<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/14/2016 2:28 PM, Gene Holtzclaw
via 6pack wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR15MB037695698DD1642F72A5D89EE1750@BY2PR15MB0376.namprd15.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<div>
<div>I still say study the numbers. Even a high performance TR
engine can't flow what two Stromberg's can handle.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
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.<br>
<br>
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. <br>
<br>
Dyno comparisons on the same engine would probably tell the tale.<br>
<br>
<br>
Cheers. <br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Michael Porter
Roswell, NM
Never let anyone drive you crazy when you know it's within walking distance....</pre>
</body>
</html>