Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*4\s+bbl\s+carbs\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*4\s+bbl\s+carbs\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. 4 bbl carbs (score: 1): Author: RGGAMMA@aol.com; Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 20:42:20 EDT; Ah, tis I the omni present question asker...... OK, this one should cause some discussion......Pro and con of a Holly 600 vac secondaries or a Edelbrock 600 vac secondaries. Some of the street rod cr; /html/tigers/2001-08/msg00098.html (6,775 bytes)
2. Re: 4 bbl carbs (score: 1): Author: geewhiz <geewhiz@inreach.com>; Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 18:22:11 -0700; Ahhh...the old Holley vs. Edelbrock/Carter debate! I love this one! Pro Ebok/Carter: 1. No gaskets below fuel level, less leakage. 2. Aluminum...lighter. 3. Metering rods...very good, gradual fuel en; /html/tigers/2001-08/msg00099.html (9,356 bytes)
3. RE: 4 bbl carbs (score: 1): Author: "Bob Palmer" <rpalmer@ucsd.edu>; Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 07:56:55 -0700; Gerard has given you a very good summary of the pros and cons. You asked specifically about the vacuum secondary model 600 cfm. As it comes stock, the advantage of Holleys in cornering situations is; /html/tigers/2001-08/msg00101.html (8,217 bytes)
4. Re: 4 bbl carbs (score: 1): Author: SFordRB@aol.com; Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 18:20:33 EDT; Both schools hold true. More reliability in the Edelbrock while the Holley has more bits and pieces that can be used to extract every bit of extra performance. Go with what you know. Dr. Moonstone; /html/tigers/2001-08/msg00106.html (6,513 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]