Technical BANGHER CARBS, STROMBERG , OR???

I wanna put 2 carbs on my B Bangher motor...is there any other choices for carbs???
I don't wanna run 97's, I have a Zepher twin carb manifold, so what carbs should i get??

 

Might I suggest a pair of Webbers?

 

which ones... years ago I put a holley weber on my 235 6 cylinder, boy did that wake it up, and mpg went to over 20

 

I was thinking maybe a couple of their side draft models. That or the down draft versions

 

97s though will bolt right on to the zephyr manifold. But you say you don’t want 97s.

 

The 81's used to be used a lot (from the Ford V8 60). Try posting on Fordbarn.

Charlie Stephens

 

so, the way I see it, 1 -97 is too much carb... and 2 is way too much...???

 

I have 97's, but isn't that way too much carb for a 4 bangher??

 

I got sticker shock when I seen the price...1200 for 2 carbs??? seems that there must be 2 one barrels out there that would work with out over carbing the motor.... the edlebrock 94's flow even more than the 97's.... correct???

 

I could build a 2 carb split manifold, if I could find two carbs that flow to match my motor.... even make it a one piece that is part of the header...

 

anty one know for fact the CFM of the most popular 3..97's, 81's and 94's ?

 

Small base Rochester 278cfm
stromberg 48 175cfm
stromberg 81 135cfm
stromberg 97 150cfm
stromberg LZ 160cfm
holley 92 142cfm
holley 94/59 155cfm
holley 94/8ba 162cfm
holley egc 185cfm
Copied from another thread

 

many thanks....2 81's =270 cfm... vs 1 97 @ 150 cfm... if 1 97 is too much, then 2 81's is way too much???

end result for the labor of love is to put 2 carbs(for the hot rod look) that actually work better than stock..

like said... i can fab a manifold... and 2 one barrels seems like the way to go ????

heres the motor


I could make the manifold all one piece with the header, and get rid of all the hokey stuff

 

I'm missing some info.... how many C.I. is a b banger motor, and whats the max rpm??
and if you know... what CFM carb should you use

 

To determine the total CFM (Cubic Feet per Minute) needed for your Model A 4-banger with dual 1-barrel carburetors, you can use the following formula:

CFM=3456CID×RPM×VE

Where:

• CID is the cubic inch displacement of the engine.
• RPM is the maximum revolutions per minute.
• VE is the volumetric efficiency (typically around 0.85 for naturally aspirated engines).

For a Model A engine, which has a displacement of 200 cubic inches (CID), and assuming a maximum RPM of 3500 and a VE of 0.85, the calculation would be:

CFM=3456200×3500×0.85≈172 CFM

Since you are using two carburetors, you would divide this total by 2:

CFM per carburetor=2172≈86 CFM

 

I'm running 1 Stromberg 81 on my banger. Does fine!

 

so according to this the 97 should be close to perfect...?

 

I wonder if the b motor needs a bigger carb than the A

 

Ford thought so. A 'B' carb has a venturi size of 0.866-inch ID versus the 'A's 0.846-inch.

 

I believe you need a "divide" instead of a "multiply"

CFM = (CID times RPM times VE) divided by 3456

This works halfway decently on 4 cycle engines with 4 cylinders and a plenum intake; it works better on 6 and 8 cylinder engines with a plenum intake.

If the intake is an IR design (2 siamized runners) then you need to multiply the result by 2.

If the intake is an IR design with 4 individual runners than you need to multiply the result by 4.

I personally feel you are optimistic on VE for a Model A Ford engine.

As far as some common mechanical power system single barrel carbs are concerned:

1946~1948 Chevrolet Carter W-1 tag 574s flows approximately 190 CFM
1946~1948 Willys military W-0 tag 636s flows approximatel 120 CFM.

The above 2 examples would be rated on the 1 barrel and 2 barrel scale.

Jon

 

I have running a single 97 on my banger for almost 2 years with no problems at all. The motor runs out great.

 

You have said over and over in other threads how good this engine performs, so why the hell do you want to f#*k with it? Seems counter-productive to me....

 

I just want the look of the two carbs and a fabbed intake, I'm running a single 97 now....

 

cause there's no dirt blanket on me yet,..and it's what I feel like doing... I don't wanna be productive, I just wanna have fun.. there would be no such thing as a hot rod if every one thought like you...and as good as it is.... it's the slowest thing I own.... well, not as bad as the model TURD

 

I had a B motor in my 30 Pickup with a Winfield head, Mallory distributor, header and a Holley 94 on an Ansen manifold and it ran great. The single 94 is plenty of carb for a mild banger but I'm building a 29 roadster pickup with an A motor, Snyder 5.5:1 head, FSI distributor and dual 81's. Two 81's is over carbed but I'm going to put smaller jets in them, more for looks than performance. I'm looking at the Burns manifold since I can use the stock exhaust manifold if I decide to go that way.

 

I happen to like alot of carbs..


and the little do hicky on the rear end

it also has a 7 series winfield head

 

You have sort of answered your own question there. It's already slow, and you might bog it down even more with the wrong carb setup. Going slower doesn't sound like hot rodding to me.....
Your car, your choice. Let us know how it works out for you.

By the way, bread has a lot of carbs.

 

I had 2 97's on a A motor with a zepher manifold....it worked... but way too fat after midrange to top end... even with the smallest jets... like 39's