bigger carbs for better mpg ???!!! - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:11 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: LAKE HAVASU CITY
Age: 22
Posts: 167
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 27
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
bigger carbs for better mpg ???!!!

i have a buddy here in town that has a old bronco with a huge small block in it, and he was saying that whenever he had a big block motor that he could never get a quadrajet to give him good mpg compared to a eddy or afb carb. he was then talking about how with the smaller primaries the qjets choked the motors and he always had to step in it harder to get up to cruising mode.

and also to add, he has a qjet on his 305 monte carlo and gets 20 mpg intown, and 25-27 highway.

and a qjet on his motorhome with a 350 and he gets 10 ish which he said is good ( i know nothing about motor homes )

is this just a tuning issue on his part or are there just certain motors that like certain carbs ? i know everyone says how great a qjet is so im slightly hesitant to lean to one side or another

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:20 PM
How fast is fast enough?
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 28
Posts: 8,673
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 16
Thanked 280 Times in 261 Posts
a Qjet isn't that great, hence they stopped using them on production cars in the 80's. That being said it can be tuned to perform much better or much worse for a given application.

Most carbs can be decent for mileage (none will touch a good EFI setup) but its all in TUNING.

A bigger carb can deliver better mileage than a small one IF the bigger carb is tuned better. If the smaller one is tuned better then it will perform better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-14-2012, 03:49 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: LAKE HAVASU CITY
Age: 22
Posts: 167
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 27
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
truly

thats what i figured.

i actually like the design of my afb more then the quadrajet. ive been out and about and noticed at cruise my afr was super lean, but i was going down hill at like 1000 rpm and although that scared the $h1t out of me, i realized the motor wasnt working at all...

ive been with my gf at the park and changed rods before and or adjusted the mixture screws.

my big ol 1980 suburban with 33 inch tires is getting 8.5 mpg when i was driving 22 miles a day 35 mph tops and a few 25-30 mph zones. at times when im putting at 25-30 mph my afr goes lean in the 15.5-16 afr but as soon as i start going up slight hills it drops to 14 ish.

i know the carb pretty well, and i dont feel the mpg im getting is bad whatsoever. and i bet if i went to a qjet id have the same mpg.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-14-2012, 04:04 PM
poncho62's Avatar
Out of the Loop Moderator
 
Last wiki edit: Streetbeasts links
Last journal entry: at car show
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hanover, Ontario, Canada
Age: 62
Posts: 16,857
Wiki Edits: 5

Thanks: 20
Thanked 246 Times in 200 Posts
Tuned properly, a Qjet will get good mileage because of those tiny primaries....start stomping on it and it will suck gas with the best of them.

The motorhome gets 1/2 the mileage than the Monte Carlo, because it weighs much more and is much less aerodynamic......Lots of factors in mileage
__________________
Ontario Rodders
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 09-14-2012, 04:08 PM
How fast is fast enough?
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 28
Posts: 8,673
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 16
Thanked 280 Times in 261 Posts
AFB (edelbrock) carbs have been shown many times to produce better mileage than quadrajets, BUT it is all in the tuning. The bad thing about edelbrocks is that while the rods, jets, and springs are easy to swap going beyond that gets tricky.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ap72 For This Useful Post:
LEROYDOZOIS (09-14-2012)
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 09-14-2012, 10:54 PM
curtis73's Avatar
Hates: Liver. Loves: Diesel
 
Last wiki edit: How to find cheap parts
Last journal entry: 1999-2001: Getting it on the road
Last photo:
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Age: 40
Posts: 5,128
Wiki Edits: 16

Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ap72 View Post
a Qjet isn't that great, hence they stopped using them on production cars in the 80's.
Ummm.... that was long after everyone else stopped using a carburetor because they couldn't meet EPA and CARB emissions as well as CAFE.

Saying the Qjet "wasn't that great because they stopped using them in 1989" is like saying that the "Camaro wasn't that great because they stopped making them in the 2000's."

The Qjet is a great carb... and I agree with you that tuning is the biggest factor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 09-14-2012, 11:05 PM
Grease_Fever's Avatar
68 Pontrolet
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TN
Posts: 107
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Qjet...Great Carb. (If you can read)

EFI...Better!

