The previous statement "basically you said the 9635sa was not a good one" caught my eye.
Not trying to steal thunder from one of Jon's older forum messages, I recall:
The 9635sa is a CLONE of the great originally Carter-made 9635s.
They are not the same carburetor.
This also appiles to the 9636sa and 9637sa (Chrysler and Ford respectively).
Carter went out business around 1985 and so began the clones.
In searching for member experiences of the Carter YF (my own curiosity) in other forums and I couldn't help but notice statements that are common with the Stovebolt forum and this discussion. Mainly the Ford Six (240 and 300) and Jeep Six (258) forums. Repeating words like "torque engines", low VE at higher RPMs (compared to V8) and members/owners tending to overcarburate. Please don't shoot the messenger. Sound familiar?
Now back to 1985 when fuel injection started taking business away from the carburetor companies, the dog-eat-dog competition amongst the remaining companies lead to the "Marketing Department". Their goal is to create specifications that snag the average buyer. Fuel injection is superior so why waste money on a "Design Engineering Department" to improve the function of the carburetor. Just clone what was made in the past and find ways to improve manufacturing ROI (make more profit with less cost). The last four sentences are my words but is it not typical of the history of busniesses in the USA?
So the new carburetors made today, regrdless of name branding, are designed with a "vortex" for our dollars (credit card)? Choose carefully.
This 9635sa came with the truck when I bought it in 2015. When Jon mentioned he had great success using a Carter AFB 9400 on his econline's 300, and me not knowing a thing about Carter's, I thought I had a jewel in the rough, but it was just a turd. Before lunch on Friday I did some searching to see what a Carter AFB 9400 may look like, so I could see if mine was worth the effort, and then I read the history of Carter. Once I dug it out, I saw it was different immediately, and then after a quick search of 9635sa, it was clear that AFB in my possession was not worth my time for this engine or any other for that matter. Of course it is way too much carburetor for the modified 292, but as I mentioned previously, it needed to be adjusted nearly once a week. In my case I was not out any money for the turd AFB, and won't be, as it will not see another engine unless I sell it or give it to someone. But it would have to be someone I don't expect to see again, because I wouldn't sell or give a turd to a friend...lol...
Side note, I recently bought a "NEW" quadrajet for my '81 C20, and upon receiving it, it looks great, but it is clear it is not a quadrajet. It may look like one, but I highly doubt it will perform like one, and there won't be replacement parts available, etc, so it is going back. I will take my chance on a rebuilt Rochester. Clones will never be as good as the originals, and it is clear that both clones I have in my possession, the AFB and the Quadrajet, will never come close to being as good as the originals.
Before logging in this morning, I saw someone bought a 9400 AFB on ebay. I guess they are still out there, but very rare, and probably very expensive when they become available.
