Which one is really the best carb?
07-28-04, 03:33 AM
#1
Lorem ipsum dolor sit ame
Thread Starter
Which one is really the best carb?
In an AIM chat with another forum member, this came up. He was of the opinion that a Weber 48 IDA would outperform a modified Nikki carb (sterling carb). Does anybody has factual data to support which one performs better and why? obviously don't want to make this a flame war, just stick to facts, not opinions.
07-28-04, 05:59 AM
#2
it WILL run
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Raleigh,MS
Posts: 2,017
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
on any real high performance setup, yeah most aftermarket carbs would be able to do better then a nikki
the main advantage of the modded nikki is that you can get good performance for 300$ rather than 600$ IMHO
the main advantage of the modded nikki is that you can get good performance for 300$ rather than 600$ IMHO
07-28-04, 06:44 AM
#4
No distributor? No thanks
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Outskirts of Road Atlanta
Posts: 3,438
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
Webers go as high as 51s, but that would be too large for you. Dellorto DHLA (sidedraft) and DRLA (downdraft) perform the same as Webers, but with better progression circuits for part-throttle operation and they have a choke. Webers are much easier to come by, parts-wise, and are common performance carbs. There's also the Holleys, though, which you really can't match for servicability and availability of parts. Of course, then there's the modded Nikki.
07-28-04, 06:58 AM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its really down to the skill of the tuner. For most people this is the limit as much as the raw flow rate of the carb.
However, given the same skill of tuner you can get more HP on a larger DCOE, but you may loose some low end torque, simply because you loose the progressive nature of a 4 bbl.
The main advantage with webers is the adjustable trumpet length, allowing you to fine tune the power band. Whether the manifold you chose is free enough flowing to allow this effect to be seen is another kettle of fish altogether.
If I have my sums right, doing a first order approximation, the standard Nikki should be able to flow as much air as a 45DCOE with 40mm chokes.
Not found many people who have REALLY taken the time to find out what the best setup for a weber on a rotary is. Most seem to just copy what they have heared, leaving most weber setups horrendously sub-optimal.
However, given the same skill of tuner you can get more HP on a larger DCOE, but you may loose some low end torque, simply because you loose the progressive nature of a 4 bbl.
The main advantage with webers is the adjustable trumpet length, allowing you to fine tune the power band. Whether the manifold you chose is free enough flowing to allow this effect to be seen is another kettle of fish altogether.
If I have my sums right, doing a first order approximation, the standard Nikki should be able to flow as much air as a 45DCOE with 40mm chokes.
Not found many people who have REALLY taken the time to find out what the best setup for a weber on a rotary is. Most seem to just copy what they have heared, leaving most weber setups horrendously sub-optimal.
Trending Topics
07-28-04, 11:49 AM
#9
Nikki-Modder Rex-Rodder
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Trying to convince some clown not to put a Holley 600 on his 12a.
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
6 Posts
Mel I'll kick your ***!
And if you beat me, I'll kick your *** for beating me!
(...or I'll wind up getting my *** kicked twice!)
I can do the math here for bore size cross-sectional comparison between a stock Nikki, our Sterling Carb, and the most popular 2bbl choke size choice for the 12a stockport, but this is all theorertical. Many other variables account for flowability such as veturi design, booster design, booster placement, horn design, and manifold design, as well as impedances ranginging from the obvious throttle and choke shaft diameters to the minutia of screw heads and choke plate stop-tabs. Even secondary operation vacuum ports in venturis will effect flow.
So with all this in mind, this "fluff" on paper is just hopeful theoretics, and constitutes a general idea. Flow can only be determined on a bench, and as we have seen, the minutest details effect flow dramatically.
But even the bench can only be relied upon as just a very accurate measurement tool.
It won't determine main circuit vacuum signal, can't account for float bowl design, and tells us very little about the emulsion system behavoir -something that is absolutely vital to proper carburetion.
(-actually, it can tell us about circuit vacuum pull and efficiency graphs @ given air flow, but it's just easier to do that **** on the car.)
Ultimately, the test is how each carb performs on identical engines, with identical drivers, and each carb having been tuned by a master tuner that works primarily with that model carb.
Here's some math for mental excercise...
Area = pi x (r)squared
Where
"pi" = 22/7, (or 3.14)
and "r" is the radius, or 1/2 the diameter.
