The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area The HiPo Shop Dual Carb Issues

I have a 1942 3/4 ton using a 1962 235, with Offy dual carb intake and Fenton headers. It sits in front of a T5, and a modifed OE rear end (now 3.90). I'm having a hell of a time with the dual Carter YF carbs. One runs OK, and the engine idles OK, but the other is popping and sputtering any time it's put under a load. I went through it today and found an issue that I corrected (missing check ball in the pump circuit). That did not correct the problem. Even when these YFs are set up pretty well, they never seem to hold that for very long.

I'd like to ask if anyone has a recomendation for a better choice of carburetors for this dual carb application? I have not been a big fan of the Rochesters that were OE for the 1962 235, and from what I've read, they would dump too much fuel in a dual carb arrangement. Right now I am minimizing my use of the truck for fear of a fire.

There must be a more modern, reliable and smoother running carburetor out there, that I can buy and use as a pair. Either that or, I would appreciate your thoughts about adapting a TBI system to this Offy dual intake or, to a stock intake manifold. I suspect FI would be an improvement but have no experience with FI on these older I6 motors. Any advice or experience with the dual carb setup would be appreciated. Thanks.

Tom

I would install a correct single carb intake manifold on it and enjoy driving the truck without worrying about the carburetor.

If you're serious about fuel injection, look at the Holly Sniper setup for 6 cylinder Mustangs. Of course you'll still need a single carb intake manifold so might as well get one and install a single carb. If you still don't like it, you're just a bolt on part away from fuel injection.

Two of just about any kind of carburetor on an inline six is either one too many, or one not enough. The intake port setup on the stovebolt engine is just begging for three VERY SMALL carburetors. Two YH's on a 235 is WAY too much carburetion, which almost inevitably results in lean surges, backfires, and generally terrible performance anywhere except wide open throttle and high RPM. If you insist on using two carbs, try a couple of Carter W-O carbs that fit the CJ-2 Jeep flathead 4 cylinder engines from WW II and the early 1950's. Those will only be slightly over-carbureted for a 235 engine. I've got a bored ands stroked "261" engine on the drawing board that will approach 300 cubic inches and run three side draft Keihin carbs from a Harley Davidson engine.

For instance: This one's got a broken throttle base casting, but it's only pictured for reference purposes.

www.ebay.com/itm/334754230247?

There are a lot of brand new offshore made "clones" of the W-O carb- - - -"buyer beware!" The quality control probably isn't great on those things!
Jerry

Jerry

Thanks for your input. The 235 I'm using had the Offy dual carb intake on it when I bought it. Thought I'd try to get by with that but, too many issues to make it practical. I do have several OE Chevy I6 intake manifolds, and about 5 Rochester carb cores, on the shelf here. (This was not my first Chevy 6). I will most likely take the best one of those, and convert her back to a single carb.

Another thought I had was to get hold of a two barrel adapter, and try to find a two barrel TBI system to mount. Of course, that would mean some engine management mods but, it may be worth the extra effort.

Thanks again for your advice and comments. I'll follow up after I make the changes.

Tom

Otto

Thanks for your advice. I plan to replace the Offy intake with a stock unit, and go back to single carb for now. I'll research the FI situation for possible use somewhere down the road. Appreciate your help.

BTW, how was thet Storch flight into Italy? I'm sure Mussolini appreciated the lift.

Tom

I would recommend Carter W-1, 483's from '48. They will be expensive to get running but will perform better than anything else. But since you are going back to stock, use the good Carter you have.
With dual carburetors, both absolutely must be identical to run correctly. They must be same model number, jetted the same and adjusted the same, right down to using proper gauges, no guessing, no eye balling, gauge setting. It's a lot of work that must be done right, and the engine must to be in good shape with an ignition system working correctly.

Used in common on a plenum manifold, the carburetors should be relatively small; the OEM for similar but smaller engine is recommended (2 216 carburetors on a 235, 2 X 235 carburetors on a 261, etc.).
However, if each carburetor only feeds a pair of adjacent cylinders (#1 & 2, 3 & 4, 5 & 6) they should be larger than the original carburetor,as much as 3 times the CFM called for in the common CFM calculation (D × VE × RPM ÷ 3,456).
The original Corvette used 3 X Carter YH carburetors, certainly not "very small" with 1½" throttle discs and 1-5∕16" venturi.

