For all you Edelbrock Carb fans

[Stanglover]

Well guys, that's an interesting contrast between Eric and Chuck's thoughts on the Edelbrock carbs. 1sostatic is his usual hilarious self! 

I have to admit, I still have not had time study them, but I will for sure, then I can add my 2 cents worth.

Thanks for your comments and input, the debate continues...……..

Full disclosure, I didn't watch all of them in their entirety, so I may have missed something. The cobbled up mess of an engine he had in the videos speaks volumes about his skill and knowledge, at least to me it does. I'm not trying to bad mouth Ed carbs, some are happy with them. I'm just not one of those people. Chuck

 You and I are on the same page. I just edited my previous comment to reflect much the same while you were adding a new post.

 

[TheRktmn]

Since I started messing with cars in the early/mid 70s I have used Motorcraft, Holley, Edelbrock and Summit carbs.

I was fed up with Holley's being temperamental and alternately leaking or drying out so I switched to Edelbrock which is basically an improved Carter. The E'brocks were good and very tunable, but a bit of a pain to use on a Ford.

The last few years I have been running Summit carbs - a cross of the best Motorcraft and Holley features and I love 'em.

 

[Stanglover]

Since I started messing with cars in the early/mid 70s I have used Motorcraft, Holley, Edelbrock and Summit carbs.

I was fed up with Holley's being temperamental and alternately leaking or drying out so I switched to Edelbrock which is basically an improved Carter.  The E'brocks were good and very tunable, but a bit of a pain to use on a Ford.

The last few years I have been running Summit carbs - a cross of the best Motorcraft and Holley features and I love 'em.

Bob, an interesting comment and point of view. 

Thanks.

 

[Stanglover]

One more comical video, my friend sent me last night, 



This one is for the Edelbrock Rochester style 1904.

The main problem I have with these video's is, in a practical sense, not everybody, in fact most, will not have access to an AFR meter as it requires sensor(s) mounted in a specific location in the exhaust pipe(s) Most of us have to rely on vacuum and timing to get it as close as possible.

 

[Mister 4x4]

Well guys, that's an interesting contrast between Eric and Chuck's thoughts on the Edelbrock carbs. 1sostatic is his usual hilarious self! 

I have to admit, I still have not had time study them, but I will for sure, then I can add my 2 cents worth.

Thanks for your comments and input, the debate continues...……..

EDIT: Ok I just looked at all the video's.

Now, I know very little about carbs in general other than the basic to intermediate stuff. I've learned a lot over the last few years, thanks to the members here.

So, here's my take away, His set-up does not look very professional, more like something anyone could cobble up in the garage. He shows and uses a GLASS filter, a no-no as far as I'm concerned, (ok, it a test rig, so maybe here) He state that the secondary's open without a load on the motor. I thought a load was needed for the secondary's to kick in, but perhaps I'm wrong in this case. As far as 3 lbs fuel pressure on any carb no matter what brand, well we all know we don't want too much, but could that be too little?

Lastly, I'm still not convinced. There are some very good points to the Edelbrock carbs, but I think I'll stick with more traditional types I'm familiar with.

Glass filter on a test rig - I don't have a problem with that.  On a real car however, yeah I've learned that's not the best way to go.  Agree.   ::thumb::

Cobbled together test rig - Yeah, WTF is up with that?!  It looked SO ghetto, but it apparently gave him the information he was looking for.  I couldn't really get my head around what exactly he was testing for, so I just watched and listened for nuggets of inspiration.

The fuel pressure declaration told me something I wasn't expecting.  I'd heard something somewhere that 5-6 psi was the sweet spot, so I installed an adjustable pressure control valve on mine and set it to the max 5.5 setting since I had an electric fuel pump putting out 12-14 psi (Holley Black).  It never wavers.  He said anything more than 3 psi is overkill, and pretty much demonstrated that the carburetors themselves (Edelbrocks, at least) are internally regulated to 3 psi (or even less, maybe) - he did this by bumping up the line fuel pressure and nothing changed on the carburetor settings or readings he was getting.  OK - mind blown... but, makes sense since the needle valve assembly can only let through so much volume so fast, after all.  

Now the part that gets me is the thought that the secondaries open when there's a load on the engine.  I have to disagree on that idea... the carburetor has no way of detecting a load on the engine.  The secondaries open because the moving parts inside reach a point where the linkage for the secondaries is engaged - period.  Think of the carburetor as if it were a toilet - mostly because of the bowl and float mechanism, but the accelerator pump also works similarly to the 'flush' function.  There are obviously other differences both in form and function, but I believe the basic concepts share common functions.  