Stock Nikki Primary Venturi diameter is 20mm
Area of *SNPV* = 3.14 x (10mm)squared
Area of *SNPV* = 314 square mm
Stock Nikki Secondary Venturi diameter is 28mm
Area of *SNSV* = 3.14 x (14mm)squared
Area of *SNSV* = 616 square mm
Let's combine the areas of one primary venturi and one secondary venturi and do the equasion backwards to arrive at one equivalent large venturi, which will be one half of the Stock Nikki's breathing ability. In theory, it will be like one bore of a 2 bbl carb. So let's see...
Area of one primary venturi + Area of one secondary venturi of the Stock Nikki =
314 sq mm + 616 sq mm =
930 sq mm.
Let's find out what the diameter would be of this area...
Area = 930 sq mm
Area = pi x (r)squared
Area = 3.14 x (r)squared
930 sq mm = 3.14 x (r)squared
dividing both sides of the equasion by "3.14" to revise,
930 sq mm / 3.14 = (r)squared
...and the new equasion looks like this:
296 mm sq = (r)squared
...or...
(r)squared = 296 mm sq
If we unsquare "(r)squared", we have to do the same to the other side of the equasion...
The 'square root' of "(r)squared" = "r".
The 'square root' of "296 mm sq" = 17.2 mm
r = 17.2 mm
r is 1/2 the diameter, so 17.2 mm x 2 gives us the 2bbl venturi diameter...
34mm.
So a stock Nikki carb has the same combined bore area as a 2 bbl carb with 34mm chokes.
Does it flow as much?
Not bloody likely.
Doing that math for the Sterling Carb demonstrates that the combined bore area is the same as a 2 bbl with 38mm chokes, and we make a slightly larger version for heavily ported engines that translates to a two bbl with 40 mm chokes. (The "Banana Carb")
It is because of heavy modification and our venturi design that I feel confident that our carbs will flow as much as two bbl with even slightly larger chokes than our calculations indicate. This may sound like an impossibility for most reading this, but if you read up on our old posts regarding Carls outragious flow findings and suprises, you'll see that air flow can behave very suprisingly, and is very subject to minute changes in venturi design and very subject to the laws of physics and surface adhesion.
In a nutshell, fluid flowing through complex passages will try to take the path of least resistance. It can only do that to a point, because fuid isn't compressable...it just won't budge. It has to keep going because of it's nature and it's wieght.
Air will stop dead in it's tracks at any part of the complex passageway that it doesn't like.
There's just a whole lot going on with the air flowing through a tube, and Fulie-boys take notice of guys like Carl doing all this flow work, because the laws of physics regarding airflow are the same for a FI throttle body.
As far as the question, "Which is the best carb?", well, untill tests are completed to everyone's satisfaction, and until we have the ported manifold sorted out for those tests, I can't state for a fact that our carb is better than overall than any other.
What I can state is that our carb does not have some of the shortcomings of some of the most popular choices.
For example, Holley primaries are just too damn bigg to do any good on a rotary.
Because the rotary has such a low air flow at low rpm, the large primary mouth of even a 465 Holley won't have enough air velocity through the venturi to provide the low pressure within the vena constrica of the venturi to cause a strong signal to the main circuit.
-It simply can'ty deliver the fuel.
...Ok, so you jet the thing so it can. But then as the velocity increase, you have a mixture that progressively get richer to an ineffective point.
Unfortuneately, the Holley is not very tuneable regarding jetting. A tunable emulsion system in the Holley would make it a bearable carburetor.
The two bbls will suffer on the rotary for the same reason.
Both the Holley and the Weber XXmm can be tuned to deliver fantastic power at the top, and if you're really good, you'll find a tiny comprimise (barely noticeable) in order to get the mid range dialed in, too.
But there's just no getting around the laws of physics regarding the low end.
Keep in mind something...the rotary engine has a substantial increase in VE as it increases in RPM. There's definitely a curve of intake necessity for the rotary as it runs through the band under load.
These carbs were originally designed for piston engines with relatively flat increases in volume throughout relatively short rpm bands.
It's really the advances by tuners in the superbike world that has made the Weber a good choice for the rotary.
