Replacement carburetor for 55 Buick Century 322 CI

[Guest buckeye 3]

Has anyone replaced the factory Rochester or Carter carburetor with a different year or brand . I'm just curious to see what my options would be in the future if I wanted to make a change.

[buick840]

http://forums.aaca.org/f162/edelbrock-1406-conversion-333493.html

This thread offers an option for you.

[Guest buckeye 3]

Thank you for all the information. I will file everything for use in my spring project. It appears that you came up with the perfect solution. Like you I'm intrested in reliabilty for my daily driver. Buckeye 3

[JohnD1956]

... Like you I'm intrested in reliabilty for my daily driver....

After all, the carb that still functions after 58 years is not at all reliable?

Sorry, it just irks me to hear that reliability argument...

[MrEarl]

LIKE that

[bhambulldog]

Keep the original.

My carburetor has needed work only twice in 40 years.

Once during engine rebuild 35 years ago.

And again, 13 years ago .

I've not even had to adjust it since then.

[Guest buckeye 3]

Do you have Carter or a Rochester, there is a big difference in the reliabilty of the Rochester. I have 2 - 53'' & 2 54's & 1-55. Ihave no trouble with the 53 &54 with the Carter but the 55 has Rochester and while it functions ok it's not as smooth as the other 4 cars. Buckeye 3

[bhambulldog]

mine is a Carter carb.

I didn't know that about Rochesters....h

As you say about yours with Carters, mine runs flawlessly

[carbking]

On a stock (unmodified) engine, one should be unable to tell the difference from a correctly functioning original Rochester to a correctly functioning original Carter; EITHER will function better than any modern "replacement" unless one is willing to spend significant time and/or money modifying the modern replacement. Another option for 1952, 1953, and 1954 is the original equipment Stromberg model 4A.

Now if the original is not functioning correctly, that is not the fault of the carburetor.

However, even if the original is total garbage, it should be possible to find a fully-restored original for less (perhaps much less) than the modifications necessary to a modern replacement.

If the engine has been modified, many feel the original Carter is easier to modify than the Rochester (or the Stromberg). 50 years ago, this was true, as metering rods in many sizes were readily available through the local speed shop. Today, the rods are still available, but as far as I know, only from that grumpy old hillbilly in Missouri that makes them to order on a manual lathe.

If you are having difficulty with a Rochester, I would suggest determining WHY there is a difficulty.

Jon.

[buick5563]

"Like" for the grumpy old hillbilly^^^

[Guest mstanleyfl]

"Like" for the grumpy old hillbilly^^^

I thought Mr. Earl lived in Ga...

[60FlatTop]

I used to work with a group whom looked down on a person who called their self cynical and opinionated. They thought it was inappropriate to take TWO attributes.

Jon, the Carb King, has it. That '55 Century was a car that competed for a buyer's money against Chevies, Fords, Mercuries, Oldsmobiles, Pontiacs, and few others I can't remember. Its reliable enough to tow an Airstream across the country (check some old National Geographic magazines and see the tours).

I live in Rochester, well, the area, we made good carbs.

That car should have a 4GC on it. Be sure the choke heater tube is working correctly. I did put a 1970's GM electric choke on one of mine it cured some issues. That's about it. If you can spell Edelbrock right you can fix the original carb.

Bernie

[bhambulldog]

X2 on the choke heat tube and mechanism.

[Guest buckeye 3]

Just to clear the air. I own a 54 skylark conv. with 27 K miles, a 54 Roadmaster HT, 2- 53 HT'S and 55 Century HT, all in show condition. I'm a retired engineer with over 40 years with Buick & Cadillac . I,m not saying the Rochester is no good, I'm just saying that the Rochester needs more tender care than the Carter. I have purchased a rebuilt Rochester and have spent hours trying to get the choke to operate the way it should. I may send it back as it has a one year warranty on it. I have been holding off, because it's embarrassing with my background,to be stumped by a simple carburetor .But Iam eighty years old, and MAY (?) be getting too old. Buckeye 3

[VickyBlue]

I have over 2000 miles on mine (1406) and in all honesty, it was the best thing I ever did to her. Money well spent.

[NTX5467]

One thing to be cognizant of is that many of the older carburetors had drilled "fluid" lines in them, which were sealed externally by a ball bearing and solder. With time and age, the solder can become dry, but not usually leak (as the seal is "mechanical") . . . BUT it's been observed that ethanol'd gasoline can "eat" that solder enough to cause a BIG fuel leak onto the intake manifold area of the engine. In prior times, we never worried about those sealed passageways as the carb "dip" cleaner didn't bother the solder, but that's not the case any more. Therefore, it's recommended that every ONE of those passageways in the older carbs be re-sealed with ethanol-resistant sealer.