At least one person on this board has successfully installed the Holly Sniper system on his truck. It was designed as a bolt on replacement for the Autolite 1100 installed on 170/200/250 inline six Ford engines. It can be used with breaker point ignition or with HEI.

Not so bad going in. Overloaded coming out.

Ghost Rider Don't want to burst your bubble but since this IS the hipo shop where you can do what you want...it is your truck !! My 2 1 barrel 235 runs like a charm summer and winter never cold natured,don't wash my cylinders in gasoline every day,don't fight fuel pumps,liquid carbs or sticky exhaust flaps,no sludge,no black exhaust spots on the driveway,oil stays like new,just use 2 simple forklift propane carbs. You can buy those new on line. Just this morning the neighbors gave me a pile of lpg fuel system parts probably all good. Oh well get you a 1500$ Sniper wonder system .

A single throttle body system (fuel sprayed from a single source) will provide the same mixture distribution as the carburetor on the same manifold.
Since the venturi is no longer relevant, TB air flow can be greater than the original carburetor with the same throttle disc size.

As has been discussed, there is no reliable method to control mixture using port injection; the siamese ports + asymmetrical firing order of cylinders 1 & 2 and 5 & 6 (which are not equal but mirror images of the 240°-480°-240° intake cycles) are not suitable. The siamese but regular 360°-360° # 3 & 4 interval may be better, but not significant.

Downside:
1. $$$
2. learning curve
3. road-side repair is almost impossible, stores don't carry these spares

The ideal setup for an inline six with three ports would be sequential electronic fuel injection timed to fire the injector a little before each intake valve opens. Buick came out with SEFI in 1985 or so on their 3 liter V6. On a stovebolt, only one injector per port would be needed, since the intake valves for the cylinders that share the ports open several degrees of crankshaft rotation apart. Of course, all the common computer inputs would be required- - - -RPM, crankshaft position, camshaft position, throttle opening, manifold vacuum, coolant temp, ambient temp, exhaust gas oxygen, etc. The technology has been around for 40+ years, so programming a controller chip wouldn't be much of a step for any computer geek.

The cost of a limited production run of that type of system for the few stovebolters who might want to run it would probably be outrageous.
Jerry

the intake valves for the cylinders that share the ports open several degrees of crankshaft rotation apart

At the 1-2 and 5-6 ports the intake valve opening interval is alternately 240° - 480° - 240" for 1 pair, and 480° - 240" - 480° for the other pair.
I'm sure it can be done, but IDT such a product is available currently.

The Australian inline six runs fuel injection, maybe you can look into them for ideas.

Ghost - a few thoughts:

(1) Jerry (Hot Rod Lincoln) and panic have both alluded to issues with dual carbs on a 6 cylinder Chevy engine. This is due to the fact that the Stovebolt six has 3 sets of siamesed intake ports. With two carbs, the carbs interfere with each other in trying to feed the center 2 cylinders.

(2) Joe mentioned the Carter W-1 is an excellent choice if you must use 2, and panic mentioned that with a common plenum, the 2 carbs should be smaller than 1 (original). The W-1 is an excellent choice, as the W-1 has a mechanical power system (the YF power system is vacuum). With a vacuum power system, the vacuum springs SHOULD BE NEW, and the compression on all cylinders very close to identical.

(3) Joe also mentioned that if one uses 2 carbs, they must be EXACTLY the same. Same identification number, same calibrations. (You did not specify which YF carbs you are trying to run).

(4) You mentioned quote: "There must be a more modern, reliable and smoother running carburetor out there, that I can buy and use as a pair." (Opinion) there is NO modern single barrel carburetor that is better, or more reliable to run in multiples than the Carter "W" series (the W-1 is an S.A.E. size 2, and the W-0 is an S.A.E. size 1). The YF is excellent in a single carb environment.

