Well, that may be your experience, but it isn't mine.
I have found the Webers bulletproof and truely 'set and forget', no more
carb synchronisation, no more leaky throttle shafts, no more stuck floats
or worn jets (and the resultant petrol leakage).
Before you say that is routine maintenance stuff or worn parts, that is my
whole point. Over time you may (will?) have to do more with SUs. Even the
throttle linkage b/n the (dual) SUs is hokey and requires adjustment and
the resultant balancing.
The Weber does work very well when it is setup right. If it isn't set up
correctly you *will* have flat spots, poor economy etc etc.
On my rally spridget with hot 1380 motor and a DCOE45, I won the
club's economy rally with 45mpg. I was up against many SU equipped
cars. SU doesn't necessarily mean economy and Weber doesn't necessarily
mean gas guzzler.
(to achieve really good economy with a weber, you either have to be gentle
on the accelerator (to avoid the overuse of the accelerator pump) or lean
off
the pump jet. No I don't *normally* drive that way.)
I still have SUs on a number of my cars, including the 67 BGT, and I am
happy enough with them when they are in good nick and setup properly,
I just can't countenance myth presented as fact - either as zealotism (?)
or misunderstanding.
Not sure about the B, but Webers were a BMC Special Tuning part for the
Spridgets. Was that also true for the 'B'?
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: bill <pplusb@northlink.com>
To: Steven Tritle <stritle@epix.net>; Mike Gigante <mikeg@vicnet.net.au>;
mgs@autox.team.net <mgs@autox.team.net>
Date: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 3:53 PM
Subject: Re: SU's vs Webers when converting a rubbernose
>Agreed - can't bump an SU off once set properly. Also, they work better
>than Webers!!
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Steven Tritle <stritle@epix.net>
>To: Mike Gigante <mikeg@vicnet.net.au>; mgs@autox.team.net
><mgs@autox.team.net>
>Date: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 3:41 PM
>Subject: Re: SU's vs Webers when converting a rubbernose
>
>
>>Sounds more like SU's than Webers.
>>
>>Steve
>>52 TD
>>Mike Gigante wrote:
>>
>>> Webers just sound so much better :-)
>>>
>>> In addition, unlike SUs, they are "set and forget" - they don't drift
out
>>> of tune, and they are less prone to wear problems. If they are set up
>>> correctly, they are wonderful.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Neil Cotty <neilc@tradesrv.com.au>
>>> To: MG Mailing List (E-mail) <mgs@autox.team.net>
>>> Date: Monday, November 23, 1998 10:01 PM
>>> Subject: SU's vs Webers when converting a rubbernose
>>>
>>> >Hi all,
>>> >
>>> >I've read quite a bit lately on SU's, Webers etc and I'm not sure why
>there
>>> >are so many people out there with rubbernose cars converting to a Weber
>>> when
>>> >they could convert to SU's. As far as I'm aware a single Weber *may*
>have
>>> an
>>> >advantage at very high RPM's (3-5 bhp according to the Special Tuning
>>> manual
>>> >with other mods) but SU's have the advantage lower down, producing more
>>> >torque - at least thats what I hear from many racers and the books I've
>>> >read - but essentially overall performance is similar - power band is
>>> >different. If you own a single carbed B why not replace them with dual
>SU's
>>> >instead of a single Weber? They leave more space in the engine bay
>thanks
>>> to
>>> >the smaller intake, and are more 'original' than webers. They also look
>>> >quite pleasant! I'm not bagging Webers (I'd love a pair of sidedraft
>DCOE's
>>> >and a xflow head!) I'm just genuinely wondering why Webers are chosen
>>> before
>>> >SU's. Is it a supply issue or one of 'perception', as Webers are really
>>> seen
>>> >as performance carburettors..
>>> >
>>> >I'd like to hear some comments on this rubbernose issue. The Weber
route
>is
>>> >chosen far more often than the SU when changing from single carbs to
>>> >increase performance (*without* other engine mods!! not talking about
>head
>>> >work, headers etc) - I'd think you'd get similar performance by going
to
>>> >dual HS4 SU's on a std car. I've never experienced a late model
>rubbernose
>>> >so I can't appreciate how 'impaired' they actually are. My GT is no
>>> >bahnstormer even as std with 94hp, in good nick with dual carbs, a lot
>more
>>> >has to be done to improve it's performance! Heck even my A eats it for
>>> >breakfast! <G> Yes, it really does.
>>> >
>>> >Cheers,
>>> >Neil.
>>> >--
>>> >Neil Cotty - Sydney, Australia
>>> >1970 MG B GT / 1959 MG A 1600 Mk1
>>> >
>>
>>
>
|