One of our chapter members found his leak before it caused a problem. He also related how he was at a weekend cruise event when a '55 Cadillac pulled into the parking lot, smoke coming from under the hood (not noticed until the vehicle slowed and stopped) . . . then the race was on for a fire extinguisher, many of which appeared to help keep the car from burning more than it had . . . . all from an un-sealed ball bearing in a carburetor's fluid passageway, on the outside of the carb.

In theory, it should not really matter which brand of carb is on an engine, as they all mix air and fuel, BUT things might not be that generic or universal in nature. At least in more modern times, a GM-Rochester carb can be one of the most bullet-proof carbs around (performance and reliability), but some Holleys can tend to have sharper throttle response and some AFBs can be more trouble-free in other areas, from my own observations and experiences. Each design has its good points and not-so-good aspects, too. In the end, having a carburetor which is calibrated for the engine/trans/vehicle/rear axle ratio is a KEY thing, regardless of which brand it might be. THIS is where it can get a little sticky, especially when dealing with engines/vehicles which have been out of production for a good while!

Even if the carb number might be "a match" for a vehicle, it can still have un-seen things inside of it which can throw off the fuel calibration curve from the original specs. It can be normally expected that some throttle shaft/baseplate housing will have some wear, which can not only make the throttle butterflies not seat correctly in the throttle bore, but allow too much of an "air leak" outside of the air flow through the venturis. This can be a part of the carb's base calibration, though, but if the wear is too much and too much additional air comes into the internal air flow that way, it can make things go a little leaner than normal.

Hard deposits can also collect in the internal fuel passageways of the carb's fuel circuits. Might not seem like much, but a 1% change can make a big difference in the fuel curve calibration. Whether in the idle system, power circuit, or main circuit. Carb cleaners usually don't get that stuff out, either, by observation. Also, if the carb is a "metering rod" carb, it can be possible that the springs which the power piston moves against can become weak with age and heat cycles, which can make them weaker and the fuel curve a little leaner (which might conceiveably cause a slight-lean condition as the "cruise mixture" becomes the "power mixture" a little too late compared to what the engine might desire.

NOT that any of these things are insurmountable problems/issues, just that many rebuilders and purveyors of rebuilt carburetors might not ALL take the care and effort to ensure everything is as it should be with what they sell as their "finished product". Nor might they have sufficient testing equipment AND original specs to ensure complete fuel curve accuracy, either. Be that as it may . . .

THEN the issue of what the owner desires from the vehicle comes into play. "Original" or "competent daily driver" can come into play. Each orientation has its plusses and otherwise. Then, factor in modern fuels and it all becomes flakier still!

I'd say that for somebody who wants to have an older vehicle that is accurate in all respects, AND is willing to go to the trouble to make it all work as it should, AND is willing to learn any little idiosyncracies the vehicle might have (which, to me, is part of the allure of being "in sync" with the machine's character), then keep those OEM carbs of whichever brand you might desire.

But IF you are more in what I've seen VickyBlue's displayed orientation, then do a very good adaptation of a more modern-design carburetor to your vehicle. Finding needed calibration parts can be easier (PLUS an instruction manual of how to fine-tune the base calibration!) as can finding somebody who recognizes the newer-type carb AND knows what they're looking at . . . and where to look for help in any issues it might be having. AND all of this can happen in a more local environment rather than becoming friends with the UPS driver.

The other thing is that with a new carb, you KNOW all of the internal guts and fluid passageways are clean, which can make any calibration targets a little easier to hit (I suspect). I know that not every engine likes the same fuel curve as the "generic" Chevy 350 V-8, even if the displacements are similar. This is where the newer-carb's calibration kits can come in handy . . . and necessary. Walk into a speed shop and ask for main jets for a Rochester 4GC and you MIGHT find somebody old enough to know what that is, but if you ask for the same thing for an Edelbrock AFB #1406 (for example), it can be a different situation all together (IF you didn't order that kit direct from Edelbrock). OR perhaps I might want something a little different, like a new StreetDemon carb (and the calibration kit!).

I can see and understand EACH orientation. Just depends upon which of my cars I'm going to apply those orientations to! My '77 Camaro (formerly 2bbl) can be "open game", but my '68 LeSabre 350-4bbl is a different situation. A well-executed conversion (in driveability AND fuel economy!) can add value to a vehicle, just as having the OEM-spec correct parts on the same car can add value for a different owner. Just make sure that whatever is done is "top notch" in orientation AND execution -- period!!! NO "trick of the week" mediocrity allowed, no way, no how!

I was lucky enough to have purchased a REAL Carter AFB/AVS calibration kit, when they were new. I also have one for a ThermoQuad, too, for what it's worth.

