Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

4bbl carb

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
    #1

    4bbl carb

    Is throwing a 4bbl carb on my Lincoln going to be worth the loss of mileage for the performance I gain? What CFM should I go for also if I do?
    Tags: 600cfm
    #2
    why would it lose mpg?

    Comment

      #3
      Use a vacuum secondary carb.
      1984 CV tudor 351W, 4bbl, 5-speed best time in the 1/8 8.39 at 80 with 1.80 60ft time.
      2006 P71, 1988 Bronco II, 1986 Baby LTD(5.0 & T5 swap in progress), 1976 16' Hobie Cat, 12' AquaFinn
      http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2651997 UPDATED 20100826
      sigpic

      Comment

        #4
        stock 351? I wouldn't go over a 600 cfm carb, probably 500-550 should do fine. The mid 80s 351 4bbl trucks actually had a 390 cfm carb on them.

        Keep out of the secondaries and it won't cost you any fuel economy if the carb is tuned correctly.
        86 Lincoln Town Car (Galactica).
        5.0 HO, CompCams XE258,Scorpion 1.72 roller rockers, 3.55 K code rear, tow package, BHPerformance ported E7 heads, Tmoss Explorer intake, 65mm throttle body, Hedman 1 5/8" headers, 2.5" dual exhaust, ASP underdrive pulley

        91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC grandpa spec white and cranberry

        1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

        Originally posted by phayzer5
        I drive a Lincoln. I can't be bothered to shift like the peasants and rabble rousers

        Everything looks like voodoo if you don't understand how it works

        Comment

          #5
          what motor?

          a 670 street avenger would probably be a good choice

          Comment

            #6
            Originally posted by gadget73 View Post
            stock 351? I wouldn't go over a 600 cfm carb, probably 500-550 should do fine. The mid 80s 351 4bbl trucks actually had a 390 cfm carb on them.
            Pray to God that a certain someone doesn't see this.

            I'd skip Edelbrock's offerings, and grab a Holley. Or, if you have the money, and can find one, a BG 525 Road Demon.
            Last edited by Guest; 03-06-2010, 06:08 PM.

            Comment

              #7
              Originally posted by jayh View Post
              why would it lose mpg?
              I thought the whole point of having 4bbls was to allow more gas and air to be injected.

              engines a 351W

              edit: nvm I understand the fuel economy part.

              Comment

                #8
                Yeah a stock 351 with between a 500-600 cfm vac. secondary carb will do you just fine. I myself like edelbrock cabs just because of the tuning simplicity. You can get more out of a holley if you all ways want to mess with it. But that might just be the experience I've had with them.
                1984 CV tudor 351W, 4bbl, 5-speed best time in the 1/8 8.39 at 80 with 1.80 60ft time.
                2006 P71, 1988 Bronco II, 1986 Baby LTD(5.0 & T5 swap in progress), 1976 16' Hobie Cat, 12' AquaFinn
                http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2651997 UPDATED 20100826
                sigpic

                Comment

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Pesty351 View Post
                  Yeah a stock 351 with between a 500-600 cfm vac. secondary carb will do you just fine. I myself like edelbrock cabs just because of the tuning simplicity. You can get more out of a holley if you all ways want to mess with it. But that might just be the experience I've had with them.
                  Edelbrock bad! Holley smash Edelbrock!

                  Comment

                    #10
                    I had a feeling you wouldn't like that.:cowboy:
                    1984 CV tudor 351W, 4bbl, 5-speed best time in the 1/8 8.39 at 80 with 1.80 60ft time.
                    2006 P71, 1988 Bronco II, 1986 Baby LTD(5.0 & T5 swap in progress), 1976 16' Hobie Cat, 12' AquaFinn
                    http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2651997 UPDATED 20100826
                    sigpic

                    Comment

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Pesty351 View Post
                      I had a feeling you wouldn't like that.:cowboy:
                      Well, if you have an Edelbrock, run it.

                      Comment

                        #12
                        edelbrock wont be bad on a stock 351, I would go 750 in an edelbrock though

                        Comment

                          #13
                          aiiiiight. If i want to go over 600cfm i guess it wouldnt make a difference unless i got new heads and all that, am i correct?

                          Comment

                            #14
                            Originally posted by jayh View Post
                            edelbrock wont be bad on a stock 351, I would go 750 in an edelbrock though
                            You trying to drown it?
                            1984 CV tudor 351W, 4bbl, 5-speed best time in the 1/8 8.39 at 80 with 1.80 60ft time.
                            2006 P71, 1988 Bronco II, 1986 Baby LTD(5.0 & T5 swap in progress), 1976 16' Hobie Cat, 12' AquaFinn
                            http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2651997 UPDATED 20100826
                            sigpic

                            Comment

                              #15
                              imho its stupid to run anything under 600cfm

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X