(5) (no offense meant) your post requires us to guess. We don't know what carbs you are using, straight or progressive linkage, with or without chokes, and the calibrations. While (1) through (4) above should be considered "food for thought"; ASSUMING both of your carbs are EXACTLY the same, I would suggest interchanging the carbs to see if the issue follows the carb, or stays with the location!

(6) efi has been mentioned; I will make no comments on efi, other than I personally do not like it for a myriad of reasons.

Jon

On SEFI systems, the camshaft position sensor gives the computer a one time signal when the engine is cranked to start the injection sequence. Until the engine is shut down again, it's a matter of programming to keep the injectors pulsing at the correct time, just like ignition. The original GM computers in the 1970's operated at a glacially slow 10 hertz. In the 1980's, Chrysler raised the clock frequency to 90 hertz, which is still a snail's pace compared to cell phones, PC's and other modern devices. Putting a real fuel injection system on a stone age engine like a stovebolt is an interesting concept, but isn't it sort of "lipstick on a pig"? Throttle body injection is a poor substitute for the real thing, which is why the automakers abandoned it about 40 years ago.
Jerry

Guys

Some additional info about this issue.

1. Both of the Carter YF carbs are 788 w/ electric choke.

2. The linkage is symmetric, through a fixed link that is operated by the OE bellcrank on the lower block.

3. I will swap the carb positions this week to confirm that this is not cylinder related.

4. I pulled a stock intake manifold off the shelf and seperated it from the exhaust manifold. I'll have that cleaned and resurfaced to use with a single carb.

I looked into alternative carburetors and found some recommendations for using the Weber DGV, 32/36 on an OE intake manifold, with an adapter. The DGV is a progressive second barrel, so the issue of overcarbing on the low end is reduced, while the fuel required for acceleration and highway speeds is provided by the secondary. I'm told this setup provided excellent performance and driveability. Has anyone had any experience or firsthand knowledge of the Weber DGV on the 235? If so, let me know what you've seen/heard.

Thanks again for your input. I'll update as this fix goes on.

Tom

Ghost - Carter built the 788s as a carburetor with a MANUAL choke!

Obviously, modifications have been made to make it work with an electric choke. Always a question as to what other modifications might have been made.

(Opinion) 2 of the 788s are too large for a 235 unless it has been significantly modified.

Jon.

The nicest thing about beating one's head against a wall with inappropriate modifications is that it feels so good when you stop! The adapter needed to fit the Weber carb to the aftermarket intake manifold dramatically reduces the efficiency of the carburetor. That adapter would need to be several inches tall with a very gradual taper to avoid turbulence that messes with the fuel distribution, which would create serious hood clearance problems.
Jerry

Jerry

I tend to agree with your assessment of the Weber application. Just wondered if anyone had used this carb. The comments I saw elsewhere on the web indicated the Weber was a good fit. The tallest adapter I found thus far was only 2 inches. Probably not enough to address the turbulence issues you mentioned.

Keep in mind that the carb setup on this 235 was "as is" when I bought the motor. I did not buy anything extra for this setup, or do any mods to the motor. I'm simply trying to get the best possible information, before I go out and spend any money on upgrading the fuel system.

Right now, I have the OE manifold up at the shop being cleaned and surfaced. When I get that back, I'll restore the intake to a single YF carb and see how that works out. That should make the carburation more reliable and less problematic. That setup should be fine, and I can drive the truck until I sort out any required upgrades. If it is not, I can then make a decision concerning a new carb and/or manifold.

Based on the input from Carbking, I checked my YF carbs again. Both are 1-788, and the upper section of both were manufactured with an electric choke. If the YF 788 was made as a manual choke only, then he's right about them being modified. That alone may be the reason for the problems with these carbs.

Many thanks to all for your help. I will update as the changes are made.

