Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by carbking

  1. Matt - your rebuilding kit is on its way, thank you for the order. A few thoughts: (1) Use two wrenches when removing the fuel line from the carburetor, one to support the fuel valve seat, the other to loosen the line. (Also use two wrenches when you re-install). (2) The kit contains new 0.058 main jets (Stromberg spec). They require a special tool (do not allow your mechanic to use needle-nose pliers). The tool is EASY to make if you do not have one. Keep the old jets; they can always be drilled oversize if necessary for tuning. (3) If the carburetor IS the culprit (not saying it is), my bet would be a previous rebuilder used too small an orifice fuel valve. The Stromberg spec was 0.128. The Grose-Jet WILL NOT supply sufficient fuel for this carburetor. Other "common" Stromberg valves with the same physical dimensions had a 0.099 orifice. (4) Be aware that the Stromberg EE-2, EE-22, EE-23, and EE-25 were what Stromberg called a "thin-wall casting". Never force the fuel valve seat; forcing it can break a very expensive bowl. Questions - 573-392-7378 (9-12, 1-4 Mon-Tues central time). Jon
  2. Some 40 years ago, we submitted some samples of the early zinc alloy to a metallurgist. After testing, his opinion was that the early pot metal (depending on company, basically pre-1930, but different companies changed from about 1930~1938) contained significantly more lead than the later zinc alloy. And the abundance of the lead is what caused deterioration. Take the above as hearsay; I am NOT a metallurgist. Jon
  3. (Opinion) If the car is to be a "trailer queen", driven (or pushed) ONLY from the trailer to the show-field, shine up the Johnson. If you plan to actually start, and even more, drive, the car; I would highly suggest you install a more reliable carburetor. (Or maybe just hire a 15-year-old to stand on the running board and pour gas into the engine from a leaky boot!) I am probably more paranoid than most concerning this subject; and the paranoia is NOT related to my business. In a previous lifetime (maybe 50 years ago), I lost a friend to a car fire, caused by a leaky carburetor. I have no guilt, I had nothing to do with the carburetor, but I still lost a friend. He was an older gentleman (maybe my age today), and simply could not get out of the car in time. This loss of life WAS preventable! Where there is a hot engine in close proximity to gasoline, there is a potential for fire. There are other reasons for not using some of these early carbs today for drivers, but I will not hyjack the thread. Jon
  4. Wurstfreund - ALL Rochester Quadrajets manufactured before 1970 were the same size, 750 CFM. What is different are linkages and calibrations (fuel jets, air jets, bypasses, metering rods, rod lift, etc.). A really good rule on post-1967 carburetors is to ALWAYS use the correct original carb for the engine. Carburetor gurus with a really complete machine shop can ignore this statement. As far as shipping to Europe (or anywhere else other than the country of origin): There are many really good reasons for a small company NOT to ship outside the country of origin, ESPECIALLY during the pandemic. We do not ship outside the USA, but we have MANY European REPEAT customers that have us ship to a mail drop in the USA, and the package is then forwarded to its destination. Perhaps this would be a solution for you. Jon.
  5. Anyone remember the Chrysler TV ads from the early 1960's where they promoted having (I don't remember exact numbers) about 2000 engineers, and fewer than 15 stylists? Well, their engines/transmissions were bullet-proof, and someone once said beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Jon.
  6. Glenn - unless it was stored in the bottom of a pond for 50 years, heat normally works; soaking very seldom works. A carburetor is a good example of a Galvanic cell (a.k.a. battery). Two dis-similar metals in the presence of a liquid. There is ion flow, creating corrosion between the shaft and the carb body. Heat to maybe 100 degrees less than the melting point of the body will burn the oxygen out of the corrosion molecules, thus reducing the space they occupy. Then penetrating oil will sometimes work. Bloo - while the original Autolite's are scarcer than a 6-fingered poker dealer, Holley made service replacements almost as soon as the Autolites hit the street. My guess would be that any FLAPS could easily obtain a rebuilt Holley. And probably one could be ordered through a Ford dealer. And since the Holley would not have been original, there would be no premium in price. Jon
  7. OK - first of all, I am sold out of the 144/170 carbs, so this is advice only, not an attempt to make a sale. 40 or so years ago, there was a push on demand for the 144/170 carbs to restore the small Rancheros. Add a zero to the price. 30 or so years ago, there was another push on demand for the 144/170 carbs to restore the Econoline vans. Add another zero to the price. The 144/170 carbs are scarcer than those for a K series Mustang (289/271 HP), and priced accordingly. You might be able to swap a complete running 200 CID ENGINE for less than a 144/170 carb! So not sure what your idea of reasonable would be; but take the above into account if someone offers you a genuine 144/170 carb. Again, I am sold out, and have been for 20 years! Jon.
