The same mathematics and physics apply to V-8's.
2 x 4 or 4 x 2 run the best of the more common set-ups
Then 2 x 2
Then a single four, followed by a single two.
3 x 2 bring up the rear, unless it would be 6 x 2.
I have also (rarely) seen 8 x 2 and 3 x 4.
All of the above assume that carburetors for any configuration are properly selected (check the second line in my signature block).
Many internet pixels have been disturbed (unjustly, they should have left to sleep)
about hot rod carburetion.
One of the most interesting comments (at least to me) is: "the hot rodders in Southern California starting using 3 x 2 because their were no single carburetors flowing sufficient air and fuel".
How big does the carburetor need to be?????
Considering Stromberg alone (the hotrodders used Stromberg 97's): by 1934 Stromberg had a production automobile 2-barrel of more than 500 CFM capable of feeding a racing Duesenberg 420 CID engine with a supercharger; and if you consider aircraft engines, Stromberg had a four-barrel carburetor as early as 1932. So did the automobile carb engineers for Stromberg not know about the four barrel aircraft carburetor? Must be the old left-brain right-brain thingy, as the same engineers designed BOTH systems (I have the Stromberg records to prove this).
The reason the small Stromberg 97 was chosen was cost. The junkyards were full of wrecked Ford's with V-8's and Stromberg 97 carbs. Many of the hotrodders were long on talent, and short on money! As these carbs were too small, various manifold manufacturers designed 2, 3, and 4 carburetor manifolds.
And as far as the 2 x 4 or 4 x 2 vs the 3 x 2; or the 3 x 2 vs a single 4-barrel: Pontiac paid Carter to sabotage the AFB so the standard 4-barrel GTO engine would not outrun the more expensive tripower engine. Hint: if you like Carter AFB carbs, take a look at the various hot idle compensators used in different applications, both functional and dummy.
EDIT - Spartan since you pictured a six deuce manifold, here is one with carburetors:
Log 6x2 setupJon.
