleaner.

All have annular discharge boosters. All are incredibly easy to rebuild. Jets are unique to Autolite except for the very earliest, from 1960 and earlier. They were Holley. Ironically, the Holley power valves are interchangeable with 2100 and are much more accurate and come in a wider variety. Stock power valves come with a rebuild kit. Most 2100s- 1.08 and earlier can be used with no changes (with the exception of cleaning and rebuilding) when adapted to a 200 engine. Slight variations to the accelerator pump arms may be necessary. 1.08s were used on a variety of vehicles with a 302 engine- from Falcons and Mustangs to F100s and Galaxies so internal adaptation was made by changing the internal K-cluster. So, for your use look for 1.01 or 1.02 from a Falcon for best internals for your situation.

Hope that helps you understand a few more details. Good luck.

Adios, David

That is pefect man, thats good info. It helps, I'm already on the lookout for the carb
--1965 Ranchero w/1966 200, dual friction diaphram 9" Modern Driveline clutch and billet flywheel all balanced, 1985 SVO WC T5 with front shift, 1966 2.8 Ford 8", Weber 32/26 with VI adapter, CRT Performance HEI.
--1961 Studebaker Lark VI, OHV 170 l6 in the process of being resurrected. But it lives
--Creator of the only Weber 32/36 conversion video.

User avatar
cr_bobcat
Registered User
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:13 am
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #10 by cr_bobcat » Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:03 pm

I would go with the 1.08. I loved the 1.14 I had on mine, right up until I cracked one of the feet off. Don't over tighten those old carb bodies....
Block: Stock C8 Block/pistons, C9-M head, 1.75/1.5 valves, dual spring, 1.65 RAU Rockers, port divider, direct mount Holley 4412-500, HEI w/20* advance, manifold vac, dual-out Arvinode exhaust, Clay Smith 264/274 110* installed w/ 4* advance, adjustable dual chain timing, C4 w/ shift kit, 3.20 (TBC) rear ratio, 9.44 SCR / 7.97 DCR

Build that Six with parts from http://www.vintageinlines.com

User avatar
Econoline
Registered User
Posts: 1293
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:37 pm
Location: Anacortes, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #11 by Econoline » Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:14 pm

I had a 1.08 from a 72 302 I was going to use on my 250 until I decided to go tbi.
It ain't gonna fix itself

CZLN6
VIP Member
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 11:07 am
Location: Idaho Falls, Id
Contact:

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #12 by CZLN6 » Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:25 am

Howdy back Star and All:

FYI- The K cluster is responsible for rich/lean of the idle curcuit, transition circuit, and accelerator pump volume. That leaves the low speed idle air screw and the accelerator pump linkage externally to tune. K clusters are marked with a coded stamp to a specific vehicle/engine application. A 1.08 destined for an F100 to Iowa would have a K cluster very similar in appearence to a 1.08 for a Mustang going to Arizona, but internally would be very different. We have found no key to the FoMoCo stamped code on the bottom of the K cluster. So, swapping the K cluster, for refining the tune is a shot in the dark, at best.
For all of the 2100s simplicity and beauty of function, fine tuning, to a certain extent, is limited.

Ironically, we have swapped on a bunch of different 2100s, 1.08s and 1.14s to my 250 and to Dennis' 200 and they all worked fairly well- dirt and all, no rebuild. Other than not being able to find main jets to play with the Autolite 2100s are great. And they weigh less than Holley 2300 and have no gasket line below the fuel bowl.

PS- Autolite jets are not numbered the same way Holley jets are. Another mystery.

Adios, David
co-author of the Falcon Performance Handbook
http://www.falcon6handbook.com/

User avatar
StarDiero75
Registered User
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:39 pm
Location: Bremerton, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #13 by StarDiero75 » Wed Mar 20, 2019 2:39 am

Econoline wrote:I had a 1.08 from a 72 302 I was going to use on my 250 until I decided to go tbi.