  8. Terry - we have successfully used POR-15 for years. And hundreds of our customers have successfully used the model airplane dope used to coat the fabric wings on flying model airplanes. And hopefully, the fuel you burn is no worse than what we have here in central Missouri Good luck with it. One other comment: Now that the foam float pontoons are available ala carte (from others, we still sell them with rebuilding kits only); a really good insurance policy might be to acquire a "parts" carb identical to the one on one's car to acquire a float arm. Acquire an extra foam float, affix the arm and seal it; and place the now ready to use float in bubble wrap in a small wooden box in the glove compartment. Remember that virtually ALL of the sealed factory floats of the 70's and 80's DID eventually fail. These that are being hand-coated WILL eventually fail. Having a spare could get you home. Marvel was too cheap to use brass floats in all but a hand-full of truck carburetors; and one of many reasons I don't care for the brand. Jon.
  9. The phenolic (foam) floats of O.E. fame were molded. All of the outside surface of the molded float has a hard coating. But, as Bloo mentioned, eventually virtually all of them sank. The aftermarket floats for the older cars are not molded, they are machined from a larger molded block. So where the machining takes place, the hard surface is removed. The manufacturer told me that it didn't matter that the hard surface was gone, each individual cell was closed, and they wouldn't leak. Well, the very first two I sold DID absorb gasoline. AND the one I then tested ALSO absorbed fuel. It took less than 3 weeks! I am not a chemist, and do not pretend to be one. But my guess is that fuel in certain areas is more stressful than others. Maybe there are areas with fuel that will not cause the foam to fail, I don't know. I do know that without sealing, we have had failures. And I can tell you that a customer is not happy hearing "well, the manufacture of the foam says it is not supposed to absorb fuel" when the customer's float HAS absorbed fuel. I would suggest sealing the float once the float arm has been attached. If nothing else, call it an "insurance policy". Jon.
  10. Bloo - we switched to the Nitrophyl because we were unable (at the time, have not tried since) to purchase natural cork. The cork we were, and are, able to purchase is a composite material (ground-up remains from the natural cork used by the "big boys", mixed with a "binder", and pressed into sheets). The binder changes the bouyancy of the cork, AND IT WON'T FLOAT! I certainly agree about brass floats being superior. At one time, there was an aftermarket brass float available to replace the early Marvel floats. I posted a picture on these forums a few weeks ago. But they have not been produced for almost 100 years. And unless I find some more buried in some of my cabinets, I am out! Over the years, we have had 7 different floats reproduced here in the USA. The problem is that the companies (there are 2) that reproduce these floats have a line item minimum of 1000 pieces (IF they still have the original tooling). As for current production CHEAP import brass floats, their quality has been well-documented. I wouldn't give these things away if someone paid me to do so! So how long would it take to sell 1000 Marvel brass floats? Jon.
  11. Terry - the foam floats are SUPPOSED to not absorb fuel, as they are "closed-cellular" in construction. But, used in some concoctions of fuel, they WILL absorb fuel, and sink IF NOT COATED. I am aware of two substances which may be used to coat FLOATS WHICH HAVE NEVER BEEN IN FUEL: (1) POR-15 (2) Model airplane dope used to coat the fabric bodies of model airplanes There are probably others. We have tried lots of different "this one works for me" cure-alls to seal floats which have been in fuel. To date, zero have passed our tests. We suggest to our customers to coat the float AFTER the pontoon has been attached to the float arm. Jon.
  12. Markus - there are considerations, and then the final decision becomes yours. First discussing the early and late 1968 8-430 carbs (7028240 -> 7028248). The only difference in these carbs is that Rochester made a modification to the float to improve fuel control; all calibrations are identical. So from a purely practical standpoint, the 7028248 would be the best carburetor to use. However, if you do not regularly drive in city traffic in temperatures approaching 35 degrees C., then the 7028240 would probably work equally as well. When was the change effected? I do not know. The Rochester documentation only shows early-late, no date or serial numbers. If Buick were as meticulous as Pontiac, then somewhere there is a Buick Service Bulletin that states "effective with serial number xxxxxxxxxxxx Rochester 7028240 was replaced with 7028248". I have a virtually complete set of Pontiac Service Bulletins, but zero Buick Bulletins. There should be 4 additional numbers in the same area as the part number on the carburetor. This is the "date code". These four digits are in the format "jjjy" where jjj are the three digit julian day, and the y is the last digit in the year. Thus a date code of 3657 would decode to the 365th day (December 31st) of 1967. A date code of 0018 would decode to the 1st day of January 1968. If you are building a numbers-matching show vehicle (you state you wish to keep it as original as possible), date codes are important. Conventional wisdom is that the date on accessories such as the carburetor should precede the build date of the vehicle by from two weeks to ten weeks. (If you don't care about matching numbers, then the date code information can be regarded as extra, unnecessary trivia). Where do you get either? Again, I do not know; I am sold out of both, and no longer buying carburetors. You have a third option, but I do not suggest it, merely stating that it is possible. If you can locate someone that is well-versed in the modification of Rochester Quadrajets, the 7028244 you currently have, may, at great expense, be modified to think that it is a 7028248. There would be many expensive parts to be replaced, plus some machine work. Again, this is an option I would not suggest. As far as other options (different brand of carb, etc.), will leave these alone, as all of them will require engineering (modified fuel line, modified air cleaner, etc., etc., etc.). Simply not worth the effort in my opinion for a basically stock engine. Jon.
