It's been proven time and again on this forum that the formula that just aint true. Simple as that.

Brett

 

You're quite funny... You want to know what wrong with your carb, and I tell you... For that, I'm attacked.

Listen up, little kid... Whether you like it or not, the answer STILL remains. Your combination is too small to run your carb. And as I expected, you'll never actually admit that you made a mistake, even after I prove to you (in excruciating detail) why you are wrong, and show you mathematically how it works....

It's the standard kiddie response... You don't like the answer, so you attack...

And Blah, blah blah.........

Well, kid, for starters, you don't know how to read a cam-card...

A little hint for you: you're running a STOCK TORQUE CONVERTOR.....
HELLO??????????????
I'm not gonna' explain the signficance of that to you, I've spoon-fed you enough..... Figure it out for yourself... If you don't get it, then you have NO business being a ME... Unless, of course, that's what our Universities have degraded to.....?

Clearly, I understand the data you posted better then you... BTW, initial timing is completely separate from where you set your idle... they can effect each other, but they are not exclusively dependant upon each other...

About this thread, to each challenge you've made, I have addressed, using logic and common sense... And with each point that you lose, you pretend that it is ALL you, that you're still the MAN...

You're like the Black Knight in the Holy Grail.... "it's just a scratch!"

To the fact that you're wrong: "ummm.... STROKER kit in the future!"
To the fact that you're wrong: "ummm.... Do you know who LARS is???"
To the fact that you're wrong: "ummm.... ummm... CAM card!!!"
To the fact that you're wrong: "ummm.... You don't have as much experience as LARS!!!!"

and so on....

You STILL haven't posted your response from BG... No phone calls, no nothing.... Well, when they confirm what I've told you, just remember, I TOLD YOU SO.

Brettmc and "the dude," your responses are amusing. You chatter on the sidelines, offer nothing to substantiate your positions...

I'm bored of this thread... Kid, I am 100% certain that I'm correct. With each response, you simply embarrass yourself more... It was fun, but now it's not... Now it's quite pathetic....

 

Yes, I did substantiate my position. I asked who is more credible and backed it up with facts. You, on the other hand, really lost all credibility here:

 

I'm not wasting my nonexistant time calling BG for your sake, I have emailed them, after I posted the "return to sender" thing I sent it the next morning successfully. I will post it here no matter what they say, assuming you don't get my thread locked with your rantings before that time.

I used to get involved in religious debates alot, it was fun at times but way too many people like you. 100% positive in their position, propose one flimsy 'proof' and completely ignore it when others pick it to pieces, quickly degrading into personal attacks and extraordinary numbers of punctuation. You may be right, you may be wrong, but one thing's for sure, you really should've taken debate class in highschool.

You proclaim that almost noone knows more than you, and I am the arrogant one, thumping my chest to declare my greatness, ha!

Again, let me do you the courtesy of considering your arguements and responding to them as best I can, although I know I won't get the same in return. Can't read a cam-card? Those numbers that I quoted directly from Crane and CompCams catalogs specify very different camshafts, one that I took out, one that I put in. Since they are different, idle will be different, get it? I do NOT have a stock convertor, again you are observant. I told you why your numbers are baseless, I and others have told you that that formula is faulty, and that's all you have. You haven't tried to analyse why the formula is right, you just scream at me "Little kiddie, look I can do math! My blown bigblock has run for 30 minutes so I know everything!" This is really going nowhere and although the hilarity is endless, I think this thread is about done. I will post BG's response for integrity's sake.

"To the first two, I really don't know- the more I understand in life, the LESS clever or smart I feel"
You know where I found that eh? Warning single ladies of Fresno, Mr. Right may not be as he first appears


Chris

 

perhaps you need to rejet down to a smaller size on the primaries

 

Yeah, going from the brief troubleshooting guide on BG's website I was suspecting that. Thank you for bringing something useful to this discussion! I had a few seconds to spare and tried fiddling with the idle mixture screws, they're as far in as they can go without completely killing the idle fuel flow (another quarter turn in on one corner and the engine dies quickly) I think a step down in jet size may move me back into useable adjustment range.

Since both primary and secondary butterflies are open equal amounts at idle, should I rejet both?

One final down, 3 to go, and I'll have time to do the basic checks.

Thanks,
Chris

I glanced at your profile and saw "1960 Austin Healey 3000" You guys really have some great projects, some of the best times I've had with my dad have been helping him restore his '64 Chevy 2 SS and working with him on my own car. Your son's a lucky kid! You may be interested in this car that we've been building a new engine for at work:



The engine is insane, you wouldn't believe how much the bare block weighs and how long those connecting rods are!

