Register now to get rid of these ads!

multi carbs...

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by T-Roy, Aug 27, 2006.

  1. Hey fellas,

    I'm going to run a 2x2 setup on the Chrysler 383 that's going in my Plymouth. In your experience, what carbs would run best? I know where a set of 94's are that I can probably get pretty reasonable, but not sure these would be the best route to go. What are your thoughts?
  2. 53SledSleeve
    Joined: Feb 25, 2003
    Posts: 362


    I'm glad you asked this, I'm contemplating the same thing. Either 2x2 or 3x2. I've got a 3x2 on my 350 in my 53 chebby, but I want something different on my 383.
  3. George
    Joined: Jan 1, 2005
    Posts: 7,388


    94s are rated @ 155-185 CFM, depending on what you have. Seems a bit low on CFM.
  4. I've got 3 EAB's on a 56 olds 324 tied together on fixed linkage. It runs like a swiss watch

  5. Mutt
    Joined: Feb 6, 2003
    Posts: 3,219


    It's cooler to have a well performing motor than it is to have 2 two bbls on a four barrel manifold. You talk about stroking it with a 440 crank, and then want to put 2 two bbls on it? If you're not interested in performance, why put a 383 in it?:confused:

  6. Mutt, you got me on that one.

    I've actually decided this car is going to be more of a cruiser than trying to get every last bit of hp/tq I can out of it. I'm sticking with the 383. Basically a stock build with a cam around .450 lift and 218 deg dur @ .050. I had also given the thought of running 4 inline 2bbls on a dual 4 intake, but wasn't sure how reliable or if that would be too much carburetion for the motor.

    A 3x2 setup would be fine, if I could find a manifold within my budget. It seems that 3x2 intakes for these lo-deck motors go for a lot more than a 2x4 intake.
  7. George, I had heard that the 94's were rated around 230 cfm. I don't remember where I heard that, it just kinda stuck in my mind. 230 does seem a bit much for those carbs, but I didn't know.
  8. SinisterCustom
    Joined: Feb 18, 2004
    Posts: 8,269


    2 94's is not enough for a good runnig 383. IMO
  9. That's what I'm gathering from these posts. So, it sounds like I need to run at least 3 x 2bbl carbs. If not, more.

    What are the differences between the EAB, 7RT and 8BA etc. carburetors? Guys, thanks for all the responses. :cool:
  10. My EAB carbs are about 135CFM each. They look alot like 94's
  11. Bugman
    Joined: Nov 17, 2001
    Posts: 3,483


    The Holley 2100 which is nearly identical to the 94, came in 200 and 300 CFM versions. The biggest difference is that they use a 4 bolt flange instead of 3. they were most notably used on the '70's "Bugspray" kit for the air cooled VW.
  12. dickster27
    Joined: Feb 28, 2004
    Posts: 3,190

    from Texas

    The Holley 2110 is the one you want for the biggest CFM ratings......they look like the regular 94 but have 1 1/16" venturi area and bigger throttle plates as well as annular spray bars like the later model Holley 4 barrels. You should get what you need from these and they are still the 3 bolt base.
  13. Awesome dickster! Any idea what year and vehicles these carbs came on from the factory?
  14. One of the nice things about big mopars is that you can get a couple manifold flanges cut (or DIY w/ drill press & die grinder) and fab up manifold w/o having to worry about sealing valley.

    Be a cool way to go 4X2...
  15. 1952henry
    Joined: Jan 8, 2006
    Posts: 806


    The EAB (52-53), 8BA (49-51), and 7RT (48-51 truck), 8RT (52-53 truck) were all basically the same carb. Referred to as the 94, based on the .94" venturi. The 7RTs and 8RTs originally had a flanged top as the trucks had a different air cleaner.

    Later carbs, such as the EAB and 8RT had what are called high lift nozzles. They are supposed to combat perculation. The airhorns had a relief cast in them to clear the high lift nozzles.

    They all had about the same airflow, less than 200cfm. As long as you have the right airhorn, all parts interchange.

    AS someone pointed out, the later carbs had flowed more cfm. This started in 54 with the EBU, then EGC. They had 1/1/16" venturis.
  16. Painterman
    Joined: Jan 19, 2006
    Posts: 537


  17. Man, I tell ya what. Ya gotta love this board. I post on another "hotrodders" board, but does not come anywhere close to comparing with the knowledge found here on the HAMB where the real Hotrodders are. You guys are great. And you don't have to wait 3 or 4 days for someone to respond.

    I think I'll use the smaller carbs and go with an inline 4 x 2bbl set up. The motor came stock with a Carter BB 2bbl carb, so with a bit more cam and these carbs, it should run pretty good. :cool:
  18. man-a-fre
    Joined: Apr 13, 2005
    Posts: 1,311


    Stromsburg 48's is what id run on it.
  19. 1952henry
    Joined: Jan 8, 2006
    Posts: 806


    If you go with the Holleys, make sure the parts are identical in whatever number of carbs you use. Specifically jets and nozzle bars.
  20. What's the cfm of 48's?
  21. Ok... Are the nozzle bars numbered just like jets? I assume the nozzle bars do the same job as squirters on typical Holley 4bbl carbs?
  22. dickster27
    Joined: Feb 28, 2004
    Posts: 3,190

    from Texas

    Cruzin, go to Street Rod Builder issue #Dec., 2001. This will tell you more about Ford/Holley 94 style carburetors than you will ever need to know. and you will then see why you want to run the bigger units as compared to the wimpy Strombergs of any size or the smaller 94's. Why, because the parts all cost the same but you get more bang for the buck.
    the Dickster
  23. Thanks, googling now.

    Your talking about the 2110's correct? I just figured the smaller carbs x 4 would run better than to be over carbed with the larger bore carburetors...

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!


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.