Tom

If you have access to a good welder and an equally good machinist, the 2-carb manifold can be altered to accept the Weber progressive carbs without adapters, but it would be an expensive conversion. I'm contemplating doing something similar to a single carb manifold for a highly modified 261 engine, to install a 2G series Rochester 2 barrel, or a similarly sized Stromberg carburetor. That engine will be close to 300 cubic inches, and Carb King and I believe a Stromberg 2 barrel for a Chrysler Corp. 318 would be a good fit. The cylinder head port design limits the max airflow, so putting high CFM carburetors on a stovebolt engine doesn't make good nonsense anyway.
Jerry

Well ... I pulled that spare OE intake manifold off the shelf and found that the part number comes back as 36-37 for the 216, so I can't use it.

After some additional research, I'm leaning towards the Clifford 6=8 manifold, and the weber DGV progressive 2 barrel carb. This is primarily because it seems that combination would be less problematic than the Offenhauser 3 X 1 barrel setup.

At one time I owned a 1960 Mercedes Benz 190SL. The four cylinder 1.9 liter motor was equipped with two Solex PHH 44 two barrel carbs. They were a challenge to keep in tune and balanced. While this was primarily because the car was not driven regularly, the result is that I would like to avoid recreating that situation in this truck.

If anyone has experience using the Clifford 6=8 manifold, or you have knowledge of someone using that manifold, your insights would be appreciated.

Tom

Tom - I have not used the Clifford manifold; I always bought Offys (they fit without modification).

With no offense meant, I would question the use of the progressive two-barrel Weber.

Should you go that way, I hope you have a local shop that stocks every spare part Weber ever made, the equipment to tune it, and the knowledge to use the equipment.

I personally would (and I realize most will question my stating this, after many of the posts I have made ) rather have the Rochester!

About 35 years ago, I spent more than $1500. TRYING to make a Weber IDA (2-barre) run as well as a $5. Ford Autolite 2100 on a 2000 Ford. It could not be done, by me or the regional Weber gurus.

Jon

Jon

Thanks for your advice, experience and expertise. I'm still researching this issue, and have not yet made any decisions as to which way to go. My concern with going to the 3 X 1 Offenhauser intake is twofold. First I'm concerned with the need for acquiring, tweaking, maintaining and balancing three carbs. Second, there is the expense of buying the replacement components. Obviously the carbs would need to be smaller, yet configured to mount on the Offy intake. That means finding the right carbs, adapters, linkage fabrication, and other expenses

The advantages of the Clifford intake appear to be; 1) only one carburetor, so a consistent atomization and mixture across the three intake chambers, 2) a manifold designed to operate with this motor and carburetor, 3) The Clifford Engineering guys will jet and adjust the Weber 38/38 carb specifically for the chevy 235, 4) a unified acquisition cost with all adapters and accessories provided. 5) The Weber 38/38 is readily available from Weber, and as a clone from several other manufacturers.

I did look into your suggestion to use the Carter W1. That carb is not readily available, except as a poor condition core. The cost to have them rebuilt is now some $250 each, online. I would rather do away with the Offy 2 X 1 intake. If I go to a 3 X 1 Offy intake, that cost would be trippled, and I stilll have the challenge of balancing, tuning, and maintaining three carbs.

The Rochester has never been one of my favorite carburetors. IMO, they are too problematic, leaky, temperamental, and unreliable. Since I'm now forced to buy another manifold regardless, I think it's best to find something that was designed to work as a system with the carb. So my decision is basically; Do I want to go back to a 1962 stock intake and carb, or do I want to go with something different?

I intend to call the folks at Clifford this coming week to ask some questions about their package for the Chevy 235. If you feel there is something I should be asking, just let me know, and I'll include that in my discussion with Clifford Engineering.

Thanks again for your help with this issue. Have a great weekend.

Tom

In a 1955 issue of Hot Rod Magazine, they did an article on McGurk's dyno test of a 261 in various stage of tune -- stock, twin carbs, triple carbs, Corvette dual exhaust, milled head, hot cam, hotter cam, etc. Running a dyno test after each change.

After a point -- that being two carbs, dual exhaust, a cam slightly hotter than a 55 261, and increased compression -- they determined that for a streetable engine in a pickup, less is more. If you wanted more, bore it an eighth. In that guise, it put out more HP than a stock 265 and considerably more torque at usable RPM, around 2500. The wilder versions put out as much as 176 HP at 4800 RPM and were nasty to drive in town.