From the ad for this car where I stumbled across its picture: "This is a 1949 Healey Silverstone named after the world famous race track in England. There were only 105 of these made and this one is #47. This car won 1st place in a 1950 production car race at Silverstone Race Track in England with Duncan Hamilton at the wheel. Currently used to vintage race. Pictured here at the VIR race complex"

 

Really? I hope not. This has been the most entertaining thread since the arguments about splitting the forum.

Seriously though, I think this was already suggested, but I think you have a nasty vacuum leak. 2000 rpms is incredibly high.
You also might want to look for Lar's Holley tuning articles. Apparently they apply just as well to the Demons.
Oh, Breathial, I'm running the same carb but with mechanical secondaries, on a 351w with the same cam, Edelbrock RPM heads, Edelbrock Air Gap manifold, headers, 2.5" exhaust and have no idle issues.

 

But no that's a Ford, they have their own outdated formulas

From what I've been told the hunting idle spells vacuum leak, I just can't imagine that I did anything wrong sealing the intake, hopefully I'll find something else amiss externally...

I'm honored to compete with the forum split threads... some day I hope to pull off a thread as rediculous as the Merlin arguments!

 

that Healey silver stone is a cool car.....i am not an authority on this subject but have observed that many times only the primary is jetted down....i suspect that once you hit the "secondary stage" the implications are not as noticable as you are pouring the fuel into a hungry engine

 

BG will, of course, tell you that your carb is too big. A smaller carb is much more forgiving of poor tuning issues, so it will run better out of the box, and makes the BG tech's job easier.

 

I did. As the quote goes, "The personal attack, the last bastion of the supremely defeated..."

Please provide a link to this... Or admit you're a liar. As the quote goes, "The personal attack, the last bastion of the supremely defeated..."

Hmmm... changing the story... Again.

You have tried to disagree with me, without a shred of information to support your position. I use common-sense, the knowledge that I've gained reading the Holley and Demon tuning books, Bernoullis' Law, extrapolation of information from the BG website and a simple spread-sheet (which, of course) confirms what I already knew...

And in response you offer... nothing, except hot air and personal attacks... (Did you learn this tactic in debate class???) So again, I say:

Prove me wrong...

Prove me wrong...

As the quote goes, "The personal attack, the last bastion of the supremely defeated..."


Again, provide a link where I stated this, or admit you're a liar... Again, as the quote goes, "The personal attack, the last bastion of the supremely defeated..."


Somehow I doubt that...

My, MY.... Now THAT made me laugh.... I must have really gotten under your skin, eh, KID....???

You must have really dug for that one... To dig so hard for, as the quote goes, "the personal attack, the last bastion of the supremely defeated..."

How much have you been researching me, on the internet...? All the way back to the Navy, when I saved the US Government millions of dollars, by thinking carefully about things that others (like you) took for granted??? Or Epson Robotics, designing and proving out state-of-art systems that everybody said was impossible to achieve???

Personal attacks, indeed...

I came back to check, and see what new BS you'd throw up, out of curiosity... And I must say, I did have a nice laugh... If you want to continue the flame-fest... Then, fine... we'll continue until the thread gets locked... It doesn't matter much to me... The choice is yours...

So, now, as I come to the end of this particular post, I wonder if you will actually appreciate the information which I am about to give you...? Instead of arguing like an ignorant, petulant child??? We will see...

Two freebie tuning hints for you (until you again change your story), swapping jets won't help the situation- you're working on your idle circuitry and off-idle transitions... The jets won't affect anything until you're past the transitions... Unless your idle set-screw is in so much that the carb is into the main jets, in which case your idle will be 1200-2000, somewhere around there... If that is the case for the car to "idle," you're seriously screwed...

Secondly, the easiest way to check for a vacuum leak ...? With the engine at idle (or as low as you can get in RPM), put the palm of your hand over the primary jets, to block airflow into the primaries. If engine RPM increases, you have a vacuum leak. If you don't get a change, slowly put your hand completely over the primaries until it seals off the carb. It should stall out... But if RPMs go up at any point before it stalls out, you DO have a vacuum leak... You'll know how big it is, by how much the RPMs go up... A little bump in RPMs means a small leak, and you get the idea... If the RPMs don't change, and finally the engine just stalls out...? You have no vacuum leak of any significant magnitude... Simple test, works EVERY time...

Oh, I know... You want me to PROVE it, right??? Explain how this second hint works??? No, not gonna' spoon-feed you any more... But I guarantee you, you'll get a meaningful answer... As to why it works, you'll have to think about it, and who knows...? Maybe you'll figure it out...

