View Poll Results: What did you think of the article?
Very informative, was a great help in choosing a carb.



5
29.41%
Good job, even tho I don't need it. Go sacrafice a chicken or something to celebrate.



7
41.18%
Not bad, but you didn't tell anyone anything they didn't already know. Kinda pointless.



0
0%
Good concept but its just badly written. Rewrite it.



1
5.88%
Too vauge and basic, not really helpful in narrowing down anything.



2
11.76%
Whats is a carberatur anyway?



1
5.88%
soooo...where do I put my injecters on that thing?



0
0%
Who cares...my TBI will beat any of them anyway.



1
5.88%
Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll
POLL: Opinion on new carb selection tech article.
POLL: Opinion on new carb selection tech article.
I got bored a few weeks ago and cranked it out. There seemed to be an abundance of the same questions, so I thought I would write it to get people some basic info. I tried to keep it as neutral as possible. Lemmie know what you think.
https://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/tech/pickacarb.shtml
https://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/tech/pickacarb.shtml
Last edited by Jester; Feb 13, 2002 at 03:03 PM.
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 43,187
Likes: 43
From: Littleton, CO USA
Car: 82 Berlinetta/57 Bel Air
Engine: L92/LQ4 (both w/4" stroke)
Transmission: 4L80E/4L80E
Axle/Gears: 12B-3.73/9"-3.89
Pretty good, I'd say. The newly emerging Demon crowd will feel under-represented, though. I know a local musclecar builder/restorer/tuner that would beg to differ on your "pretty much exactly equal" performance statement - and he's been a Holley fan for years.
Supreme Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
From: Hillsborough, NJ
Car: 1990 IROC
Engine: L98
Transmission: TH700-R4
Jester, good article. it summed up just about every carb and every advantage/disadvantage. i must say, i never regarded the edelbrocks as poor performers, but hey, everyone has their tastes 
ps. why would you need mech. secondaries on a car with a 3000 stall? wouldn't vac. secondaries work fine?

ps. why would you need mech. secondaries on a car with a 3000 stall? wouldn't vac. secondaries work fine?
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 602
Likes: 0
From: St.Charles, MO/ Edwardsville, IL
Car: '03 S-10/ '87 Trans Am
Engine: mild 350
Transmission: TH350
Originally posted by curt86iroc
Jester, good article. it summed up just about every carb and every advantage/disadvantage. i must say, i never regarded the edelbrocks as poor performers, but hey, everyone has their tastes
ps. why would you need mech. secondaries on a car with a 3000 stall? wouldn't vac. secondaries work fine?
Jester, good article. it summed up just about every carb and every advantage/disadvantage. i must say, i never regarded the edelbrocks as poor performers, but hey, everyone has their tastes

ps. why would you need mech. secondaries on a car with a 3000 stall? wouldn't vac. secondaries work fine?
As far as Edelbrock's, I think they deserve more credit than you give them. You make it almost sound like they are worse for your car then keeping the stock Q.
-Matt
Supreme Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,974
Likes: 0
From: Pueblo Co
Car: 1989 C4
Engine: L98
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 307
"Good job, even tho I don't need it. Go sacrafice a chicken or something to celebrate."
Even if I totally agreed I would have selected this one.
BTW I still want you to come up here and tune a 750 CFM carb @ 4800ft above sea level on a SBC.
Even if I totally agreed I would have selected this one.
BTW I still want you to come up here and tune a 750 CFM carb @ 4800ft above sea level on a SBC.
Trending Topics
Originally posted by Flash84Z28
As far as Edelbrock's, . You make it almost sound like they are worse for your car then keeping the stock Q.
-Matt
As far as Edelbrock's, . You make it almost sound like they are worse for your car then keeping the stock Q.
-Matt
Originally posted by Apeiron
Yeah, doesn't seem to be very neutral to me.
Yeah, doesn't seem to be very neutral to me.
lol..well I really wanted to write something along the lines of "edelcrocks suck. You would be much better off keeping the stock carb. Don;t even consider these POS's, or anything else from that company." I think I kept it very neutral considering.
Seriously..I would rather have a Q-jet than an Edelcrap....hands down. A non CC version one anyway...the CC ones are kinda a tough call....
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 43,187
Likes: 43
From: Littleton, CO USA
Car: 82 Berlinetta/57 Bel Air
Engine: L92/LQ4 (both w/4" stroke)
Transmission: 4L80E/4L80E
Axle/Gears: 12B-3.73/9"-3.89
Originally posted by Jester
Seriously..I would rather have a Q-jet than an Edelcrap....hands down. A non CC version one anyway...the CC ones are kinda a tough call....
Seriously..I would rather have a Q-jet than an Edelcrap....hands down. A non CC version one anyway...the CC ones are kinda a tough call....
And I don't have my tongue in my cheek.
And I've got 2 Edelbrock q-jets (that are supposed to be the best non-CC q-jets ever made).
Ok guys, i've got this CC Q-jet sitting in my garage. I took it off of an 305 monte ss I had. IS This carb going to work with out the computer? This is probably a stupid question, I just haven't bothered trying the carb with out the computer yet.
Moderator
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 20,981
Likes: 11
From: Mercedes Norte, Heredia, Costa Rica
Car: 1984 Z28 Hardtop
Engine: 383 Carb
Transmission: 4L60
Axle/Gears: 3.54 Dana 44
Originally posted by Jester
lol..well I really wanted to write something along the lines of "edelcrocks suck. You would be much better off keeping the stock carb. Don;t even consider these POS's, or anything else from that company." I think I kept it very neutral considering.
lol..well I really wanted to write something along the lines of "edelcrocks suck. You would be much better off keeping the stock carb. Don;t even consider these POS's, or anything else from that company." I think I kept it very neutral considering.

Being less than perfectly objective isn't that bad I suppose, but it would help if you came clean in the article about your personal vendetta against Edelbrock.
Supreme Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,238
Likes: 4
From: Calgary, Alberta, Republic of Western Canada
Car: 1986 Sport Coupé
Engine: 305-4v
Transmission: 700R4 and TransGo2
Originally posted by Jester
yeah B&M sucks too, altho I don't think quite as bad as Edelcrap. TCI sucks worse.
yeah B&M sucks too, altho I don't think quite as bad as Edelcrap. TCI sucks worse.

Now you're out of the closet--exposed, as it were!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post