Look up the article. It's very enlightening.

I am very interested in said article. You know someplace that has the old archives available?

I downloaded it from the web and didn't keep track of where I got it from. I suppose you could do a search on McGurk and Hot Rod Magazine.

Buoymaker: Yes the small block was a great improvement over the stovebolt, no arguments there. I had a 56 Bel Air with 265 and powerglide which was a snappy ride if not a powerhouse. Then a little later I had a 57 Bel Air with a power pack 283 and powerglide which is one of those cars I never should have sold. It WAS a powerhouse by the standards of the day. I used to borrow a 57 Vette from a friend to impress my girl sometimes and it wasn't much faster than the Bel Air. Also a 283.

I also wrenched on two nearly identical school buses, same size, one powered by a 283 truck engine and one by a 261 I6. The 261 wasn't much slower but was more pleasant to drive (less shifting) and consistently used less gas. Different driver, of course and also different route. 4-speeds with 2-speed axles in both.

Panic

Apparently I was not clear.

Agree that the 38/38 is not progressive. I was referring to the Weber 32/38 as a progressive carb. I think you misunderstood my intent concerning the Webers. I did not intend to use two weber carbs. My plan was to replace both carb and intake manifold, and use only one weber carb. The option there would be either one of the 38/38 or one of the 32/38, not two of either.

With respect to the Offenhauser manifold, I was referring to the common log version. My concern was that with three of any carburetor, the 235 could be unevenly fueled by variations in the adjustments, balancing or wear over time, of the multiple carbs.

Tom

Tommy

Thanks. I'll look into that old article from Hot Rod.

I have considered going to a 265 or 283 in this truck. After all, it's not as though the truck was totally original. The thing is, It's not that I want "more power". I simply want a reliable fuel system. I would also like to avoid modifications to the drivetrain mounting system. Something that I have been able to do thus far. Basically, I still have everything that would be needed to return this truck to a 1942, as built, configuration, through bolt on changes. I'm going to try to stick to that commitment for the present.

Tom

Guys

We had some really nice weather here today so I pulled both Carter YF carbs off the 235. What I found was that the forward carb was forged with A 788 on the base section (throttle plate area), and the aft carb was forged with C 788. I don't know what the differences are between these two throttle sections but, there has to be something significant.

I pulled a spare Carter YF off the shelf and swapped the base section on the aft carb for the one on the spare. The truck now runs quite well, idles as it should, and the hesitation, sputtering, popping, and backfires and now mostly resolved. I do get some small amount of pop and sputter but only on hard acceleration. Something I do not do as a habit.

If anyone has any insight concerning the differences between the A 788 and the C 788 base section, I'd be interested in your thoughts on this.

Thanks to all who took their time to help me work through this problem. If I do decide to upgrade the fuel system at some point, I'll post that update on this thread. Best Regards,

Tom

That aft carb may have had a worn throttle shaft that was leaking more air around it than the one on the replacement base. I'll bet if you'd made vacuum measurements before and after, the before would have had weaker vacuum. That's my story and I'm sticking too it.

Tom - first, happy you now have it running to your satisfaction.

Instead of posting the base numbers, look at the center sections of the carburetors for identification numbers. The identification numbers will be STAMPED, not raised, and may be in two different areas.

The older YF carburetors had the identification number stamped on the edge of the flange of the center casting (bowl) where the bowl meets the lower casting (throttle body).

After a couple of years, Carter changed the identification stamp location to a vertical flat section on the bowl on the end of the casting opposite the fuel tank.

Carter numbers on the YF units will be either 3 or 4 digits followed by the letter "S", POSSIBLY followed by a second letter.

Examples:

788s
788sa
966s
2100s

There were TWO different throttle bodies cast with the 788. The later one superseded the earlier (but Carter wasn't planning on multiple carbs using these). I probably have the drawings for each, but they are on microfilm, and no offense, I don't wish to spend the time looking. Microfilm is a great archive, but a lousy useable format!

Two questions that I would ask, the answers MAY (or may not) improve the current state of tune.

