4g61t.org

Specializing in the 3g CSM
It is currently Thu Apr 18, 2024 8:23 am

All times are UTC-05:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 10:04 am 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 3:21 pm
Posts: 860
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
I love carbs. They're insane black magic voodoo and they shouldn't work...but they do! I know how they work, but it's more fun to ignore the science ;).

I have been seriously thinking of getting my car through the emissions testing, and then swapping to a custom dual carb setup for two years (until testing again).

Please tell me a good reason why this shouldn't happen?

:)

_________________
Early 2000's: 1992 Summit sedan - 14.1 @ 100.9mph w/ 155/80 13s
2012: 1989 Dodge Colt GT Turbo - 14.9 @ 100mph, 10psi/s16G


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 10:56 am 
Offline
CSM Junkie

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:04 am
Posts: 598
Location: Charlotte,NC
No


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 11:27 am 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 3:21 pm
Posts: 860
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
'No' isn't ever a good reason, lol.

It'd be a silly project, but I get bored quickly...
Oh, no boost either. Just carbs :).

_________________
Early 2000's: 1992 Summit sedan - 14.1 @ 100.9mph w/ 155/80 13s
2012: 1989 Dodge Colt GT Turbo - 14.9 @ 100mph, 10psi/s16G


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 11:53 am 
Offline
CSM Junkie

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:04 am
Posts: 598
Location: Charlotte,NC
Quote:
'No' isn't ever a good reason, lol.

It'd be a silly project, but I get bored quickly...
Oh, no boost either. Just carbs :).

Fail


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 2:00 pm 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 3:21 pm
Posts: 860
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
lol, ouch. :).

_________________
Early 2000's: 1992 Summit sedan - 14.1 @ 100.9mph w/ 155/80 13s
2012: 1989 Dodge Colt GT Turbo - 14.9 @ 100mph, 10psi/s16G


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 2:38 pm 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:40 pm
Posts: 667
Location: Indianapolis, IN
ITB's for the WIN!!! At least for the sound.

_________________
Thom
1991 GVR4 1025/2000 (PTE 1200's, 16g, DSMLink v3, gm-maf, eagle/ross, .020 over, 272's, EVO VIII Wheels)
1992 GVR4 866/1000 (getting everything from above)


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 3:06 pm 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 3:21 pm
Posts: 860
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Duals sound like that, except a bit 'wetter'. I had an 83 Rabbit on dual carbs for a while and I couldn't get enough of that sound.

Building a manifold could be fun, even if I don't use it. I've got most of the stuff already, including the DCOE flanges :).

Really though, I get bored and do stupid things to my cars...because it's fun :).

_________________
Early 2000's: 1992 Summit sedan - 14.1 @ 100.9mph w/ 155/80 13s
2012: 1989 Dodge Colt GT Turbo - 14.9 @ 100mph, 10psi/s16G


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 3:42 pm 
Offline
CSM Junkie

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:04 am
Posts: 598
Location: Charlotte,NC
Quote:
Duals sound like that, except a bit 'wetter'. I had an 83 Rabbit on dual carbs for a while and I couldn't get enough of that sound.

Building a manifold could be fun, even if I don't use it. I've got most of the stuff already, including the DCOE flanges :).

[b]Really though, I get bored and do stupid things to my cars...because it's fun [/b]:).

I guess that's all that really matters, just doesn't seem like it would be worth the time and costs


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 4:01 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:21 pm
Posts: 2143
Location: Tucson Az
well to me it would only be useful for a show car for the looks.. deleting the turbo to add the carbs would drop the HP way down. also you need to look at all the other issues you might come across like.. how will it get good/even airflow? will they hit the firewall? fuel return to the tank..carbs dont have this option... lots of lil things like this you need to look into .. now if you built a NT motor for more power and do this it might be kewl. but would cost alot more cause of the build.


either way its a very interesting idea..

Steve

_________________
Steve 89 colt 2.3 stroker stock top end. evo3@20 psi 13.489@99.30mph 3/10 2012
On drag radials.auto trans.launching @ 5 psi and no traction thru 2nd.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2013 1:08 am 
Offline
CSM Junkie

Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 6:27 pm
Posts: 526
Location: Lake in the hills, IL
Why build a NT carb motor? Ill be the positive one and say go for it, :rock: you can always Turbo your Carb, like the big v8 boys do it. :partyman: don't drop the Turbo, keep it & add the carbs....would love to see some pics! TO bad your far, I'd love to help with the welding...

_________________
Speed kills!! Drive a Honda & live forever!


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2013 7:34 am 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 3:21 pm
Posts: 860
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
I'd only go blow-through dual carbs if I could find a proper set of tri-jet Dellortos. Big bucks now, but soooooo worth it.

I gave up the quest for power years ago, so a 100hp (if that) dual carbed NA motor would be fine with me. My rabbit dynoed at 105whp and it was HILARIOUS to drive. That was on a 1.8 8v too. It's fun having 200+whp, but I don't drag race anymore, so there's almost no need for power now. Unless my hobby was collecting speeding tickets, lol.

Still not sure what I'm going to do. This summer is dibbed for working on the Colt, so we'll see what fall brings :).

_________________
Early 2000's: 1992 Summit sedan - 14.1 @ 100.9mph w/ 155/80 13s
2012: 1989 Dodge Colt GT Turbo - 14.9 @ 100mph, 10psi/s16G


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2013 7:38 am 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 3:21 pm
Posts: 860
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Quote:
well to me it would only be useful for a show car for the looks.. deleting the turbo to add the carbs would drop the HP way down. also you need to look at all the other issues you might come across like.. how will it get good/even airflow? will they hit the firewall? fuel return to the tank..carbs dont have this option... lots of lil things like this you need to look into .. now if you built a NT motor for more power and do this it might be kewl. but would cost alot more cause of the build.


either way its a very interesting idea..

Steve
My 83 Rabbit had the same engine layout, intake in the back. The manifold was stubby, and I could only run short horns, but it worked great. As far as return lines, that's easy. Just cap the line in the bay and save it for an eventual return to EFI :). I've got a cabinet full of carb stuff, and balancing/tuning tools, so the setup would be easy. I've even got a couple of bypass FPRs to allow for the stock fuel pump to be used to provide 4 psi of pressure for the carbs, and send the rest back to the tank.

Anyway, still not sure, just thinking out loud to stave off the boredom, lol.

_________________
Early 2000's: 1992 Summit sedan - 14.1 @ 100.9mph w/ 155/80 13s
2012: 1989 Dodge Colt GT Turbo - 14.9 @ 100mph, 10psi/s16G


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 

All times are UTC-05:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited