Who owned cars with multiple carburetors ?

4-2-7 said:
Not on early cars like the 63, it wasn't until the C6 Auto trans came out that you could get HP motors with a auto trans. 1966 and that's the alphanumerical designation, C= the 60s decade 6=the year. So by the time Ford put out the 7 liter engine 66 Galaxy & GT/ GTA Fairlane's you could get it both in auto or 4speed. In 67 the mustangs got a bigger engine compartment and GT 390s with the C6 as well as the Fairlanes

As for me I would never put the early PS in a fast car as I want the solid feel of manual steering. But with a auto trans you can't rock the gears like a 4speed parking it with manual, so a 4speed also helps steering the car at slow speed. But I wouldn't want squirrely steering at 130mph
Click to expand...
Are we arguing about different things, Dan? My grandma had a Rangoon Red '63 Galaxie XL convertible with a 390 Z-code/C6 and full-boat options, including PS and PB. I know because I sold it for her in 1986! Agree that you couldn't have gotten that car with a Q or R code and auto, but not sure if PS or PB would have been available with those motors ... ?
 
noogies said:
Are we arguing about different things, Dan? My grandma had a Rangoon Red '63 Galaxie XL convertible with a 390 Z-code/C6 and full-boat options, including PS and PB. I know because I sold it for her in 1986! Agree that you couldn't have gotten that car with a Q or R code and auto, but not sure if PS or PB would have been available with those motors ... ?
Click to expand...
I'm just about a walking encyclopedia for 60s Ford cars and some of the 70.:rolleyes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_C6_transmission

The Ford C6 is a heavy-duty automatic transmission built by Ford Motor Companybetween 1966 and 1996. It was marketed as the "SelectShift Cruise-O-Matic". Compared to its predecessor MX transmission, the C6 offered lower weight, less complexity, less parasitic power loss, and greater torque capacity for larger engines. It did this without exceeding the packaging dimensions of the MX.
 
4-2-7 said:
I'm just about a walking encyclopedia for 60s Ford cars and some of the 70.:rolleyes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_C6_transmission

The Ford C6 is a heavy-duty automatic transmission built by Ford Motor Companybetween 1966 and 1996. It was marketed as the "SelectShift Cruise-O-Matic". Compared to its predecessor MX transmission, the C6 offered lower weight, less complexity, less parasitic power loss, and greater torque capacity for larger engines. It did this without exceeding the packaging dimensions of the MX.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Dan. So Grandma's must have been an MX. Was the MX the same as the big Lincoln trans that they used in the automatic Thunderbolts?
 
'65 MGB with twin side draft SUs.
At the time (early 80s) I worked at a parts store in the middle of nowhere west central IL and we had 2 rebuild kits in stock (with an inch of dust included - no charge).
 
1973 Jensen Healey with twin Stromberg 175's, real nightmare when smog checks were required
1964 Triumph Spitfire with twin SU HS2's, doesn't get much simpler
 
By extension ( my father)
73 Pontiac Grandville
455 with crane cam and tri power from 389 GTO Motor. I can't tell you how pissed he was when I snapped a rocker shaft:yikes:
 
The kz1300 in my avatar had 3 2 barrel mikuni cv carbs.Though it weighed a portly 700 lbs it was a much faster bike than the six Honda.Tons of torque.Got between 35 to 45 mpg too boot.I do love the Honda also I'm not putting it down just stating well established facts.
 
Markoneswift said:
Mini Cooper S with twin SU carbs.
Triumph TR7 with twin SU
Triumph Stag with twin Stromberg's

My dad is a whizz with multi carb setups, balances them by ear with a piece of pipe :)
Click to expand...

Nice! I always say, if you can't keep a car running that has twin SUs, you aren't much of a mechanic. One of the simplest carbs out there, with excellent fuel atomization.
 
noogies said:
You could definitely get PS and PB with a Z code/4-gear. R and Q codes with their higher RPM capability may have been another can of worms. I'll have to check that out ...
Click to expand...
Yeah probably just the solid lifter motors, 390 Police Special, 406 and 427's, not enough vacuum. My car was weird, deluxe interior, manual trans, steering and brakes. oof!
 
I don't miss carbs atall expecially in the winter at -30 or so.Is there even a new car made with carbs?
 
62 Alfa Guilia spider Veloce Dual side draft weber carbs. Every now and then I'd pull off the air cleaner. The induction sound was glorious.
 
2011etec said:
I don't miss carbs atall expecially in the winter at -30 or so.Is there even a new car made with carbs?
Click to expand...
I don't know about other countries, but the last vehicle sold in the US with a carb, at least that I've seen in person, was a '93 Isuzu 2wd pickup with a 2.3 liter. Autozone's website says they were carb'ed up to '94. I'm surprised they held on that long.

In my couple minutes of research, I read that Honda Preludes up until 1990 actually had dual carburetors.:idea: Not being a Honda person, I didn't know that.
 
Last edited:
leesonic said:
I guessed Lancia just by the spare wheel before I even saw the valve covers. Do I win a prize? Monte Carlo or Beta, though they might have had different names over here?
Click to expand...

You definitely get the prize. I was racking my brain trying to figure it out, and Lancia didn't even occur to me (nor could I read the valve covers, er cam covers)

We called it 'Scorpion' over here because Chevy already had a car called Monte Carlo. The 'regular' Beta was front engine.
 
'76 Triumph TR7 (dual Stromberg CD). Ran great after I undid the previous owner's/mechanic's attempted tuning.

late-80's IMSA GTU Nissan 300ZX (triple Mikuni PHH). Ran well though the owner insisted on leaving them rich and never trying to make it run its best at any particular circuit.

'99 Ducati M900 (dual Mikuni BDST). Runs well though to get them to run GREAT is a chore and most (not me) opt to spend a large wad on Keihin FCR carbs (flat slide racing units with accelerator pumps).
 
Not mine, but my brother had a 1961 Ford Starliner with 406 engine and bucket seats taken from a 63 Galaxie. It had three 2-barrels and few other mods including heavy duty clutch. He would let me borrow it when I was16-17 and had a date. He wouldn’t let me drive it when going out with the guys :)

Sold it after a year or so because of cost to replace clutches and transmissions (4 on floor) :rolleyes:
 
I would agree with the comment about Weber DCOEs being fitted and not ever being made right. Lots of reasons; two main ones. First would be not understanding ANY multi-carb setup. Second would be starting off with the wrong size. DCOEs came in 3 sizes as I recall (and the larger DCOs in 2). Depending on the engine, how it was to be used, and its state of tune, wrong size and you'll never get good results.
 
Yes I had a few

Mini Cooper "S" with twin 1.5" SUs

Alfa Romeo Alfasud Quadrifoglio with twin 36 downdraft Webers.

Alfa Rome 33 Quadrifoglio with twin 40mm Webers.

The Alfas were surprisingly reliable fuel wise....not so much with the electrics.
 
Dual 40mm x 32mm Weber 's on my '58 VW Baja Bug and on my '62 Porsche 356B. Most bad Weber experiences are due to oversizing. If they are sized right to start it's half the battle. I did have the dreaded mid-lean condition when dialing them in for my 356, but a changing the size of the emulsion tubes fixed that right up. The other biggies are really clean fuel at a constant 3 psi. With a bowl type cartridge filter, electric fuel pumps and precision regulator they were friggin' awesome. Always wanted to do a small-block V8 with Webers, but it was just too spendy.
 
Owned and still own my '68 Triumph TR250, which has dual 1.75" Stromberg carbs stock but should end up with larger (2") dual SU's by the time it's finished.

John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom