tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: mechanical secondaries

To: tigers@autox.team.net
Subject: RE: mechanical secondaries
From: "Travis Hall" <tigerboy65@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 07:17:49 -0400
I know this subject has been beat to death, but here's my two cents.

Avoid mechanical secondaries at all costs.

My Tiger is stock, but my other car is a 1966 Mustang with a 289 bored .030 
over with a 280 degree advertised cam favoring duration on the exhaust side, 
ported heads with oversized valves(they came from Chevy of all places), high 
rise manifold (Edelbrock Performer RPM), and headers.

This is where the grief/debate comes in. I am running a 750cfm Holley with 
vacuum secondaries from summit racing equipment. One of the reasons for this 
is because the 715cfm that Shelby used on the GT350 mustangs was not 
available.  Another reason, my research prior to the build indicated that 
Ford's like cams that favor the exhaust side, and they prefer to be 
overcarbed.  I've read the Holley book, and I know what they say in theory 
(something around 500cfm), but I also know what works on the street(so does 
Mr. Shelby). I've run an Autolite 4150 (stock), a Holley 600cfm, and the 
750cfm (with different jets), and I have no flat spots and instant response. 
I'm running a 3:00:1 gear in the back with oversized ZR rated tires and a 
factory 4-speed. She'll spin the wheels in any gear with excellent low end 
response to boot.

Another thing, you can change springs as well to adjust when the secondaries 
kick in. I found no need on my carb.

Thanks,
Travis
B9472584





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>