  13. Kartman did send PM, and the short answer is NO! The 726s in stock form would run EXTREMELY LEAN on the 248 in stock form. Now, if this is going to be duplicate of one of the cars that ran in the old Mexican Road Race in the early 1950's; and one increases compression on the 248, changes to a racing camshaft, changes the ignition system to magneto, fabricates a set of headers, and changes the rear gears. THEN changes the metering rods, vacuum spring, main jets, and air bleeds in the 726s; it would run like a scalded dog ABOVE 2000 RPM! Anyone that would claim they are directly interchangeable either has one they are trying to sell and doesn't care about repeat customers; or they flunked 7th grade physics! The Carter WCD is one of the (opinion) top 3 most reliable, simplistic, easy to work with 2-barrels ever made at any time, any price, or anywhere. Additionally, it is right up on the top, easily seen, thus easily blamed for everything! For decades, I have posted that the older updraft carburetors were "much more reliable than the newer downdrafts"! WHY? Because they are much harder to remove, and someone will actually determine the real problem before tackling the carburetor Why not post the top of that "endless list of ongoing issues"? Perhaps someone on the forums can help you wade through the list. Even if yours does turn out to be not rebuildable, used cores ARE readily available, and reasonable in price. Jon.
  14. From my website: 1968 Buick carburetors 1968 6 250 A/T Rochester MV 7028014 2454 1968 6 250 S/T Rochester MV 7028047 2455 1968 8 350 A/T Rochester QJET 7028244 1820 1968 8 350 A/T Rochester 2-GV 7028140 2456 1968 8 350 S/T Rochester 2-GV 7028141 2457 1968 8 350 S/T Rochester QJET 7028245 1819 1968 8 400 Early A/T Rochester QJET 7028242 1821 1968 8 400 Early S/T Rochester QJET 7028243 1821 1968 8 400 Late A/T Rochester QJET 7028246 1818 1968 8 400 Late S/T Rochester QJET 7028247 1818 1968 8 430 Early A/T Rochester QJET 7028240 1821 1968 8 430 Late A/T Rochester QJET 7028248 1818 Jon.
  15. Matt - before throwing rocks at the carb, check the fuel pressure. That carb likes 2~3 psi, and does NOT like 4 psi. There was a vendor building fuel pumps and selling kits whose philosophy was "if the part fits, its the right part"! I have seen some of their pumps put out ridiculous pressures. Not going to light anyone up; fuel pressure is easy to test. Fuel coming out the vent indicates bad float (I hope not), bad fuel valve, bad float adjustment, or too much fuel pressure. You might get lucky. At this stage, would say you are entitled to some good luck! Jon
  16. Matt - I am rather late to this thread, and don't really want to read 17 pages of posts. You mentioned running hot, and the carb needing choke. My guess would be you will find your issues in other than the carb, but two things come to mind concerning the carb: (1) Lincoln used a number of different Stromberg type EE-22 carbs. The earlier ones had internal venturii of 1 3/32 inches. The later ones including yours would have come with venturii of 1 3/16 inches. The fraction size is cast on either one side of the bowl, or the end of the bowl. For decades, less than honest (or possibly knowledgeable) individuals have sold these old carburetors by type rather than application. If the owner's manual said Stromberg EE-22, then obviously ANY EE-22 would be correct. (2) For some time, a "2-ball" aftermarket fuel valve was popular. Will comment ONLY that we sold a lot of rebuilding kits to folks to replace these things as they would not allow sufficient fuel flow for the larger engines. If fuel flow is insufficient, then the fuel bowl level would be low, and choke would be required. Jon
  17. Dennis - I honestly don't know. I do know that "sizes" in this time period violate the "truth in advertising" idea. If it were mine, I would try to find another Studebaker owner that thinks he has an original, and get pictures and measurements. Jon.
  18. Dennis - I have 147 different NUMBERED Schebler model R carburetors in my database; plus a host of others that I have no numeric reference. Of course, Schebler did not deem it necessary to put the numbers on the carburetors. Have fun trying to identify them. The one used by Studebaker on the 354 is one for which I have no number. Jon.