As of yet, the best I can brag about the Sterling Carb is that because it is a 4 bbl with very small primaries, the low volume through the engine at low rpms is actually just enough to provide sufficient floe velocity through those small venturis to give a good strong vacuum signal to the main circuit.
The fuel is there. You can richen the low end just by rejetting the emulsion system, and I'm confident that no other carb with provide as much lowend torque to get you into the power band of the engine as ours. Then, we have opened the carb up just enough to get the most power out of the engine, as well.
The carb was designed for this application, and then it was stifled with emissions contol **** and "user-friendly", idiot-proof starting and running assists.
Once stripped of all that **** and trimmed a bit, it is an optimally sized carb that can deliver optimal performance, and can be tuned to any style of driving, from economy to performance, with seperate needs for seperate rpm ranges.
But, you have to be willing to spend the HOURS tuning and tracking your results in order to enjoy these benifits.
It bolts on easily, but it is NOT a bolt-on performance part.
There's work involved.
And if you beat me, I'll kick your *** for beating me!
(...or I'll wind up getting my *** kicked twice!)I can do the math here for bore size cross-sectional comparison between a stock Nikki, our Sterling Carb, and the most popular 2bbl choke size choice for the 12a stockport, but this is all theorertical. Many other variables account for flowability such as veturi design, booster design, booster placement, horn design, and manifold design, as well as impedances ranginging from the obvious throttle and choke shaft diameters to the minutia of screw heads and choke plate stop-tabs. Even secondary operation vacuum ports in venturis will effect flow.
So with all this in mind, this "fluff" on paper is just hopeful theoretics, and constitutes a general idea. Flow can only be determined on a bench, and as we have seen, the minutest details effect flow dramatically.
But even the bench can only be relied upon as just a very accurate measurement tool.
It won't determine main circuit vacuum signal, can't account for float bowl design, and tells us very little about the emulsion system behavoir -something that is absolutely vital to proper carburetion.
(-actually, it can tell us about circuit vacuum pull and efficiency graphs @ given air flow, but it's just easier to do that **** on the car.)
Ultimately, the test is how each carb performs on identical engines, with identical drivers, and each carb having been tuned by a master tuner that works primarily with that model carb.
Here's some math for mental excercise...
Area = pi x (r)squared
Where
"pi" = 22/7, (or 3.14)
and "r" is the radius, or 1/2 the diameter.
Stock Nikki Primary Venturi diameter is 20mm
Area of *SNPV* = 3.14 x (10mm)squared
Area of *SNPV* = 314 square mm
Stock Nikki Secondary Venturi diameter is 28mm
Area of *SNSV* = 3.14 x (14mm)squared
Area of *SNSV* = 616 square mm
Let's combine the areas of one primary venturi and one secondary venturi and do the equasion backwards to arrive at one equivalent large venturi, which will be one half of the Stock Nikki's breathing ability. In theory, it will be like one bore of a 2 bbl carb. So let's see...
Area of one primary venturi + Area of one secondary venturi of the Stock Nikki =
314 sq mm + 616 sq mm =
930 sq mm.
Let's find out what the diameter would be of this area...
Area = 930 sq mm
Area = pi x (r)squared
Area = 3.14 x (r)squared
930 sq mm = 3.14 x (r)squared
dividing both sides of the equasion by "3.14" to revise,
930 sq mm / 3.14 = (r)squared
...and the new equasion looks like this:
296 mm sq = (r)squared
...or...
(r)squared = 296 mm sq
If we unsquare "(r)squared", we have to do the same to the other side of the equasion...
The 'square root' of "(r)squared" = "r".
The 'square root' of "296 mm sq" = 17.2 mm
r = 17.2 mm
r is 1/2 the diameter, so 17.2 mm x 2 gives us the 2bbl venturi diameter...
34mm.
So a stock Nikki carb has the same combined bore area as a 2 bbl carb with 34mm chokes.
Does it flow as much?
Not bloody likely.
Doing that math for the Sterling Carb demonstrates that the combined bore area is the same as a 2 bbl with 38mm chokes, and we make a slightly larger version for heavily ported engines that translates to a two bbl with 40 mm chokes. (The "Banana Carb")
It is because of heavy modification and our venturi design that I feel confident that our carbs will flow as much as two bbl with even slightly larger chokes than our calculations indicate. This may sound like an impossibility for most reading this, but if you read up on our old posts regarding Carls outragious flow findings and suprises, you'll see that air flow can behave very suprisingly, and is very subject to minute changes in venturi design and very subject to the laws of physics and surface adhesion.