You don't still have it?
--1965 Ranchero w/1966 200, dual friction diaphram 9" Modern Driveline clutch and billet flywheel all balanced, 1985 SVO WC T5 with front shift, 1966 2.8 Ford 8", Weber 32/26 with VI adapter, CRT Performance HEI.
--1961 Studebaker Lark VI, OHV 170 l6 in the process of being resurrected. But it lives
--Creator of the only Weber 32/36 conversion video.

User avatar
StarDiero75
Registered User
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:39 pm
Location: Bremerton, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #14 by StarDiero75 » Wed Mar 20, 2019 2:42 am

CZLN6 wrote:Howdy back Star and All:

FYI- The K cluster is responsible for rich/lean of the idle curcuit, transition circuit, and accelerator pump volume. That leaves the low speed idle air screw and the accelerator pump linkage externally to tune. K clusters are marked with a coded stamp to a specific vehicle/engine application. A 1.08 destined for an F100 to Iowa would have a K cluster very similar in appearence to a 1.08 for a Mustang going to Arizona, but internally would be very different. We have found no key to the FoMoCo stamped code on the bottom of the K cluster. So, swapping the K cluster, for refining the tune is a shot in the dark, at best.
For all of the 2100s simplicity and beauty of function, fine tuning, to a certain extent, is limited.

Ironically, we have swapped on a bunch of different 2100s, 1.08s and 1.14s to my 250 and to Dennis' 200 and they all worked fairly well- dirt and all, no rebuild. Other than not being able to find main jets to play with the Autolite 2100s are great. And they weigh less than Holley 2300 and have no gasket line below the fuel bowl.

PS- Autolite jets are not numbered the same way Holley jets are. Another mystery.

Adios, David

Very strange, so its more or less luck with testing K clusters?

I'm looking for simplicity so this sounds like the carb for me. The weber is a nightmare.

I do have a 1.23 i got off a 360, and i love how simple it is. Simplicity is a beautiful thing.
--1965 Ranchero w/1966 200, dual friction diaphram 9" Modern Driveline clutch and billet flywheel all balanced, 1985 SVO WC T5 with front shift, 1966 2.8 Ford 8", Weber 32/26 with VI adapter, CRT Performance HEI.
--1961 Studebaker Lark VI, OHV 170 l6 in the process of being resurrected. But it lives
--Creator of the only Weber 32/36 conversion video.

User avatar
StarDiero75
Registered User
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:39 pm
Location: Bremerton, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #15 by StarDiero75 » Wed Mar 20, 2019 2:51 am

Just bought a 68 2100 1.08 off a 302 from eBay. Hopefully its good. I'll look into getting the holley/autolite adapter from VI now. I gotta also swap to a cable pedal as i dont think the mechanical pedal will work anymore
--1965 Ranchero w/1966 200, dual friction diaphram 9" Modern Driveline clutch and billet flywheel all balanced, 1985 SVO WC T5 with front shift, 1966 2.8 Ford 8", Weber 32/26 with VI adapter, CRT Performance HEI.
--1961 Studebaker Lark VI, OHV 170 l6 in the process of being resurrected. But it lives
--Creator of the only Weber 32/36 conversion video.

User avatar
Econoline
Registered User
Posts: 1293
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:37 pm
Location: Anacortes, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #16 by Econoline » Wed Mar 20, 2019 7:27 am

StarDiero75 wrote:
Econoline wrote:I had a 1.08 from a 72 302 I was going to use on my 250 until I decided to go tbi.

You don't still have it?


I sold it a while back
It ain't gonna fix itself

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 6828
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #17 by xctasy » Wed Mar 20, 2019 7:34 am

I enjoy Real People who do Real Stuff and get there hands dirty! Ryan, great work.

