• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Down leg or annular?

I understand getting started with what’s on hand. Makes sense. Now that you’re ready, get the bigger carb. The factory put a 750 on the 440hp. A 700 is a total bottleneck on a built engine.
 
Last edited:
What manifold are you using and what RPM range?

A 700 DP is on the small side for a 440. You should pick some up top and the annular boosters do work better especially down low.
IMO.....why the smaller carb works well.....is because the distributed MIXTURE VELOCITY is high, attributing to better more consistent cylinder filling and the resultant consistent performance. When the mixture velocity is reduced....due to over carburation, the opposite effect occurs.....less than stellar performance results......regardless of timing, cam, heads, or manifold used......bigger is not necessarily better, inspite of what you've been told.......
BOB RENTON
 
Based on that


Let’s all run out and buy 600 CFM Carbs

Thanx

But of course my results where different because I actually tested different carburetors with my particular engine instead of what someone might have told me on the internet

My opinion of course

Thanx
 
Last edited:
Based on that


Let’s all run out and buy 600 CFM Carbs

Thanx

But of course my results where different because I actually tested different carburetors with my particular engine instead of what someone might have told me on the internet

My opinion of course

Thanx
Let's see your results of the different carbs tested, assuming all tests were conducted using the same test criteria.....time of day, air density, temperature, fuel ratio, fuel type on "your particular engine" (unspecified). Perhaps a chart or graph of carbs tested showing:, rpm, hp/ torque produced....exhaust gas temps/cylinder will show if mixture distribution (velocity) is reasonably equal.....or is the "seat of the pants" methodology used?......just curious......
BOB RENTON IS
 
Last edited:
IMO.....why the smaller carb works well.....is because the distributed MIXTURE VELOCITY is high, attributing to better more consistent cylinder filling and the resultant consistent performance. When the mixture velocity is reduced....due to over carburation, the opposite effect occurs.....less than stellar performance results......regardless of timing, cam, heads, or manifold used......bigger is not necessarily better, inspite of what you've been told.......
BOB RENTON
As the resident blowhard/know-it-all, I'm surprised you didn't address the issue of the quality of the air/fuel mixture when it finally makes it to the combustion chamber and its effect on horsepower, torque and driveability.
 
As the resident blowhard/know-it-all, I'm surprised you didn't address the issue of the quality of the air/fuel mixture when it finally makes it to the combustion chamber and its effect on horsepower, torque and driveability.
There is a pressure drop (and corresponding velocity loss) when the mixture exists the carb (plenum under carb) but it is a recoverable loss (gain) as the mixture enters the distribution passageways...(depending on X-sectional area) velocity increases due to area reduction. Mixture is a compilation of air + fuel (combined densities) that can vary with RPM levels, temperature. There will be transitional loss (minor) from manifold to head ports due to size discrepancies, intake port shape, valve guide interference, valve seat/head angle, valve opening area. It depends on the severity of these mismatched (if any) differencies will the effect on cylinder filling but it is mixture VELOCITY that has the greatest effect. WHAT ARE YOUR CONCERNS and solutions. I suggest you read the handbook: CRANE's FLOW OF FLUIDS, (yes, air is a fluid) for a better understanding of the physics of fluid dynamics (fluids in motion).....many of your questions are answered....with sample calculations to demonstrate the principles. Can you perform Integral Calculus (under curve area calcs)? BTW.....THANK YOU....but I do know a lot about a lot of things (but not all as you suggest)...how can I help you understand?......
BOB RENTON
 
There is a pressure drop (and corresponding velocity loss) when the mixture exists the carb (plenum under carb) but it is a recoverable loss (gain) as the mixture enters the distribution passageways...(depending on X-sectional area) velocity increases due to area reduction. Mixture is a compilation of air + fuel (combined densities) that can vary with RPM levels, temperature. There will be transitional loss (minor) from manifold to head ports due to size discrepancies, intake port shape, valve guide interference, valve seat/head angle, valve opening area. It depends on the severity of these mismatched (if any) differencies will the effect on cylinder filling but it is mixture VELOCITY that has the greatest effect. WHAT ARE YOUR CONCERNS and solutions. I suggest you read the handbook: CRANE's FLOW OF FLUIDS, (yes, air is a fluid) for a better understanding of the physics of fluid dynamics (fluids in motion).....many of your questions are answered....with sample calculations to demonstrate the principles. Can you perform Integral Calculus (under curve area calcs)? BTW.....THANK YOU....but I do know a lot about a lot of things (but not all as you suggest)...how can I help you understand?......
BOB RENTON
As I expected from an engineer-book smart, not so much so in real life.

The simple answer is that an annular booster does a much better job atomizing fuel over a dog leg booster.
 
As I expected from an engineer-book smart, not so much so in real life.