In a nutshell, fluid flowing through complex passages will try to take the path of least resistance. It can only do that to a point, because fuid isn't compressable...it just won't budge. It has to keep going because of it's nature and it's wieght.
Air will stop dead in it's tracks at any part of the complex passageway that it doesn't like.
There's just a whole lot going on with the air flowing through a tube, and Fulie-boys take notice of guys like Carl doing all this flow work, because the laws of physics regarding airflow are the same for a FI throttle body.
As far as the question, "Which is the best carb?", well, untill tests are completed to everyone's satisfaction, and until we have the ported manifold sorted out for those tests, I can't state for a fact that our carb is better than overall than any other.
What I can state is that our carb does not have some of the shortcomings of some of the most popular choices.
For example, Holley primaries are just too damn bigg to do any good on a rotary.
Because the rotary has such a low air flow at low rpm, the large primary mouth of even a 465 Holley won't have enough air velocity through the venturi to provide the low pressure within the vena constrica of the venturi to cause a strong signal to the main circuit.
-It simply can'ty deliver the fuel.
...Ok, so you jet the thing so it can. But then as the velocity increase, you have a mixture that progressively get richer to an ineffective point.
Unfortuneately, the Holley is not very tuneable regarding jetting. A tunable emulsion system in the Holley would make it a bearable carburetor.
The two bbls will suffer on the rotary for the same reason.
Both the Holley and the Weber XXmm can be tuned to deliver fantastic power at the top, and if you're really good, you'll find a tiny comprimise (barely noticeable) in order to get the mid range dialed in, too.
But there's just no getting around the laws of physics regarding the low end.
Keep in mind something...the rotary engine has a substantial increase in VE as it increases in RPM. There's definitely a curve of intake necessity for the rotary as it runs through the band under load.
These carbs were originally designed for piston engines with relatively flat increases in volume throughout relatively short rpm bands.
It's really the advances by tuners in the superbike world that has made the Weber a good choice for the rotary.
As of yet, the best I can brag about the Sterling Carb is that because it is a 4 bbl with very small primaries, the low volume through the engine at low rpms is actually just enough to provide sufficient floe velocity through those small venturis to give a good strong vacuum signal to the main circuit.
The fuel is there. You can richen the low end just by rejetting the emulsion system, and I'm confident that no other carb with provide as much lowend torque to get you into the power band of the engine as ours. Then, we have opened the carb up just enough to get the most power out of the engine, as well.
The carb was designed for this application, and then it was stifled with emissions contol **** and "user-friendly", idiot-proof starting and running assists.
Once stripped of all that **** and trimmed a bit, it is an optimally sized carb that can deliver optimal performance, and can be tuned to any style of driving, from economy to performance, with seperate needs for seperate rpm ranges.
But, you have to be willing to spend the HOURS tuning and tracking your results in order to enjoy these benifits.
It bolts on easily, but it is NOT a bolt-on performance part.
There's work involved.
07-28-04, 12:00 PM
#10
Never satisfied
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San diego, CA
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hmm, all this talk points to air being a fluid. Yet air is compressible, ever had any in your brake or clutch lines? Air still takes the path of least resistance, but under mechanical means it can be compressed. True fluids cannot.
Your question is very difficult to answer. My holley runs great, but others do not. Seen an engine running a delorto barely have enough power to go up hills. This was all blamed on bad compression in one rotor. When a holley was substituted, the motor picked up most of the power it had lost. Explain that.
Your question is very difficult to answer. My holley runs great, but others do not. Seen an engine running a delorto barely have enough power to go up hills. This was all blamed on bad compression in one rotor. When a holley was substituted, the motor picked up most of the power it had lost. Explain that.
07-28-04, 12:17 PM
#11
Lives on the Forum
Wow! There's a whole lot of brains floating around on this thread! I think I just pulled something reading the last two posts! LOL. My brain hurts!!! 