Toilets also can't sense if there's a clog down stream and therefore 'flush harder' to push through it.  No... they overfill and flood the floor until the tank fills up, engages the float, and shuts off the water.  The engine obviously doesn't load up and clog like a main drain pipe can, but rather bogs down under load.  Carburetors are very similar in that they have no sensors telling them there's a load on the engine - it doesn't care what's going on underneath it.  It just dumps more fuel in at whatever rate it's told to depending on the positions the mechanisms attached to the accelerator cable happen to be.  I suppose a rudimentary form of a 'sensor' could be vacuum, since the engine is basically a giant air pump - when the vacuum starts to drop, I suppose more sophisticated carburetors probably utilize vacuum in some form or fashion, rather than simply regulate it.  Fuel Injection is smart enough to accept and utilize information from various vehicle sensors, but not carburetors.

I hope that makes sense - sometimes I tend to over-simplify things in my own head for correlation purposes.  I am also no expert, by any means.  But the toilet analogy works well when explaining carburetors in another way: every time you open the secondaries, you can say you just flushed another nickel down the drain (depending on fuel prices, of course).   

 

[1sostatic]

Toilets also can't sense if there's a clog down stream and therefore 'flush harder' to push through it.  No... they overfill and flood the floor until the tank fills up, engages the float, and shuts off the water.  The engine obviously doesn't load up and clog like a main drain pipe can, but rather bogs down under load.  Carburetors are very similar in that they have no sensors telling them there's a load on the engine - it doesn't care what's going on underneath it.  It just dumps more fuel in at whatever rate it's told to depending on the positions the mechanisms attached to the accelerator cable happen to be.  I suppose a rudimentary form of a 'sensor' could be vacuum, since the engine is basically a giant air pump - when the vacuum starts to drop, I suppose more sophisticated carburetors probably utilize vacuum in some form or fashion, rather than simply regulate it.  Fuel Injection is smart enough to accept and utilize information from various vehicle sensors, but not carburetors.

I hope that makes sense - sometimes I tend to over-simplify things in my own head for correlation purposes.  I am also no expert, by any means.  But the toilet analogy works well when explaining carburetors in another way: every time you open the secondaries, you can say you just flushed another nickel down the drain (depending on fuel prices, of course).   

I like the toilet analogy ....then....

 

[midlife]

I like the toilet analogy ....then....

Folks: highly recommended that you do this at home.  Just ensure the wifey is out shopping first...

 

[Stanglover]

Toilets also can't sense if there's a clog down stream and therefore 'flush harder' to push through it.  No... they overfill and flood the floor until the tank fills up, engages the float, and shuts off the water.  The engine obviously doesn't load up and clog like a main drain pipe can, but rather bogs down under load.  Carburetors are very similar in that they have no sensors telling them there's a load on the engine - it doesn't care what's going on underneath it.  It just dumps more fuel in at whatever rate it's told to depending on the positions the mechanisms attached to the accelerator cable happen to be.  I suppose a rudimentary form of a 'sensor' could be vacuum, since the engine is basically a giant air pump - when the vacuum starts to drop, I suppose more sophisticated carburetors probably utilize vacuum in some form or fashion, rather than simply regulate it.  Fuel Injection is smart enough to accept and utilize information from various vehicle sensors, but not carburetors.

I hope that makes sense - sometimes I tend to over-simplify things in my own head for correlation purposes.  I am also no expert, by any means.  But the toilet analogy works well when explaining carburetors in another way: every time you open the secondaries, you can say you just flushed another nickel down the drain (depending on fuel prices, of course).   

I like the toilet analogy ....then....

 Too funny!! Man, you keep us amused.

 

[Stanglover]

Well guys, that's an interesting contrast between Eric and Chuck's thoughts on the Edelbrock carbs. 1sostatic is his usual hilarious self! 

I have to admit, I still have not had time study them, but I will for sure, then I can add my 2 cents worth.

Thanks for your comments and input, the debate continues...……..

EDIT: Ok I just looked at all the video's.

Now, I know very little about carbs in general other than the basic to intermediate stuff. I've learned a lot over the last few years, thanks to the members here.

So, here's my take away, His set-up does not look very professional, more like something anyone could cobble up in the garage. He shows and uses a GLASS filter, a no-no as far as I'm concerned, (ok, it a test rig, so maybe here) He state that the secondary's open without a load on the motor. I thought a load was needed for the secondary's to kick in, but perhaps I'm wrong in this case. As far as 3 lbs fuel pressure on any carb no matter what brand, well we all know we don't want too much, but could that be too little?