But hey, what do I know, right??? RIGHT???

Oh, and "dude..." Since I'm not the next Savior Lars, I'm not qualified to speak...? Gonna' tell me that I'm wrong on this, too, because I don't have his so-called "qualifications???"

 

Why would they "of course" say that????

How exactly is a smaller carb more forgiving of tuning issues???

WHY does it run better out of the box???

HOW does it make a techs job easier???

Care to substantiate your position??? On ANY of those points, or are you just blowing smoke (again)????

And, BTW, you're not doing the kid any favors, by feeding on his (and your) ignorance...

 

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said you were wrong or personally attacked you. Obviously, this is a public forum and everyone has the right to voice their opinion. On top of your severe lack of manners it appears that your ego is getting in the way of logic.

 

This looks suspiciously like a personal attack. When was I blowing smoke before????
As I said previously, some people have much more credibility than you do, and I have to believe them. If you want the technical reasons, you should start another thread and ask specifically.

 

This is too funny.
I run 850s and 1050s on my mild 350 to test them out for Forum members. I've never had an idle problem or drivability problem once the carb is set up right, and setting it up right isn't too tough. I've never heard of a "big carb" causing any problems, and I've never exerienced it in the 500 carb rebuilds I've done or in the over 300 carbs I've actually test run on my engine. Really: I have run over 300 different carbs on my car ranging from 390 to 1150 cfm. I've done actual dyno testing and tuning with Hot Rod Magazine, and I have consistently observed (with actual test results) that 750 carbs run with no problem on engines bigger than 302.

I've installed and set up 750s on 327s and 350s on almost every Tuning Tour I've done (done 13 tours and tuned over 80 Forum Vettes). There is no problem running 750s on engines down to 302. Works great. Smooth idle. Instant throttle response, fantastic power. No problems at all.

We have a Forum member right now with terrible tuning problems on a 650. I guess he should swap it out for a 390.... Carb size has little or nothing to do with tuning problems. CFM-O-Phobics really crack me up, because you can make any sized carb run just great unless the carb is too small.

That's a 1050 Dominator on a 400 small block in the picture in "My Corvette Photos." I think it's about the right size...

 

Your exact post was
You infer that, because I'm not someone whose feet you kiss, that I am ignorant on the subject...

My statement stands.

To all of the notes posted by Lars, there are relevant questions:
1. What is the cam profile?
2. What is the compression ratio?
3. What intake manifold?
4. What is the transmission (and if auto, what does it flash at)?
5. cubic inches?
6. Gear ratio?

It all sounds well and good.... All of the points he posted are correct... But again, I ask you to explain WHY on point #4???

Do you have any understanding of WHY???????????????? Or are you simply gonna' say, "Lars *says* so....?"

NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Tell me WHY.

For the kids' combination, his cam is mismatched to the rest of the combination... But NOT badly. In fact, he should be at around 380-400 HP at the flywheel. His combination is NOT, as Lars calls it, a "really screwed up setup."

What IS screwing him up badly, is the carb itself...

You know, I thought I'd let you figure out WHY, but I'm tired of this game... The reason is because of rule #1. It's what I've been saying the ENTIRE TIME!!!!

Ironic- you all think he's the greatest, read his "rules" on carbs, and have them down, word for bloody word... Yet you don't have a clue as to WHY or HOW....

So now I know who Lars is... Fine. While he understands the WHY and HOW of carbs, his notes clearly have not made your knowledge any better......

 

Not at all (your ego is getting in the way again). I don't doubt that you have quite a bit of knowledge. I'm infering who's advice I'd listen to first and giving you the reasons why.

I don't need to. I'm not an automotive engineer. If I can use his advice and techniques, it works, and I pick up some knowledge along the way, that's wonderful for me. I don't proclaim to know it all.

 

Did this guy just say Lars doesn't know chit?

 

 

There's a LOT that goes into it... The way you make it sound, You can simply slap a 1050 Dominator on a stock 283 (exaggerating, but the point is clear), and it'll run SOOOOO much better... with a little "tuning," of course...


I'm sorry, but that's absurd...

More absurd comments... Your sense of humor is... boring.

Ummm.... Now THAT is interesting, considering your "law" states otherwise:
1. Big carbs do not run rich when installed on small engines. They run lean due to the decreased fuel metering signal.

Since large carbs tend to suffer from a decreased metering signal on small engines (by your own words), a large carb DOES cause tuning problems on small engines.... (this last statement is correct, while the one about having "little or nothing to do with tuning problems" is ridiculous... In fact, your first rule pretty much KILLS your entire post, of how *easy* it is, no problems, etc., etc, etc...........

Checkmate.