  19. My guesses, in order: (1) choke not functioning normally (2) partially clogged fuel filter (3) distributor plate wear (4) intermittent blockage in fuel tank Jon
  20. Dennis - I have a LOT of Schebler literature, but documentation on the type R is sketchy, at best. To the best of my knowledge, you are correct about 4 different sizes. Jon.
  21. What a horrible thought!!!!!!!!!!!!! And I don't care anything about those that don't!! Jon.
  22. But Bernie - if you do that you don't bend the rods, and I don't get to sell new ones Jon
  23. Some really good information in this thread, but some of even the good information is based on guesses. From your posts, I don't know enough about your engine to make a specific recommendation Some information: The quadrajet many are suggesting is a spread-bore carburetor. Buick used a spread-bore intake as original equipment. Edelbrock, possibly others, sold an aftermarket square-bore intake. So the first question: is your intake a square-bore or a spread-bore? For a time, Edelbrock sold imitation quadrajets. Edelbrock still sells imitation AFB's. So second question: is your Edelbrock an imitation AFB (square-bore) or imitation quadrajet (spread-bore). Regardless, Edelbrock has had sealing issues where the carburetor bolts to the intake UNLESS THE GASKET SUPPLIED WITH THE INTAKE IS USED! As others have mentioned, a leak here would cause a high, less than smooth idle. As mentioned by others, the imitation AFB's and imitation quadrajets were/are BOTH CALIBRATED FOR SMALL BLOCK CHEVY! Can one be recalibrated to work well on a Buick? Maybe, genuine AFB's and genuine quadrajets can be, but machine work and a BUNCH of parts would be necessary. Example: the 1965 Chevrolet used a genuine Carter 625 CFM AFB number 3720. In 1965, Buick used a genuine Carter 625 CFM AFB number 3921. To make the 3720 perform well on the Buick, one would have to change the primary clusters, the secondary clusters, the primary jets, the secondary jets, the step-up rods, the step-up piston springs, and most importantly, the auxiliary air-valve! Why bother??? As far as the "mechanics" laughing at you if you asked about a Q-Jet, everyone has their favorite, and some shops sell either the Edelbrock or the Holley, thus have an ax to grind. But think about this: virtually every production car with a 4-barrel carburetor sold in the USA by 1972 used a spread-bore. There are a very few exceptions (mostly those the manufacturers know will be circle-track raced). Buick used a Q-Jet on their "Stage 4", Pontiac used a Q-Jet on their "Ram Air IV", both high performance engines. A "mechanic" that would laugh at the Buick or Pontiac performance engineers will get none of my business. As far as your having issues with two used Q-Jets that ran poorly: there is no such thing as a usable "used" carburetor until it has been rebuilt because of what passes for gas (no pun intended) the last 30 years. Turn the clock back to the 1950's, and one could install a used carburetor, and expect good to excellent results. Also, were the Q-Jets used correct for the engine make, type, and displacement? As to your idea of doing more tuning before thinking about a carburetor: YES, totally agree! I would have to be shown that the unit ran "fine" until the problem started, but if it ran to YOUR satisfaction, that is all that really matters. Should you be unable to get your current set-up running to your satisfaction, I will be happy to offer advice with no obligations, as long as you don't ask about the imitations, which are permanently banned from our shop. I will not help you try to tune the imitation. Will need to know what intake you are using (and wish to use), and any major modification (i.e. camshaft) to your engine. 573-392-7378 (9-12, 1-4 Mon-Tues central time). Jon
  24. The 24mm carb should work well up to a certain RPM, and then will probably just not rev any higher. Some power will be lost, and top speed will be lower than normal. Up to that point, should do very well. As I posted earlier, Chrysler found the 24mm to be too small, and switched to a 26mm venturi. Have seen very few quality control issues with genuine Zenith carbs, but I guess everyone has a bad day! Jon.
  25. Probably, if you (or a friend) is a carburetor specialist, and one of you has a carburetor machine shop. Personally, I would not want to do it, especially outside of the USA. You have identified some differences. Others: External: automatic choke hook-up, carburetor mounting to manifold (you will probably have to fabricate an adapter plate). Yes, the bolt pattern is the same, but the carburetor footprint is different. Internal: the calibrations are just plain different. The 1972 is a smog engine, the 1966 is not. That carburetor, unmodified, is going to be leaner than Jack Sprat! Idle tubes, idle air bleeds, main metering jets, primary metering rods, secondary metering rods, vacuum piston spring, and probably the secondary hanger will all require changing. I would look for a 1968, 1969, or 1970 Buick carburetor (no, I don't have one for sale). Jon
  • Create New...