For anyone who has run both the 2x4 and 3x2 intakes was there a significant power difference when you gave it full throttle? What are you opinions on the Eelco 3x2?
I guessed you missed the emoticon, that was aimed at his "I own a website" remark. I've been to his site. Hell he deep linked some stuff on my personal server I scanned for Yahoo list guys, I'm sure he remembers that too. Sorry I haven't shelled out the green for the Gessler parts. Though I have gotten them for others. Personally though I've run all the stock intakes and quite a few of the aftermarket ones. Haven't had the chance to personally own a B262 yet though.
There's a lot of guys in the Nailhead community that won't touch Marty's parts with a 10 foot pole. Do a search for Eelco and Northwest Speed on here. You'll see why. I know his dual quad is a copy of the Edelbrock B262 with a little update.
Who sells a good 3x2 intake? how would you rank all the 2bbl carbs on the market (rochester, holley, strombergs)?
There's not a 3x2 I'm in love with. Though I favor the Weiand a bit, they're real hard to find. Rochester 2GC for the 401/425, much better carb than the 94 or 97.
i have this intake on my 56 with a 401 with Three 2GCs on it, though iv never had aproblem with it and the car gets up and goes great iv never run another manifold on a nailhead except a factory one. is there a 3x2 intake you would suggjest other than that or the weind one that is more difficult to find? its there one more common that may out perform the offy? id like to get it for mine cuz like i said although i havnt had any issue with mine, if there a better one out there id like to get it for the car. i considered dual quad intakes and maybe just go back to the stock one but i like the way the 3 carbs look and at the end of the day its a 56 roadmaster so where is the thing really going haha.
I guess that could be rephrased to read, "it's adequate if you're after the look". They run and drive fine, they are just not a great design. I'd say the easy way is to have the Offenhauser ported. They seem to have enough meat to do some decent porting on them. Maybe I am being harsh this week.
HAHA you got me nervous for a second thinking i got a garbage intake on my motor haha. well i am taking the car apart soon including the motor to give it a good once over and to repaint and repolish and stuff, so i will have to look into doing some work to the intake like you said thanks for the advice.
Out of these carbs which one is a little more on the preformance side and would probably come close to 2x4 performance when using 2 650cfm carbs
You can, I like the auto choke left on the center though, but if you prefer a manual choke that's cool.
2G manual Choke 2GC automatic choke Other than that pretty much the same. I can usually find them for a couple bucks apiece, the issue seems to be finding 3 the same.
He does. The choke is just going to be a personal preference thing. And only the center will have it anyway if you're running progressive.
After alot of thought and reading about the nailhead Im going with a big Quadrajet 800 cfm on a ported and modded one year only 1966 Q-jet nailhead manifold, I have ported the exhaust manifold also along with the head work port and polish, still looking for the bling factor so I got a repop of a 67 starwars air cleaner polished adding all the other finned parts will have performance ,economy and bling. Going in a 65 Rivi with 3.08 posi and switch pitch higher stall 12'' coverter and 28'' tires, that should help with economy and still have the wow factor when the hood is lifted.
Hey folks, new to the forum. I know it's been nearly four years since there was any activity on this but thought I'd toss this out there. I've got a '65 Wildcat with the 401 in it. It's all stock and I'm playing with the idea of swapping out my intake for a quadrajet set up. I know a fella who would set me up with a qjet intake and qjet carb for a reasonable price. I'm curious about what types of performance gains I'd see if I did that. Are we talking a gain of 5hp? 10? 20? I would think with those m***ive secondaries I'd feel some better pull but you guys would know more. Fuel economy really is of no concern, more interested in just performance and I'd rather stick to a single 4bbl than go duals or tris. Hoping to hear back!
This has already been answered in this thread extensively. Read it from the beginning and you'll have your answer. 65 Wildcats are awesome!
Bill, really appreciate the response. And the earlier posts in the thread, especially yours, are extremely helpful and informative. Trust me, I wouldn't be posting on here if I didn't scour for some answers beforehand. It's clear what many believe to be the best set up for power, best for 'economy' and looks. The question I'm looking to have answered is more of a quan***ative one. All things equal, if you take a '65 401 with the stock setup and run it against the same engine with '66 qjet intake + carb, what types of hp/tq gains could a guy see?
I never put the Electra on a dyno and never got to feel the B262. The 1966 intake (especially with Gessler mods) and a good 800 QJ will have that Wildcat scooting along nicely but of course nothing beats the look of that dual quad setup when you open the hood. I never got it to run right with the dual quads because there were no tuners in my city who knew what they were doing with Buicks. The HP gains aren't going to be that much on a stock motor. If you're serious speak to Russel at Centerville - he'll get you sorted. The guys over at v8buick.com are also very very knowledgable. The Wildcat is a heavy car so it needs all the low down torque it can get and for that you'll need to match your components carefully. My dual quads looked great and I got them to run reasonably well but it felt softer than the 800cfm QJ although I tuned that myself trying all sorts of different rods. Actually the best power and most torque I felt was with a 750 holley double pumper using an adapter plate over the stock (non QJ) intake - believe it or not. Traction was a problem with anything other than the softest take off so that might also be an option. But I truly believe the 66 intake with a correctly tuned 800cfm (make sure you get the 800 - I posted how to ID pics earlier in the thread) will be make it feel the happiest. I'm sure of it. Buick Nailheads (especially the big boys) are an incredible engine that can be ruined by the wrong intake (i.e. the Offy 3 x 2) or the wrong carb. Give it a nice hot spark, maybe some headers if you can find a proper set made by people who know nailheads and the right amount of fuel and she'll put a smile on your face and sound great for years.
Much obliged for that reply, for a younger guy like me this information is gold. I'm watching a set of headers that Russell has up on eBay, so that's definitely on the list after I figure out how I want to get the air in. Thanks again Bill.
Have no personal dyno experience on this engine, however: Had a really close friend with a 1966 Skylark convertible, who wanted maximum drivability. He started with a factory dual 4 engine. He lives several hundred miles away, so had several "tuners" set up the dual quads, never really to his liking. Finally brought it to me along with a 1966 factory 4-GC, and a factory 1966 Q-Jet. Set-up the dual quads properly, and he was impressed with the top end, but not the in-city response. Removed those, and installed the 4-GC. Better in-city, worse higher RPM. Removed and installed the factory Q-Jet. Better than the 4-GC both in-city and higher RPM, not as good as the duals on higher RPM. Suggested trying some carbs I had. We put the dual manifold back on, and installed a pair of Carter 400's set up with solid linkage. He loved them in all conditions. Interestingly, lower 1/4 mile ET with the 400's and solid linkage than with the factory 625's and progressive linkage. REMEMBER, absolutely stock dual quad engine. I am NOT saying the 400's would outperform the 625's on a trailered race-car with different rear-end, slicks, etc. But for what he wanted, the 400's were the cat's meow. There is NO absolute answer for all conditions. Jon.
Jon, this is good stuff. I'm starting to feel like I've picked the scab on this old cut (thread) and getting all of the options flowing again. Great hearing about real-life experiences like you had with your buddy's Skylark. You can look at the specs on paper, but until you run something you won't know if it's the best fit for the car which is what both you and Bill are making clear. I'm a fan of solid linkage myself, good to hear that turned out the best performance for your buddy. Being that the Q-Jet was on par with one of the dual set ups I'm leaning on going that route. Anybody know how the linkages align between my stock '65 401 carb and a '66 Q-Jet?
The Jalopy Journal