Take care and enjoy, planning those winter projects at the same time!

NTX5467

[60FlatTop]

Sometimes we look at our old cars and lull into a simpler time in life. It never was that easy. While Goober was pumping gas on the edge of town mechanics were fixing carbs with tools like this:

This ain't Mayberry and you can't fix it with a Stanley screw driver. You need a 50 year old tool box.

Bernie

[NTX5467]

(Never had a Stanley screwdriver, but knew a "Stanley" that MIGHT use a screwdriver . . .) Make sure a "wide blade" screwdriver is in the mix, too!

That's one interesting collection of tools, Bernie! What sort of carbs will those things facilitate the repair of? Just curious.

Take care,

NTX5467

[carbking]

Looks like "Snap-On" high end carburetor tool set. Tools for Carter, Holley, Rochester, Stromberg, and Zenith; and of course many will cross over to other brands.

Jon.

[60FlatTop]

Jon is right. It is a Snap-On set with basics for most carbs. The float gauges are '50's and '60's. There are jet tools to take the place of even a wide blade screw driver. I have the Holley, Rochester, and Carter books back into the '30's as well.

Sometimes I wonder about the manufacturer's decision to put a carburetor all bristling with adjustment screws right on top of the engine, or the side, and then writing an owner's manual as if the new owner just traded in his team and wagon. Must have helped the service department.

Bernie

[Guest sfriend100]

Hey, if anyone still monitors this older thread, I have a question. I am changing my 55 264 to a 4 bbl carb. I got a manifold and picked up some older year correct rochester carbs. Can't figure out how the rochester gets hooked up as far as vacuum lines and their appears to be some other connection in the base that I am clueless on. Very different than my 55 with a Carter carb. Anyone got a pictures they can share? Thinking about finding a Carter to use.

[MrEarl]

Do yourself a favor, find you a Carter. I bought a 54 Roadmaster once where someone had put a rebuilt Rochester on and I could never get it adjusted so the car wouldn't stall. Ended up having a Carter rebuilt.

[carbking]

I have no record of a 264 ever using a 4-barrel. Any carb of any manufacturer from a 322 is going to require major surgery to work correctly on a 264.

Jon.

[MrEarl]

Major surgery, really? Can you please share what some of this might be Jon. I have always thought that much carb on a 264 was excessive for the the benefit received plus the downside of decreased gas mileage but would like to hear you thoughts on it.

[carbking]

You have to modify the carburetor to think it is sitting on a 322. Quite simply, the air velocity due to the smaller engine is too low; thus the carburetor must be recalibrated much richer to compensate......all circuits. This recalibration will negate the pickup in fuel economy efficiency one would expect in using the proper size 4-barrel opposed to a two-barrel.

Of course, one could alway bore and stroke the 264 to a 322, and then the carb would be OK.

In a nutshell, putting too large a carburetor on an engine will result in a LEAN condition, due to the weakened air velocity. Couple that with the artificial lean most of us have to contend with using ethanol-laced fuel means additional re-calibration.

Can it be done? Certainly, but MUCH easier to start with a smaller carburetor. As I have posted many times....when migrating an O.E. carb from one application to another; BEST results will occur if the donor engine is within plus/minus 3 percent in displacement of the donee engine. 3 percent of 264 is approximately 8. Thus, for best results, use an O.E. carb from an engine of 256~272 CID.

If one is going to start with a carb from a 322, then I would concur completely with your previous statement to use a Carter. Not that the Carter is a better carb (put either properly restored on the CORRECT engine, and you won't know the difference), but the Carter is MUCH easier to modify. The idle, off-idle, main, power, and pump circuits will all need attention.

Jon.

Edited April 2, 2014 by carbking (see edit history)

[old-tank]

Observations:

Some of the 322 4-barrel manifolds from late 55 and 56 that had the Rochester 4GC had an exhaust track under the carb. You should not put a Carter on that manifold without plugging the exhaust track.

The 4GC is a good performing carb, but if left to sit until the fuel drys out, you will have idle and stumbling problems until you clean out the white powerdy residue left by the crumby available gas.

Don't use the 4GC unless it is processionally rebuilt...there have been some leaks with resultant fires due to bowl plugs cement being dissolved by ethanol laced gas.

I have a Carter WCFB 2197s on a 264 installed in a 51 F-1 truck. The only modification is a manual choke. The performance is this case is flawless at all speeds. I cobbled together this carter from 4 junk carbs and it was not tried on a 322 (might not work as well). The only 'issue' is that I cannot drive below 10 mph in high gear like I could with the old flathead --- might be an airflow problem or timing advanced too far. It is of course faster and mileage is 17 mpg (14 mpg with the flathead).

Willie