My son and I are building a 65 F100. It has a 300 six. We have a Offenhouser C series and instead of a 4bbl we are considering tri-power through an adapter. So I would appreciate opinions on the new 94s or the new Strombergs..... 97s have the mystique but the 94 seems good too. Being on a inline engine I would prefer them not to leak. Thanks...
I had an old Winnebago with a 300 six. I put an Erson cam and an Offenhauser manifold with a Holley 390 on it and the guys with the big block motorhomes couldn't keep up on the way to the races. AND, it got 12 MPG not pulling a load. Why you would want to screw that up is beyond me.
I was wanting to know if anyone had any problems with new Edlebrock 94s or Stromberg 97s. Since I mentioned the engine I'll try to explain the set up. First off I know a single 4bbl would be the most efficient. Honestly that can apply to any engine. Of course the adapter will be 3 bolt. The 3-2 may work good as a 2-2 with the center blanked off. It may work similar to a slingshot. I have considered the 2-2 adapter above. For a 300 six this may actually work pretty good. It's just something to play with. There's all kinds of options from running a single on the 3x2....doubles or triples. I figured the 3x2 offers more possibilities. I have already got the Offenhouser. This is just something to collect and put together over time. If it does not work out, I could always run the carburetors on my F1. Even with the adapter.....it's got to be better than this...
I don't have any personal experience with either one, but from what I've read, sounds like just a flip of a coin kinda thing. I like the look of the 94 better, so that's the way I'd go. Seems like 2x2 might be a better set up, or like you said, block off one of the three on the 3x. I say go for it and have fun. What it's all about, I thought.
I think you'll be much happier with a 4 bbl with that engine and vehicle. In every way. Spend your money elsewhere.
I can sort of almost understand running the adapter temporarily, IF you already have the carbs. But spending $$$ on carbs to put on the adapter...just dont' make a lick of sense.
I spent a lot of time researching the Edelbrock94 and the Stromberg while choosing which one to use on my dual carb Flathead. You will get a lot of opinions on which one is better. Most opinions, I think are just personal preferences. Each seem to have their downsides. From what I could see, I don't think one is really better than the other and in the end, I decided to go with the Edelbrocks, mainly due to the cost was less than the Stromberg. I did have trouble with the Edelbrocks where the check ball for the accelerator pump in one of the carbs, was not seating properly and had a poor pump shot, and one of the floats went bad and filled with gas. I repaired those issues and really haven't had any other issues with them. They tune easily and seem to perform well on my setup. Bill
Clifford makes a dual intake. Probably a better place to start if you want multiple carbs. Will look right when finished. 4bbl will be cheaper, easier to install, have better gas mileage, easier to maintain, etc... Will look right, compared to an adapter'd together 3x2.
Well, it was a hard pill to swallow. Sometimes I have to be snapped back into reality. What we will probably do is .... Heavy duty big truck exhaust. They say they flow better than most headers and it has the heat riser. 2.5 single exhaust.....I do not like a six with duals. C series intake Shceider cam....they have several I like. Metal timing gears... Chevy rockers... 240 head 68 up ignition with vacuum mechanical advance 1850 Holley... It should do well. I'm still considering the 94s or 97s for My F1 on a proper intake.
Oh yeah, I also had the later model big truck headers on my motor home. I can't say how much they added to the performance, but they just look efficient! Also, as an aside, the guy that built that engine eliminated the valve rotaters. He said that they were actually detrimental to performance and longevity. That's the limit of my knowledge, but you might want to check with someone with some insight into these engines.
No comment on the newer clones. As to a comparison of the originals: Stromberg used a metal power valve that discharged through the main metering jets. If the valve fails, the engine would run very rich when the engine was running. Holley used a neopreme power valve that had a direct p***age into the intake manifold. If the valve fails, the carburetor bowl is drained into the intake, and washes the oil off of the rings whether the engine is running or not. Holley has the advantage of using modern jets available at every parts house on the planet. Jon.
The Jalopy Journal