The typical Theoretical Engineer who got his hands dirty is the ex Limey David Vizard. He found that 1.19 vs 1.38 (350 cfm 2bbl vs 500 cfm 2bbl), the kick in was at just 125 hp net at the flywheel. Result? Another 10 hp net. The 1979 2.8 Mustang got given a 1.14 2150 Motorcraft over the 32/36 based Autolite or Motorcraft part numbered 5200. Some where, another 4 hp , depending on what figures you garner.
The average venturi size of a 5200 is exactly 1.01. The reason it gives strange air fuel ratios is the primary and secondary circuits augument air fuel supply. The carb on the 2.8 was well sorted.

My vote is for the old 1.23 with s two stage power valve and you play with the PVCR's with either Bills E string, fuse wire or Sean Murphy style hex plug and fine drill holes.
Image
XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

User avatar
Econoline
Registered User
Posts: 1293
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:37 pm
Location: Anacortes, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #18 by Econoline » Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:02 am

Btw, jets for the 2100's are available.

https://www.carburetor-parts.com/Jets-_c_1607.html
It ain't gonna fix itself

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4736
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

Best 2100 size to use

Post #19 by chad » Wed Mar 20, 2019 9:39 am

Good ol Mike's.
Not sure if U wanna look here but there's several threads on 'goni cable' w/o the Lokar.
(how 2 bend the pedle's arm, attach to fire wall, link it up on the carb...
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

User avatar
wsa111
FSP Moderator
Posts: 3243
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: South Carolina
Contact:

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #20 by wsa111 » Wed Mar 20, 2019 2:21 pm

xctasy wrote: vote is for the old 1.23 with s two stage power valve and you play with the PVCR's with either Bills E string, fuse wire or Sean Murphy style hex plug and fine drill holes.

The orifices under the power valve can be drilled all the way & tapped close to the length of the 6-32 brass hex set screw.
Image
They can be purchased at McMaster Carr. They come blank & you have to drill the desired orifice size yourself.
67 mustang,C-4, with mod. 80 hd, custom 500 cfm carb with annular boosters, hooker headers, dual exh.-X pipe, flowmaster mufflers, DSII dist. MSD-6al & MSD-Blaster 8252 Coil. Engine 205" .030" over with offset ground crank & 1.65 roller rockers. 9.5 comp., Isky 262 cam.
2003 Ford Lightning daily driver. Recurving Distributors. billythedistributorman@live.com
Image

User avatar
StarDiero75
Registered User
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:39 pm
Location: Bremerton, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #21 by StarDiero75 » Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:33 pm

xctasy wrote:I enjoy Real People who do Real Stuff and get there hands dirty! Ryan, great work.

The typical Theoretical Engineer who got his hands dirty is the ex Limey David Vizard. He found that 1.19 vs 1.38 (350 cfm 2bbl vs 500 cfm 2bbl), the kick in was at just 125 hp net at the flywheel. Result? Another 10 hp net. The 1979 2.8 Mustang got given a 1.14 2150 Motorcraft over the 32/36 based Autolite or Motorcraft part numbered 5200. Some where, another 4 hp , depending on what figures you garner.
The average venturi size of a 5200 is exactly 1.01. The reason it gives strange air fuel ratios is the primary and secondary circuits augument air fuel supply. The carb on the 2.8 was well sorted.

My vote is for the old 1.23 with s two stage power valve and you play with the PVCR's with either Bills E string, fuse wire or Sean Murphy style hex plug and fine drill holes.

Thats very interesting. I have a 5200 sitting in the garage and it looks a little smaller than the 32/36 i got, they might be the same since I've never measured them.

I can test the 1.23 i currently have on it and see how it does vs the 1.08 i just bought and see how they compare. I'll have the funnel adapter for a bit till i get the 1980 head set up for a direct 2bbl and i won't have to screw with adapters anymore. I'm hoping the 1.08 will do just fine.

