Re: IML: Edelbrock carb change

["Frederick Joslin" <fljoslin@xxxxxxxx>]

The carb size question is misleading because it depends on the relative size of the primaries vs. the secondaries.

The Thermoquad carbs had very large secondaries relative to the primaries. I believe that they were  typically rated at 895 CFM, but most of that was through the secondaries which are not used in "normal" driving.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Klebert L. Hall"
To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: IML: Edelbrock carb change
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 10:45:56 -0500


> From: "Chris Strohmeyer"
> Subject: IML: Edelbrock Carb change
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've had VERY good luck on my 64 Dart with a new Edelbrock 650cfm about 10
> years ago. I'm considering one for my 67 Imperial 440 to replace the AFB.
> What CFM would you recommend? And do the electric chokes work well and how
> do they work?
> I'd like the car to run as well as possible so if more or less fuel will
> help then fine.

I have an Edelbrock AVS-clone with electric
choke on my '69. Works great, even though the
jets aren't quite right.
All it 'needs' is a 650, which is about what
the factory unit was. If you want more high-rpm
hp, then you might want a bigger carb. If it
has the HP cam or something like it, a 780 is
what's reccommended around these parts.
My understanding is that (for some reason I
don't get) the bigger carbs boost your high-end
horsepower, but hurt your low-end torque (at
least unless you change other stuff too), so
you might not want bigger.

-Kle.
'69 Crown 4DHT -----------------
http://www.imperialclub.com -----------------
This message was sent to you by the Imperial
Mailing List. Please reply to
mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response
will be shared with everyone. Private messages
(and attachments) for the
Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm

Fred Joslin