The Stovebolt.com Forums Home | Tech Tips | Gallery | FAQ | Events | Features | Search
Help is a click away!

VEHICLE
INFORMATION
KITS


at the

GM Heritage Center
All the details are here.

Searching the Site - a click away
click here to search
New here ??? Where to start?
Click on image for the lowdown. Where do I go around here?
====
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 80 guests, and 1 robot.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums66
Topics128,049
Posts1,055,741
Members48,426
Most Online14,466
Apr 26th, 2026
Step-by-step instructions for pictures in the forums
Brad Allen's photos

AD Chevy Trucks

Pictures galore
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!

Big Thanks!

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!

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#47751 07/16/2005 12:20 AM
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 22
P
Junior Member
Junior Member
P Offline
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 22
I'm in the process of deciding on the carb set-up for my 302 that will go in my '52 Chevy 1-ton. I have the original manifold that fits the stock Holley AA-1 and a mil. manifold that has small 4-bolt pattern. I have split exhaust and eventually plan to run a Clark 280VO (0.8 OD) driving a 4.11/4.10 rear end. This mean I'll never be running the engine up higher than about 3600 rpm. The engine is stock except the cam is a Performance 254S grind from Delta Camshaft. I'm looking for reasonably good fuel efficiency without losing low-end torque and hauling capacity. The options I've been considering are:
1. Stock AA-1.
2. Dual AA-1s with one set up as a mechanical-progressive secondary.
3. Progressive two-barrel; Carter/Weber or Holley/Weber.
4. A small 4-barrel with smallish primaries and bigger secondaries.

I would appreciate comments on the pro's and con's these options as well as on vacuum vs mechanical-progressive secondaries. On-line guides seem to agree that vacuum secondaries are best for automatic transmissions, but that's not an issue here.

Thanks

#47752 07/17/2005 12:17 AM
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,773
F
'Bolter
'Bolter
F Offline
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,773
Vacuum secondaries are usually better for economy, they don't dump as big of a fuel load when you hit the throttle.

Carb choice can be a nightmare. A 500 4 bbl seems to be a popular choice for the big sixes, but it is a little too big. I would lean toward dual carbs. A friend has dual Holley/Webers on his 261 that he built for performance. They really woke up the engine. Has good bottom end now, and has had it up to 6,000 rpm doing burnouts! Lots of power.

For some good advice on carbs, search this forum for posts by carbking, he's very knowledgable and does carb restoration for a living. He doesn't post here much anymore, but you can learn a lot from what he has written.


Fred
52 3600
69 C-10

Moderated by  Phak1, Woogeroo 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Home | FAQ | Gallery | Tech Tips | Events | Features | Search | Hoo-Ya Shop
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 8.0.0