Lastly, I'm still not convinced. There are some very good points to the Edelbrock carbs, but I think I'll stick with more traditional types I'm familiar with.

Now the part that gets me is the thought that the secondaries open when there's a load on the engine.  I have to disagree on that idea... the carburetor has no way of detecting a load on the engine.  The secondaries open because the moving parts inside reach a point where the linkage for the secondaries is engaged - period.  Think of the carburetor as if it were a toilet - mostly because of the bowl and float mechanism, but the accelerator pump also works similarly to the 'flush' function.  There are obviously other differences both in form and function, but I believe the basic concepts share common functions.  

 Eric, Thanks for a very interesting reply. Obviously 1sostatic enjoyed it. 

As I've said many times, I know little above the basic when it come to carburetors and so I could have picked up on some misinformation regarding when secondary's actually open. What you say make good sense and I follow your analogy. I agree that a carb is not a sensing device as far as load is concerned, however and this may be where I got confused, a vacuum secondary carb requires a certain vacuum signal for the diaphragm to open the secondary blades, whereas a mechanical relies on the linkage set-up to 'tell' it when to open.

Now, I just realized where I got my information regarding when the secondary's open. Below is a scan from the Holley manual for my SA 670.

I am not wanting to cause an argument on this subject, but would really like to get the fact straight in my tiny head.

Scan0002.pdf

 

[c9zx]

The non-AVS edelbrock carbs have a counterweighted air valve above the throttle plates (blades). While the throttle blades will open with no load, assuming the choke interlock linkage is disengaged (choke open), the air valve will stay closed preventing sufficient air flow to draw fuel through the secondary jets and into the venturi booster. This thread caused me to find some notes from 20+ years ago about tuning an Ed 14060r 1407 that owner insisted on using. My notes showed changing springs metering rods and jets, pump settings, float level (1/16 lower) and fuel pressure (5.0 psi). Here is a link to a pretty good article for Ed carb owners. Chuck

https://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2005/08/EdelbrockCarburetor/index.php

 

[Danoh1]

I don’t get the Holley problems. I’ve used nothing but Holley for 30+ years. No issues. For most customer cars, I go,with the Quick fuel version, as it is priced right. Zero issues with them as well.

I know the Edelbrock can work well, I’ve seen it. Just never messed with them

 

[Stanglover]

The non-AVS edelbrock carbs have a counterweighted air valve above the throttle plates (blades). While the throttle blades will open with no load, assuming the choke interlock linkage is disengaged (choke open), the air valve will stay closed preventing sufficient air flow to draw fuel through the secondary jets and into the venturi booster. This thread caused me to find some notes from 20+ years ago about tuning an Ed 14060r 1407 that owner insisted on using. My notes showed changing springs metering rods and jets, pump settings, float level (1/16 lower) and fuel pressure (5.0 psi). Here is a link to a pretty good article for Ed carb owners. Chuck

https://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2005/08/EdelbrockCarburetor/index.php

 Chuck, that's a very interesting article. I'll admit that I, like many others, may well have underestimated the Edelbrock carburetor line. They do seem to be right up there with the very best. So, I suspect it comes down to personal choice and maybe budget. 

It's a pity we could not take this part from carb "E", that part from carb "H", and put it all together in carb "Q" and end up with perfection, but we all know that will never happen. Oh excuse me, that's called fuel injection.

For me, I'll stick with what I know and stay with Holley or Quick Fuel which are pretty much one and the same now.

This has been a very interesting and enlightening discussion, thanks to all.

 

[Stanglover]

My friend is overwhelming me a bit now on this, but here's yet another video on tuning an Edlebrock carb.

 

[c9zx]

I think this horse may be dead. Perhaps we should stop whipping it. If like you Ed carbs use them, if you don't, don't use them. Sorry I prolonged this thread. It is about like the 2V vs. 4V discussions. Good day all. Chuck

 

[Mister 4x4]

It's all good, Chuck.  I don't vehemently support one over the other, I just know what's worked for me.  As you said, go with what you like.

 

[Stanglover]

I agree guys, the horse is dead. 

My friend is still sending me "stuff" on Edelbrock carbs, so I had to politely tell him enough is enough.

It has been interesting to a point, but I still don't like the way they look and that won't change. Yeah okay, I know they can't be seen with an air cleaner on.

EDIT: I intended to comment on the video in post #32. That is probably the best of the bunch as far as general tuning of the eddie carb.