(1) Have you synchronized the two carburetors (absolutely required for best results)?
(2) When you rebuilt the two carbs, were the internal vacuum springs replaced (NEW) with identical springs?

One reason I preach W-1's in a multi-carb environment is the fact that the W-1 has a mechanical power system. The YF has a vacuum power system. Different springs, fatigued springs, or the lack of synchronization can cause the YF's to meter at different calibrations, even if all else is the same. Also true of the Rochester B's.

I understand your concern for reliability. Some company (and I don't remember which one) has the motto "do it once, do it right".

Get your carbs set up correctly, and then FORGET ABOUT THEM!

The Carters on my truck (a non-Chevy V-8) performed flawlessly and were not touched for 18 years! Only after the truck sat in a shop installing factory A/C and upholstery keeping the truck inoperative for 18 months did the carbs require attention.

Again, congratulations on getting the driveability to your satisfaction.

Jon

Kevin

I thought of the potential for a vacuum leak when I was running through the problem last week. I checked the throttle shaft during that investigation. Actually, the throttle shaft on the base section that I removed was slightly tighter than the replacement. This is why I believe there was some defect or damage internally, within the original carb base section (letter C). Either that or, the carb base that is lettered with a C, is not intended for the 235 with manual trans.

I have a good carb vacuum balancer, and the throats were perfectly balanced when this problem began. I checked them again during my troubleshooting and they were still balanced. My suspicion is that some passageway was either blocked or, was open when not needed for this application. As I do not know what the differences are between the base that is lettered with an A, versus the base that is lettered with a C, I can't be sure that they are interchangeable, or of the same design.

I plan to do some research on this issue today, if time allows. I'll report back on what I find.

Tom

https://public.fotki.com/Chevelle350/stovebolt-reading/chevrolet/soup-that-chev-hot.html

Click the image to go on to the next page.


I've collected a bunch of cool old Stovebolt and GMC inline related stuff, shared here: https://public.fotki.com/Chevelle350/stovebolt-reading/

Jon

Appreciate your help and advice with this problem. I'll check the stamped numbers on the carb bodies for a match. I'll also double check the balance and linkage, to make sure there are no issues. I did not replace springs when I went through these carbs. I'll look into that issue as well.

I agree with your opinion concerning W1 vs. YF. I'd make this change if the W1s were more readily available. I probably should remove both carbs and double check the jetting as well. If they are jetted differently, that would also be an area for concern.

I'll post again when I've had time to complete these inspections. Have a great day.

Tom

Chevy could have saved themselves a lot of time and effort if they had just made a better copy of the inline six truck engine Austin-Healey used for a couple of decades in their sporty cars. They even managed to design two and three carburetor systems that worked, and used a 4 speed transmission with overdrive on 3rd. and 4th. gear instead of dropping an ugly fiberglass body on a 53 Bel-Air sedan frame and suspension and calling it a "sports car"!
Jerry

Tom - I don't understand why you are having a problem finding these?????

The primary reason I started looking at the 483s/574s as aftermarket units 50 years ago is the fact they were, and still are, as common as dirt!!! (or course, dirt is more expensive than it used to be ).

At any given time, there are several cores on Ebay, I probably have 50 cores myself, as in a different lifetime, I had time to rebuild them.

As well as the carbs being common, so are parts; ever single component of the 483s/574s (with the exception of the choke cable bracket) is readily available. The brackets can be found with some looking. I cannot think of a SINGLE one-barrel carburetor ever made that has such a ready supply of parts!

Only after I starting doing lots of these, did their other attributes for multiple set-ups (leather accelerator pump, mechanical power system, and tuneability) become apparant. And of course, I have tried to use Carters for the last 60 plus years due to their metering rod technology.

Jon

FWIW ... several observations from a non-expert.

