[6pack] Tri carb set up

[dave n]

numbers may say one thing, but I think the best test is the “seat” test.  have first put the triples on a stock engine, then done quite a lot of other mods, I’m going to say the seat test says do it.

and, I will add that my son has done very well in TR6 modified with this car.

like so many things, there are a ton of opinions.  I’ll stick with mine.

From: Michael Porter 
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 4:48 PM
To: Gene Holtzclaw ; dave n 
Cc: Triumph 6 Pack 
Subject: Re: [6pack] Tri carb set up

On 5/14/2016 2:28 PM, Gene Holtzclaw via 6pack wrote:

  I still say study the numbers. Even a high performance TR engine can't flow what two Stromberg's can handle.


This is quite true, on the numbers from the flow bench of just the carburetors and just the head.  I would say, however, that there's a small advantage in having each carburetor servicing two runners, instead of three, if only because the runners are straighter, and the pulses from each carb will be a bit sharper and better-defined with three carburetors instead of two.  Flow numbers aren't everything--they matter, but so do mixture distribution and mixture uniformity.  My guess is--because of the upper limits on flow of the head--there wouldn't be a great top-end power increase, but the low- and mid-range performance would probably improve some, and there would be slight torque improvement because patchy mixtures delivered to some cylinders would be reduced.

That said, the difference is going to be small, because of the port limitations of the cylinder head.  Is the improvement worth the money? That's probably subjective.  A hundred bucks a horsepower is pretty dear for the occasional driver.  For the NASCAR guy, it's a bargain.      

Dyno comparisons on the same engine would probably tell the tale.


Cheers.  

-- 


Michael Porter
Roswell, NM


Never let anyone drive you crazy when you know it's within walking distance....
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://autox.team.net/pipermail/6pack/attachments/20160514/7c51d860/attachment.html>