[AMC-list] 4300 and 4350 Carb comparison

[Matt Shumaker <mshumaker@xxxxx>]

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:03:26 -0500 (EST)
From:adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  (Sandwich Maker)
To:amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [AMC-list] 4 barrel intake for a 290
Message-ID:<201502121803.t1CI3QoF028320@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

" From: Matt Shumaker<mshumaker@xxxxx>
"
" []
" I could be way,
" way off on the carburetor models, because my knowledge is current as of
" the 1971 models and I am sort of thinking backwards here.  Prior to the
" change from 290 to 304, they might have been Holley carburetors.

original 4bbl on the '66 290 [and '67 343] was a carter afb.  iirc the
4bbl on the 327 was a holley.

both edelbrock and holley make under-500cfm 4bbls.

" The 4 barrel intake from a 1978 Matador would be for a spread bore
" Motorcraft 4350.  I am very, very familiar with both the intake and the
" carburetor.  I like both of them.  But they would be extremely difficult
" to tune for a smaller-displacement V8 like the 290. Significant

that would be true, but is the 4300 not spread bore?  it was stock on
302s about this time.
________________________________________________________________________
Andrew Hay                                  the genius nature
internet rambler                            is to see what all have seen
adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                        and think what none thought


Yup. Both the 4300 and the 4350 are both spread bore carburetors.  The 4300 used four bores of almost equally identical diameter.  The 4350 used primaries that were ever so slightly smaller in diameter than the 4300.  But the secondaries in the 4350 were about 50% larger in diameter than the primaries.  It was possible to get decent fuel economy with a 4350 carburetor, if I kept my foot out of the secondaries.  But it was so much fun to use them.

_______________________________________________
AMC-list mailing list
AMC-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://list.amc-list.com/listinfo.cgi/amc-list-amc-list.com