The simple answer is that an annular booster does a much better job atomizing fuel over a dog leg booster.
BASED ON WHAT?? Advertising or pictures or just your opinion.....based on nothing but conjecture.....don't bet your last $20.00 that I don't know the difference...but show us your calculations/examples to prove your point.....
BOB RENTON
 
BASED ON WHAT?? Advertising or pictures or just your opinion.....based on nothing but conjecture.....don't bet your last $20.00 that I don't know the difference...but show us your calculations/examples to prove your point.....
BOB RENTON
Looks like someone is triggered. Next, I'll be getting a lecture on how the dual point distributor is far superior to any ignition system ever made.
 
Very likely you'll be slower with the larger carb......jmo.......your $$$$.....have at it.......
BOB RENTON
All BS aside.. Bob did give his prediction
 
Looks like someone is triggered. Next, I'll be getting a lecture on how the dual point distributor is far superior to any ignition system ever made.
Maybe.....but you never answered the question I posed....are you able to or don't understand how to do so? (most people just tap dance and ask another unrelated question or comment when they don't know)....anyway.....my RS23V0A****** '70 GTX uses a PRESTOLITE DUAL POINT DISTRIBUTOR out of choice for originally and appearance. However, my Cadillac Esclade 6.2 L SUV, will tow an 8000# load, have more computing power than the Apollo 11 Lunar Lander and has electronic everything including direct cylinder fuel injection, individual coil on plug ignition and a crankshaft triggered Hall Effect timing, and it measures the air flow into the engine and makes the individual cylinder fuel calculation based on air flow (grams per second), various sensor inputs (RPM, temperature, speed, MAP, fuel type, etc.), shifts the transmission (8L80), anti lock brakes. What would like to discuss next?? The stock market, cooking, wine tasting, LUBRICATING oils, automotive cooling systems, best wax to use ???........
BOB RENTON
 
Maybe.....but you never answered the question I posed....are you able to or don't understand how to do so? (most people just tap dance and ask another unrelated question or comment when they don't know)....anyway.....my RS23V0A****** '70 GTX uses a PRESTOLITE DUAL POINT DISTRIBUTOR out of choice for originally and appearance. However, my Cadillac Esclade 6.2 L SUV, will tow an 8000# load, have more computing power than the Apollo 11 Lunar Lander and has electronic everything including direct cylinder fuel injection, individual coil on plug ignition and a crankshaft triggered Hall Effect timing, and it measures the air flow into the engine and makes the individual cylinder fuel calculation based on air flow (grams per second), various sensor inputs (RPM, temperature, speed, MAP, fuel type, etc.), shifts the transmission (8L80), anti lock brakes. What would like to discuss next?? The stock market, cooking, wine tasting, LUBRICATING oils, automotive cooling systems, best wax to use ???........
BOB RENTON
We get it Bob. You're an engineer. Smarter than anyone else on every subject. Yes, I've dealt with many engineers in business and personal life. Some are book smart, but in real life, some couldn't pour pi$$ out of a boot with the instructions written on the heel.

No need to try to baffle me with BS about how your Escalade electronics. I spent many years working in the automotive field, and yes, I was on a first name basis with the factory engineers.
 
We get it Bob. You're an engineer. Smarter than anyone else on every subject. Yes, I've dealt with many engineers in business and personal life. Some are book smart, but in real life, some couldn't pour pi$$ out of a boot with the instructions written on the heel.

No need to try to baffle me with BS about how your Escalade electronics. I spent many years working in the automotive field, and yes, I was on a first name basis with the factory engineers.
Not smarter....maybe just more knowledgeable......On the contrary.....i have and are totally aware of how to "pour piss out of a boot"....name calling and chastising is SO childish...so.....why don't you enlighten us with your acumen, "while working in the automotive field".....which manufacturer (Chrysler, GM, Ford, BMW, M-B, VW, etc ) did you work for, doing what and a few of the factory engineers (what dicipline...mechanical, power transmission, aerodynamics, testing, engine design, emissions, computer development and system programming, etc.) .... I may know the same people....like Tom Hoover for example ......tell us your story.....
BOB RENTON
 
Check out My Carburetor Journey thread. I went on tinkering til I found max top and bottom in the same carb.
My Carburetor journey.
Here if you want to test something really fun, it is the spreadbore way you should try out. :thumbsup:
For ex an 850 Thermoquad with those really small triple stack boosters that gives you tons of low end response....and then open the huge secondaries.
 
There is more than one way to enjoy this hobby.
It’s great that people like to share their opinions, but some (Renton) have a way of belittling others.

I think it’s fun to try new stuff. If you have the money go for it.

From what I’ve read annular discharge gives better low end performance, but does cost some flow.

I have a Quick Fuel 850 DP with down leg boosters on my 413 with iron heads, it doesn’t seem like too much carb.
 
Auto Transport Service
Back
Top