Also, side question, if the AF gauge was too close to the manifold, would it give different readings vs being a little further downstream? I was looking at my sensor and noticed its about 10" from the manifold. Is that too close?
--1965 Ranchero w/1966 200, dual friction diaphram 9" Modern Driveline clutch and billet flywheel all balanced, 1985 SVO WC T5 with front shift, 1966 2.8 Ford 8", Weber 32/26 with VI adapter, CRT Performance HEI.
--1961 Studebaker Lark VI, OHV 170 l6 in the process of being resurrected. But it lives
--Creator of the only Weber 32/36 conversion video.

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 6828
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #22 by xctasy » Thu Mar 21, 2019 3:48 am

Ryan, you need to check the Innovate and AEM manual. And then set the Average exhaust runner distance at 12".

Then follow Chads copied detail in his footer 1/16/2017.

One change at a time.

Your conclusions on 32/36, 5200, 1.08 and 1.23 are purely subjective. There are 13 generic types of 5200, with four different venturi types, two different kinds of idle circuit, and it sat on over 5 different kinds of US domestic engine from 1600 GM, 1700 Chrysler, 1700 VW, 1600, 2000, 2300, 2800 Ford, AMC's VW Audi Porsche derived Fox 80 2 liter four in the Pacer.

Circumstances alter Cases.

Where you hook the vac line and vent tube defines advance curve and intake charge dillution, and they define more than jetting how an engine combination runs. Fuel pressure and cleaness of thr fuel system, and little things like throttle set up are played against curb idle position. A 5200/5210/5220 Holley Weber has American profile well tubes after 1974, and the jet size to cc/min or Micron stamping has not got a 2.54 metric to Imperial ratio because of how Holley profiled Weber jets. You'll learn all this stuff. Have fun.

The Holley Weber can potentislly kick any Holley 350 cfm or 0.98 to 1.23. A Holley 500 kicks every other carbd a$$ if your in the 125 to 225 hp bracket. You just have to follow David Vizards SOHC Ford carb details dating back to 1977 to 1988.

Enjoy yourself.
Image
XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

CZLN6
VIP Member
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 11:07 am
Location: Idaho Falls, Id
Contact:

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #23 by CZLN6 » Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:19 pm

Howdy Back Star and All:

"Very strange, so its more or less luck with testing K clusters?"
No. but you will need to know what the application of the 2100 was, from the factory. The 2100s are marked with a stamped code on the mounting foot of each carb. The K-clusters are not stamped but have code mark on the base of the cluster. To date, the code is unknown. But, If you know the specific application you will have a good idea of the characteristics of that cluster. You will need to know- vehicle, weight, elevation, transmission.

Assuming elevation and tranmissions are the same, if you are using a 1.14 from a '65 Mustang and you want a richer idle and transition, swap the K-cluster for one from a '65 F100 with a 302. If you have a 1.08 from '68 Mustang with a 302 V8 and you want to slightly richen the internals try swapping the K-cluster from a 1.14 from a '67 302 Mustang. This much is not guess work, well maybe an educated guess. Will this method put you spot on as with an analyser? No, but it will be closer. And swapping K-clusters is a whole lot easier and cheaper than buying an A/F analyser and figuring the internal restrictions for idle and transitions. And, what and adventure.

So, keep us posted on your choices and your progress.

Adios, David
co-author of the Falcon Performance Handbook
http://www.falcon6handbook.com/

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4736
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

best 2100 size to use/how equiped

Post #24 by chad » Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:52 pm

"...The 2100s are marked with a stamped code on the mounting foot of each carb. ..."
& this is where Mike's comes in again.
U can ID the vehicle thru ID the specific carb. Compair the #s/Ltrs to the make/model/yr of vehicle listed w/that carb (like cross referencing in a way). This way U will not -example- try 1 for a heavy torino (also w/an off displacement, as listed, like a 428) for ur lght falcon (or whatever).
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

CZLN6
VIP Member
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 11:07 am
Location: Idaho Falls, Id
Contact:

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #25 by CZLN6 » Mon Mar 25, 2019 11:53 pm

Howdy Back:

Yup, Mike's is a good ID source. In addition to the stamped foot all factory carbs came with a metal ID tag with a code for dating, application and other info. Unfortunately, the metal ID tag frequently disappears on the first rebuild.