How much money you got?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2012, 01:12 AM
vinniekq2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: BC,Canada
Age: 56
Posts: 7,395
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 291
Thanked 707 Times in 682 Posts
Back in the 70s there were a few people that used bigger carbs for better mileage.The thing is,there is a lot more to mileage than carb size.What makes a carb work well or accelerate quickly does not usually apply to better mileage. Holley double pumper carbs are "known" to have poor mileage,why?
Because the guys that use them yard the carbs wfo all the time,because they make power.Power burns fuel. Accelerator pumps toss in a lot of raw fuel to compensate for low intake velocity,double pumpers are self explanatory.
If your fuel/air ratio is correct,you do not change speed,do not go up hills,then your mileage will be about the same with all carbs.Drivers kill most of the mileage with aggressive advance of carb linkage,its all just math and the efficiency of the carb and its systems to circumvent our poor driving skills.Take the accelerator pump out of your carb and your mileage will increase,drive ability will be terrible
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2012, 09:40 AM
spinn's Avatar
It's Madness, They are all Mad
 

Last journal entry: This makes a huge difference
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,346
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 5
Thanked 76 Times in 74 Posts
Qjets are one of the best designs. Avs and AFB are good too. The reason why drivability is better, because when the engine vacuum changes a rod opens or closes more of the jet hole depending on the condition. This maintains velocity. A Holley is really just holes and more throttle dependant. Tunning for some situations that is all you need. A carb responding to the engine vacuumin this manner should be better for more driven conditions.

They all can be tuned to work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2012, 09:50 AM
How fast is fast enough?
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 28
Posts: 8,673
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 16
Thanked 280 Times in 261 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by spinn View Post
Qjets are one of the best designs. Avs and AFB are good too. The reason why drivability is better, because when the engine vacuum changes a rod opens or closes more of the jet hole depending on the condition. This maintains velocity. A Holley is really just holes and more throttle dependant. Tunning for some situations that is all you need. A carb responding to the engine vacuumin this manner should be better for more driven conditions.

They all can be tuned to work.
wtf? either you're hungover, still blitzed, or have never rebuilt/tuned a carb (holley, quadrajet, or afb).

Being its 10:30am on a saturday I'm guessing hungover.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ap72 For This Useful Post:
LEROYDOZOIS (09-15-2012)
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2012, 06:33 PM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 59
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 597 Times in 546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEROYDOZOIS View Post
i have a buddy here in town that has a old bronco with a huge small block in it, and he was saying that whenever he had a big block motor that he could never get a quadrajet to give him good mpg compared to a eddy or afb carb. he was then talking about how with the smaller primaries the qjets choked the motors and he always had to step in it harder to get up to cruising mode.

and also to add, he has a qjet on his 305 monte carlo and gets 20 mpg intown, and 25-27 highway.

and a qjet on his motorhome with a 350 and he gets 10 ish which he said is good ( i know nothing about motor homes )

is this just a tuning issue on his part or are there just certain motors that like certain carbs ? i know everyone says how great a qjet is so im slightly hesitant to lean to one side or another
The small Q-jet primaries that work so well to give good throttle response and good economy in many applications- when used in some other applications- can give less than ideal results.

What your buddy may have going on with the truck that he can't get "good" mileage with using a Q-jet, is likely he's using a carb w/the small primary casting (called the 750 cfm casting as opposed to the 800 cfm casting), along w/the truck being either heavy or geared low- or both.

There needs to be enough airflow to meet the engine's demands, obviously. In the case of the Q-jet (made worse if the carb is a small primary Q-jet), the secondaries on an unmodified Q-jet will begin to open long before the primaries are fully opened. The exact amount varies by application, but suffice to say some Q-jets begin to open their secondaries when the primaries are not open very far at all. So if the amount of airflow/throttle opening needed to drive the truck is more than the primaries can provide, the secondaries will open to fill the need.

If the truck was equipped w/such a carb, the engine will be running off the secondaries much of the time, regardless of how carefully the truck might be driven. And once the secondaries come into play, all bets are off. There will be no 'good' mileage in those cases.

This can be made better by tuning, but there are limits as to what you can expect from the Q-jet design (or ANY carb design for that matter). Regardless of how well it's tuned, if the application is wrong or expectations don't match reality, there can be disappointment at how the carb works as far as economy goes.

In the case of a Carter, etc., most will have larger primaries than a Q-jet. This gives a larger window where the primaries are able to provide enough flow to meet the engine's demands- without the secondaries being needed. In a scenario like that, the larger primary carb may give better economy as I'm sure you can understand.

I believe the Q-jet to be the best production carb readily available for use on a performance vehicle. It was used long after the Carter carbs were discontinued w/the exception of the Q-jet-like Carter Thermoquad, which it outlived as well- just not by as many years as the AFB-type carbs. The marine industry stayed interested in the Carter carbs into at least the '90s, and it was used side-by-side w/the Q-jet. But marine usage has many differences from automotive usage so they really can't be directly compared.

Last edited by cobalt327; 09-15-2012 at 06:41 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Getting bigger Mr.Rustywrench Suspension - Brakes - Steering 3 09-13-2005 07:33 PM
Holley Carbs VS. Edelbrock Carbs. KeithB123 Engine 3 01-12-2004 10:42 PM
Is bigger always better? 345coupe Hotrodders' Lounge 8 11-17-2003 09:59 PM
Is Bigger really Better?? Mrfixmaster Suspension - Brakes - Steering 0 01-12-2003 11:04 AM
Is BIGGER really better???? chevyelc81 Engine 13 11-14-2002 12:18 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.