Register now to get rid of these ads!

Hot Rods Intake/carb question???

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Nos1partstore, Feb 18, 2020.

  1. Nos1partstore
    Joined: Jun 20, 2012
    Posts: 291

    Nos1partstore
    Member

    i thought the one i posted made more sense because of what the base of my carb plate looks like...see my picture, i could certainly be wrong though
     

    Attached Files:

  2. tubman
    Joined: May 16, 2007
    Posts: 6,913

    tubman
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I would take this guy up on his offer. You'll probably never get a cheaper education.
     
    saltflats likes this.
  3. You should have put these photos in the first post. The flow path from the carbs through the kit adapter still looks torturous and restrictive. But it would work with your current intake to a degree, just not particularly efficiently. And you still would need to fabricate an additional square bore (4 holes) plate to block off the heat cross-over. (None of the adapters being suggested will do that.)

    No one is listening to Carb King, who seems to be the only one who knows what he's talking about. :oops:

    Regarding the "kit"; is the linkage progressive or do both carbs open in sync? The 'progressive' linkage option would function more like the 4-barrel that the intake was designed to use...... but since the carbs are so small maybe there won't be any bog issues to worry about if both carbs open at once.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2020
  4. Nos1partstore
    Joined: Jun 20, 2012
    Posts: 291

    Nos1partstore
    Member

    Sir, it is a progressive setup
     
  5. Crap! I'm mixing myself up! I forgot you have that spread bore intake. I was thinking square bore. :confused:
    I guess you will need an adapter plus a custom block-off plate. My apologies if I stepped on anyone's foreskin. :eek:
    However, the flow path from the carbs to the intake is yet more convoluted. It will work, but sort of like if you ran around the block while trying to breathe through a straw. o_O

    Changing the intake to what Carb King suggested is the least restrictive, best option.
     
  6. You might be taking the hard way to under performance,but I understand where your coming from.It could look old school,and run no worst than a stock 2 barrel.With a 262 your just building a cruiser,and if it keeps up with flatheads that might be enough to get you to the burger joint on cruise night.In the last 50 years I have tried many "I"ll make it fit if it kills my wallet projects,and some worked...some didn't.Its the fun of the learning curve that has kept me in the hobby this long.If I had every dollar back spent on cars retirement would be someplace warmer,but oh well its been a great learning hobby.
     
  7. Tickety Boo
    Joined: Feb 2, 2015
    Posts: 1,610

    Tickety Boo
    Member
    from Wisconsin

    Wow :oops:, Sorry
    The 2x2 bottom of your base is different from what I thought, the primary's of the Q-jet intake are spaced a lot further apart v/s the square bore, so are the primary holes of the (post #27) square bore side of the adapter plate moved closer to center?
    Its hard to tell from the picture.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2020
  8. dirty old man
    Joined: Feb 2, 2008
    Posts: 8,910

    dirty old man
    Member Emeritus

    That manifold is possibly intended for the spreadbore Holley intended to replace a Quadrajet, and as Jon stated, using those old 94s is a sure way to insure loss of what little power that 262 has.
    But if you just gotta have a pair of 2bbls on the engine, then look around for a 2X2 mauifold on Ebay.
     
  9. You know what I would do....swap meet season is around the corner...take the adaptor plate,and walk around looking at used manifolds.If you find one that's open center with lots of area around the opening see if your plate fits.If theres enough area on the manifold you might even be able to drill a new mounting pattern on both the manifold,and you plate.
     
    Tickety Boo likes this.
  10. It's progressive alright ..Starting with the rear carb (which is over the secondary holes of the manifold)
    Do I have to say that this is a very bad idea?
    Thought I might mention that it's not going to look real vintage with the holes on the front of the cylinder heads ;)
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.