| |
Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | | Forums66 Topics128,087 Posts1,055,976 Members48,430 | | Most Online14,466 Apr 26th, 2026 | | AD Chevy Trucks Over 6,000 pictures Brad Allen has an awesome collection of Chevrolet factory pictures that he has set up from film strips. Check them out!
Lots of work on Brad's part ... pure enjoyment (and references) for you!
| | THANKS!
For helping keep this great
old truck web site
on the Internet for over 30 years! and not clogged down with Ads! Again, thanks! | |
#29915 05/07/2005 8:04 PM | Joined: Oct 2003 Posts: 94 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Oct 2003 Posts: 94 | I've heard it said that if you want to go with a multi-carb setup on your engine, then the number of carbs should be based on the number of cylinders to get the best performance. For example, a 6 cylinder should have either 3 or 6 carbs.
Has anyone else heard this? If this is true, then why?? I know that there are hundreds if not thousands of dual-carb setups on Chevy 6's out there. Would the addition of a third carb make that much more difference on a 6?
Inquiring minds want to know. Thanks | | |
#29916 05/07/2005 10:41 PM | Joined: Dec 2003 Posts: 2,733 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Dec 2003 Posts: 2,733 | I've never heard that, at least until now. My suspicion is that it is an old wives tale from the days when understanding airflow through the manifold was not a science but more smoke and mirrors. In that scenario one carb for each set of intake ports probably made sense to some. Todays intakes work a lot better and one 390 CFM 4bbl works really well. 3 & 6 carbs have linkage and firewall clearance problems on a lot of cars & trucks and that is a real good reason to avoid them but the WOW factor is lost too. | | |
#29917 05/08/2005 4:02 AM | Joined: Feb 2004 Posts: 29,782 Kettle Custodian (pot stirrer) | | Kettle Custodian (pot stirrer) Joined: Feb 2004 Posts: 29,782 | One man/one vote, and one engine/one carb! Some things are just too good to tinker with! If you want the geewhiz factor, get a 3-carb manifold, and put blind gaskets under the outboard carbs. Then you can have the reliability of a single and the looks of a triple setup. The time, effort amd MONEY you'll spend making a multi-carb setup work, some of the time, can be spent doing more enjoyable things! Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
| | |
#29918 05/08/2005 9:06 PM | Joined: Feb 2005 Posts: 42 Apprentice | | Apprentice Joined: Feb 2005 Posts: 42 | On a practical level, I have to agree with Hotrod Lincoln on this one. My truck has a 283 (2-bbl Rochester, ram horn manifolds, etc), and everything you read about these engines basically boils down to "for street use, put on a 500-600cfm 4-bbl carb, headers if you want, and away you go." So on that basis, I should go find the manifold/carbs/cylinder heads from the 283 "power pack" and call it a day.
On the romantic / inspiration side, though: Every time I open the hood, I see the Rochester 2G sitting there on the motor but, in my head, I see three Stromberg 97s. I have spent too much time looking at tri-power setups on hoodless hot rods to really want anything else, in the long run--even for a driver/hauler truck that will never see a race track. And I think this way even after hearing horror stories from a friend of mine with a Corvair about syncing his carbs. I figure it's only a matter of time! | | |
| |
| |