1. Ghost-rider -- I do not know everyone personally who uses this site, but I *do* know Jerry personally and consider him one of my very closest friends. One of the things about Jerry I admire most (aside from his sheer knowledge) is that I *never* have to wonder what he thinks about something. He will give it to you straight (whether you ask him or not ... ) He personally supervised the rebuilding of my 261 (did a lot of the work himself in front of us). Most of my ensuing comments are based on my 4 years' experience living with that engine in my '49 1-ton. Jon (CarbKing) I have gotten to know over the many years of his participation in growing this site. I consider him *the* foremost authority on carburetors. The info and advice they offer freely is absolutely gold-plated. You will not get better advice. Anywhere. From *anyone.*

2. I do not understand any of the negativity regarding the Rochester carb. Admittedly, my Rochester experience and knowledge is based on two carbs... My carb has been performing flawlessly on my 261 (pushing a stock SM-420 and an HO-72 rear axle with a 4.10 ratio). My truck keeps up in traffic light traffic and will cruise the Interstate all day long at 65 MPH. Since Jerry rebuilt it on my workbench and we reinstalled it on my engine 4 years ago. I have not touched it since. Admittedly, I have to squirt a little fuel into it to start the truck if the truck isn't run for a couple of weeks. But that's life with an old truck. Some people hate these carbs, others love them. I am neither a hater or a lover -- mine works, I don't think about it.

3. I once messed with dual Webers on one of my VWs (a Type 2). It was truly a miserable experience. I never got them right. I gave up and went back to a single Solex and lived Happily ever after.

4. Over the years, I have watched a lot of guys come and go trying to do things that they are advised not to do. They seem to be looking for validation rather than useable advice. The ones who go against the advice of people like Jerry and Jon (and George and Evan and a host of other experts who grace this site). The ones who plunge ahead against advice ... a *very* few of them might return at some point to admit that they should have listened to the advice. Most of them disappear and never return. They are probably afraid to tell us, after a lot of wasted time and money. You'd think that if they persevered and succeeded, they'd want to come back and tell us about it. I wish they would. They never do. Which leads me to conclude they failed, probably gave up on their project and may have even sold it at a loss just to get away from their dismal failure. An overstatement? Perhaps, but it's not been disproven yet

Bottom line: I like the "Less is more" approach. Sometimes, the best approach, as Jerry has said before (despite his well-known disdain for "engineers") is to not attempt to out think the original engineers. They got it pretty darn right out of the box. We mess with it at our own peril....

Food for thought ...

Thanks,
John

Ghost Rider You ask for any recommendation of a better carb choice in your first post. I have 2 set-ups of dual carbs with fenton split that start,run,work fine ,no choke,no fuel pump,no heat riser,never cold natured. I assume that here in the hipo shop it would be OK to mention this propane outfit to you. It's all I use in my AD trucks. They mentioned butting your head against the wall and how good it feels when you stop ! Shish buy one of those sniper outfits for 1500$ my .02 cents. Welp gonna go fire-up and truck ...not fight it all day!!

Jon I'm wearing my armor so it's safe to throw rocks at me. I get where Tom is coming from.

Tom:
"I agree with your opinion concerning W1 vs. YF. I'd make this change if the W1s were more readily available."
Jon:
"As well as the carbs being common, so are parts; ever single component of the 483s/574s (with the exception of the choke cable bracket) is readily available."

I was curious so I started looking specifically for 483s/574s to see what I could find as far as good used carburetors. Disappointing. None.
It looks like the rebuild/resell hounds are hoovering them up.
Added to the dilemma, I can only think of one rebuild service I trust and he is a Stovebolt member.

Search results (for examples only):

ebay USCARBURETORS, $399.99 w/ $17.50 Standard Shipping
https://www.ebay.com/itm/403626436106
The base has been machined.

ebay CARBS6V4O, $1,999.99 free ship
https://www.ebay.com/itm/183558809560
No pictures

Classic Parts rebuild service , $279.95 + $125 core + shipping
https://www.classicparts.com/1949-Carburetor-Rebuilt-Carter-W1-216/productinfo/81-017

Chevs of the 40s rebuild service, $340.50 ($150.00 included in the price) + shipping
https://www.chevsofthe40s.com/detail/10646/Chevrolet_Carburetor_Carter_W1.html

I did not try posting for W-1 483s/574s carburetors in the Swap Meet mainly because I'm not actually buying.