07-28-04, 12:19 PM
#12
No distributor? No thanks
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Outskirts of Road Atlanta
Posts: 3,438
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
Originally Posted by Xavier8
hmm, all this talk points to air being a fluid. Yet air is compressible, ever had any in your brake or clutch lines? Air still takes the path of least resistance, but under mechanical means it can be compressed. True fluids cannot.
Your question is very difficult to answer. My holley runs great, but others do not. Seen an engine running a delorto barely have enough power to go up hills. This was all blamed on bad compression in one rotor. When a holley was substituted, the motor picked up most of the power it had lost. Explain that.
Your question is very difficult to answer. My holley runs great, but others do not. Seen an engine running a delorto barely have enough power to go up hills. This was all blamed on bad compression in one rotor. When a holley was substituted, the motor picked up most of the power it had lost. Explain that.
As to how much better the Holley runs than the Dellorto.... Jorge at European Motorworks doesn't have the jets the Dellorto needs to run just right and the owner (ahem) could never find any.
Last edited by Crit; 07-28-04 at 12:24 PM.
07-28-04, 12:28 PM
#13
[QUOTE=Crit]
Jorge at European Motorworks doesn't have the jets the Dellorto needs to run just right and the owner (ahem) could never find any.[
/QUOTE]
Im not sure if this will help you but you can use reamers or index/number drill. temporary solution if you cant find the right size.
Jorge at European Motorworks doesn't have the jets the Dellorto needs to run just right and the owner (ahem) could never find any.[
/QUOTE]
Im not sure if this will help you but you can use reamers or index/number drill. temporary solution if you cant find the right size.
07-28-04, 12:28 PM
#14
Lorem ipsum dolor sit ame
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by wackyracer
Nope but I will line you up with that one.
just kidding) and then we could line up and see how they perform. Or maybe even dyno them and see what they put out. But testing them by comparing the weber in your SA with an aggressive SP with header, DLIDFIS, electric fan, who knows what kinda clutch (did I miss something?) with a sterling carb in my FB with a mild (RB) SP, stock manifold to a cat replacement pipe, stock ignition (except a blaster 2 leading ignition coil), belt fan, stock clutch and what, maybe 100-200 lbs heavier weight, would throw too many additional variables to be able to evaluate the carbs themselves.
07-28-04, 12:31 PM
#15
Originally Posted by Sterling
Mel I'll kick your ***!
And if you beat me, I'll kick your *** for beating me! (...or I'll wind up getting my *** kicked twice!)
.
.
.
.
But, you have to be willing to spend the HOURS tuning and tracking your results in order to enjoy these benifits.
It bolts on easily, but it is NOT a bolt-on performance part.
There's work involved.
And if you beat me, I'll kick your *** for beating me!
(...or I'll wind up getting my *** kicked twice!).
.
.
.
But, you have to be willing to spend the HOURS tuning and tracking your results in order to enjoy these benifits.
It bolts on easily, but it is NOT a bolt-on performance part.
There's work involved.
lol. in comparison with martial arts, this is the only way to find out if the carb is competitive. You never know, I may have you build me a sterling carb for turbo application (old RX-2 carb).
And yes, I agree 100%. any bolt on crap (no matter if its weber, holley or dellorto) will require hours of tuning.
07-28-04, 12:34 PM
#16
Originally Posted by cdrad51
For the purpose of purely testing the carb, and as Sterling stated, cars would have to be identical otherwise, i.e. your SA and my FB would have to have the exact same setup, weight the same, and be driven by identical drivers. We can achieve all that (except the drivers, you're too old to compare to my mad skillz, just kidding) and then we could line up and see how they perform. Or maybe even dyno them and see what they put out. But testing them by comparing the weber in your SA with an aggressive SP with header, DLIDFIS, electric fan, who knows what kinda clutch (did I miss something?) with a sterling carb in my FB with a mild (RB) SP, stock manifold to a cat replacement pipe, stock ignition (except a blaster 2 leading ignition coil), belt fan, stock clutch and what, maybe 100-200 lbs heavier weight, would throw too many additional variables to be able to evaluate the carbs themselves.
just kidding) and then we could line up and see how they perform. Or maybe even dyno them and see what they put out. But testing them by comparing the weber in your SA with an aggressive SP with header, DLIDFIS, electric fan, who knows what kinda clutch (did I miss something?) with a sterling carb in my FB with a mild (RB) SP, stock manifold to a cat replacement pipe, stock ignition (except a blaster 2 leading ignition coil), belt fan, stock clutch and what, maybe 100-200 lbs heavier weight, would throw too many additional variables to be able to evaluate the carbs themselves.thats what I told you before, you need headers. well, i think i have an extra set of 12-A header in case ur interested. and yes, SA is way lighter than the FB. Maybe what we can do is install it in the SA and see how it runs.
