mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Re: Weber Carbs]

To: Skye Poier <skye@ffwd.cx>, MG Nuts <mgs@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: [Re: Weber Carbs]
From: Matthew Trebelhorn <matttrebelhorn@netscape.net>
Date: 21 Sep 00 09:35:51 EDT
Well, with all due respect, I think that depends on what you mean by "easier
to deal with."  If the SUs on the car are ratty and old, then the amount of
work necessary to have a good weber on the car is about the same as that
necessary to have good SUs. 

After that, though, the SUs will need more attention in 5000 miles than the
weber will in 100,000.  Tuning, adjusting for seasons, altitude changes, etc.
etc. -- SUs just need more attention.  On a Weber, nothing goes out of
adjustment, and nothing wears out.  It just runs.

And, to the original poster, the downdraft is probably a better choice, unless
you're going to make some serious engine modifications.

Matt
70 MGB

Skye Poier <skye@ffwd.cx> wrote:
> If you don't need the extra CFM, stick with original rebuilt SU's - they
> are more than adequate and a lot easier to deal with.
> 
> Skye
> 
> Word on the street is that GW71MGB@aol.com said:
> > Can anyone give me a quick dissertation on Weber carbs?  Would I rather
have 
> > a downdraft or sidedraft?  What are the other considerations?
> > I currently have no performance modifications installed ('71 MGB).
> > Thanks,
> > Gary
> 
> --
> 1966 MGB - GHN3L     Safety Fast!             __,__\__ 
> The MGB Experience   http://www.mgb.bc.ca/   (_o____o_)


____________________________________________________________________

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