Hey Star- how's your progress?

Adios, David
co-author of the Falcon Performance Handbook
http://www.falcon6handbook.com/

User avatar
StarDiero75
Registered User
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:39 pm
Location: Bremerton, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #26 by StarDiero75 » Tue Mar 26, 2019 12:28 pm

CZLN6 wrote:Howdy Back:

Yup, Mike's is a good ID source. In addition to the stamped foot all factory carbs came with a metal ID tag with a code for dating, application and other info. Unfortunately, the metal ID tag frequently disappears on the first rebuild.

Hey Star- how's your progress?

Adios, David

Still waiting on the carb from ebay. It should be here today or tomorrow. I'm also waiting on the correct adapter for it too.

I have the cable pedal to put it all in too, but thats gonna take a bit to fab to make work. Maybe Thursday if I'm feeling creative lol.

I'm kinda half tempted to just throw it on the car and see how it does rather rebuilding it. Heres what it looks like, its pretty clean which is why I'm considering that
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
--1965 Ranchero w/1966 200, dual friction diaphram 9" Modern Driveline clutch and billet flywheel all balanced, 1985 SVO WC T5 with front shift, 1966 2.8 Ford 8", Weber 32/26 with VI adapter, CRT Performance HEI.
--1961 Studebaker Lark VI, OHV 170 l6 in the process of being resurrected. But it lives
--Creator of the only Weber 32/36 conversion video.

bmbm40
Registered User
Posts: 1218
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:25 pm
Location: Carson City, NV

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #27 by bmbm40 » Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:06 pm

It looks pretty good I would also be tempted to try as is.
66 Bronco-1970 250, NV3550, DSII, 4 turn ps, uncut, 1" bl, 2.5" sl, front disc, twin stick D 20, 30 x 9.50
NEXT- direct mount 1.08 on D8 head, power brakes, rear limited slip, 3G, electric fan, electric upgrades, custom curved DSII, header, 31" tires

New guy? Get the Falcon Performance Handbook and Ford six high performance parts from https://vintageinlines.com

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4736
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

Best 2100 size to use

Post #28 by chad » Wed Mar 27, 2019 10:36 am

I thought U already knew it wuz "too big"?
(See subject line above)?
Only 'rebuild' needed is change out internals 4 ur engine...

Do U have all these prts on hand? Will all these prts (carb, jets, etc) B @ ur home at the same time? If so avoid a double instal (install find it is not as should B, remove, correct, reinstall)?

How much of this carb can B done installed. Ur 32/36 - much could B done while mounted. This one? not sure (acc pump, all jets, etc)?
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

CZLN6
VIP Member
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 11:07 am
Location: Idaho Falls, Id
Contact:

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #29 by CZLN6 » Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:20 pm

Howdy Star and All:

I vote for putting it on and giving it a try also. Worst is likely a stuck needle valve. let us know.

Adios, David
co-author of the Falcon Performance Handbook
http://www.falcon6handbook.com/

User avatar
StarDiero75
Registered User
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:39 pm
Location: Bremerton, WA

Re: Best 2100 size to use

Post #30 by StarDiero75 » Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:23 pm

CZLN6 wrote:Howdy Star and All:

I vote for putting it on and giving it a try also. Worst is likely a stuck needle valve. let us know.

Adios, David

Just got the carb today. Its real clean and everything seems to move very nicely. I'm waiting on the carb adapter now from VI. Should be here tomorrow
--1965 Ranchero w/1966 200, dual friction diaphram 9" Modern Driveline clutch and billet flywheel all balanced, 1985 SVO WC T5 with front shift, 1966 2.8 Ford 8", Weber 32/26 with VI adapter, CRT Performance HEI.
--1961 Studebaker Lark VI, OHV 170 l6 in the process of being resurrected. But it lives
--Creator of the only Weber 32/36 conversion video.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests