Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Feb 21, 2008 21:34:17 GMT
|
Also, I think it's worth it to mention that 188 ft/lbs is an amazing amount, and if he were to use the larger carbs to gain more top end, he could probably afford to spare a few ft/lbs down low and still have a car with top notch driveability. I think this sums it up for me. I think its a little unfair to compare HS8's to the the current output of 114 bhp because the reason for stepping up to the HS8's is to INCREASE the power output. If I wanted to stay with the current output but run SU's, then your suggestion of HS6's is valid. I'm sure your going to tell me now that a single HS2 is the best choice! Change of subject.... Balance tubes on manifolds, yes or no? Opinions? |
| |
|
|
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Feb 21, 2008 21:20:55 GMT
|
What's the carbs that currently on it ? Carbs are Stromberg 97's. They are original fitment on mid 30's Ford V8's more commonly known as flathead V8's. |
| |
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Feb 20, 2008 21:41:27 GMT
|
Wow, you are right.. that is MADLY overcarbed. A pair of hs2s will flow enough for a mere 80 horsepower! I have absolutely no idea why they chose blatantly incorrect carbs there. The B16 lump used a pair of HS4s, for exactly the same power output. The nice thing about an SU, is it doesn't mind being overcarbed too much, since the venturi is adjustable. There is still no excuse for it though, since getting SUs in the right size is hardly difficult. And it will kill your throttle response. I suppose volvo didn't care about that.. I have to agree and say your theories seem a little off base. My carbs came off a '64 Austin Princess and I can guarantee you that they came from the factory with nowhere near 200 bhp. Rovers came with HS6's as standard for low range drive-ability and fuel consumption. A popular and common mod is to use the HS8's instead which are close to a bolt on. These are seen to have a limitation of just over 200 bhp when fitted to the Rover, which contradicts your 200 bhp starting point for this size of carb. But to say Volvo got there factory fitment WRONG because your A series chart says otherwise is just plain madness! |
| |
Last Edit: Feb 20, 2008 21:43:26 GMT by Enbloc
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Feb 19, 2008 20:16:35 GMT
|
I got given these inchand 3 quarters off a triumph so I cleaned them rebuilt them amd bunged them on a pinto ,went very well and sounded ace in a suckysuckylongtime way:) Great pics. Is the manifold fabbed from exhaust sections? |
| |
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Feb 19, 2008 17:01:21 GMT
|
Thanks Seth, thats the best explaination I've heard. It kinda makes sense now. This is the plan for them...  They're a lot bigger than whats currently on there. Looking for more power, better drivability and better fuel consumption! (Aren't we all!?!) Having a quick mock up it seems they are not going to fit behind the bonnet! Mmmm.... Racy... |
| |
Last Edit: Feb 19, 2008 17:02:49 GMT by Enbloc
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Feb 19, 2008 14:17:13 GMT
|
I've just got these HS8 SU's. I haven't got a clue about SU's, particuly how the linkage works for both the throttle and the choke. Is the choke the plunger set-up on the bottom? Can I use any linkage or does it have to be specific for HS8's? Is the two different linkages. One for throttle, one for choke? Pictures??  |
| |
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Feb 19, 2008 23:57:59 GMT
|
how trad?  Note the Executioners club plaque  alistairk, Thats mine! I was visiting the gf in Nottingham as she's at uni there. Are you local to there? |
| |
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Jul 27, 2007 20:54:42 GMT
|
wheres the water pump located? Water pump is sitting on the very front of the head. |
| |
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Jul 25, 2007 20:49:57 GMT
|
edit, just noticed that b engine, it has not got a water pump. I would think that number 4 would run a lot hotter that the rest as I would imagine that the water might not circulate that well to the end of the block. Nice theory, but it is flawed! There most certainly is a water pump there and it was no.1 that went bang! |
| |
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
|
|
Its a mystery at the moment what happened. Either the piston was faulty and broke up or it was a nasty case of detonation. On the HAMB, we have a "Monthly Banger Meet". With the start of each month a new thread is started on the goings on with everybody and their pre-war fours. It is dominated by T/A/B engines but have guys running mid-twenties Chevy fours and '32 Plymouth sidevalves at Bonneville! Your build up and modification posts would be great on there. www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=161498 |
| |
|
|
|
|
Enbloc
Part of things
Posts: 398
|
|
Jul 23, 2007 19:07:10 GMT
|
Great thread Jonny. I've joined just to be apart of it! You know its a dangerous game your playing, modifying sidevalves... Heres some pictures of my Model 'B' engine. The BIGGER, older brother to your baby 1172!      This is it in the car running....  ....Unfortunatly it didn't stay running for long...  Oh well, its give me an excuse to build it better.  |
| |
Last Edit: Jul 23, 2007 19:08:29 GMT by Enbloc
|
|