07-28-04, 12:46 PM
#17
Lorem ipsum dolor sit ame
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by wackyracer
thats what I told you before, you need headers. well, i think i have an extra set of 12-A header in case ur interested. and yes, SA is way lighter than the FB. Maybe what we can do is install it in the SA and see how it runs.
Yeah it would be a good idea to install my Sterling carb, when it comes, in your SA and compare.
07-28-04, 01:51 PM
#18
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: wishing i was back in FL
Posts: 4,192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the sterling carb made my fb a bat out of hell when i just ran it open turbo (long story). so i was running it like a N/A application but i had the drag of the turbo, and the car was waaay faster than it ever was with a fresh rebuilt nikki and mech secondaries. so i cant imagine if i still had my racing beat header and exhaust on there. now to get it to handle the boost. HOLY HELL YES!
07-28-04, 05:58 PM
#20
Nikki-Modder Rex-Rodder
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Trying to convince some clown not to put a Holley 600 on his 12a.
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
6 Posts
Originally Posted by wackyracer
With my experience with all of the available carbs for RX, the easiest one to tune will be any of the webber family (dcoe or IDA), not to mention the the availability of parts.
The emulsion tubes are drilled and tapped to accept Holley Dominator air bleeds, which also fit as fuel jets. (10-32 threads, 1/4" heads)
Venturis are cut engine-need specific, so there's no replacing them (no reason).
The accelerator pump is modified as well, to deliver a healthy shot, but continue the shot right through the opening of the secondaries.
A new modification I'm working on is a tuneable vacuum box for vacuum secondary operation that can easily be switched to mechanical operation with no tools required. This will make the carburetor more versatile, appealing to those feeling fuel prices that want to "toggle" their machines from "daily driver" economy mode to "weekend warrior" performance mode.
So even if I can't beat Mel's ***, I'll be able to boast the most versatile carb for the rotary!
(-Afterall, appealing to the budget minded has been a high priority for me from the start.
)
07-28-04, 06:26 PM
#21
Hunting Skylines
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Posts: 3,431
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by Sterling
I can do the math here for bore size cross-sectional comparison between a stock Nikki, our Sterling Carb, and the most popular 2bbl choke size choice for the 12a stockport, but this is all theorertical. Many other variables account for flowability such as veturi design, booster design, booster placement, horn design, and manifold design, as well as impedances ranginging from the obvious throttle and choke shaft diameters to the minutia of screw heads and choke plate stop-tabs. Even secondary operation vacuum ports in venturis will effect flow.
07-28-04, 06:32 PM
#22
i was checking up online the weights of the SA and FB... i don't know if the resource is false or not, but it advertised BOTH CARS to be roughly around 2350+lbs. GSL and SA that is
Last edited by d0 Luck; 07-28-04 at 06:36 PM.
07-28-04, 07:51 PM
#24
why not just test them all on one car and one dyno? tuning all the candidates (Sterling/CArl, Weber, Dell, Holley, whatever ...) may not be able to occur in one day, but we can certainly find one car on this board that can be used as test mule, right?
i would say test it on a road course as well, but then we'll get into the differences between driver preferences, so this is one time i would leave it all up to a dyno.
my two revs ...
i would say test it on a road course as well, but then we'll get into the differences between driver preferences, so this is one time i would leave it all up to a dyno.
my two revs ...
07-28-04, 10:06 PM
#25
Airflow is my life
Originally Posted by REVHED
There's a reason (other than the ones you mentioned) that you can't just compare cross sectional area between a two-barrel and four-barrel carby. A two-barrel will flow more than a four-barrel of equal cross sectional area because the two-barrel has less wetted area. The wetted area is the circumferance of the barrel multiplied by the length. The greater the wetted area the more friction there is and more resistance to flow.
Last edited by Rx7carl; 07-28-04 at 10:08 PM.