97/48
- Thread starter Pete
- Start date
scicala
Well-known member
"Do you know of any 3" test numbers for these 94/97 families?
Thanks
Martin."
Martin, I'm afraid we just have to assume carbs that are flowed at 3" hg will be higher flow. Would be nice to know how much, but would need to have access to a flow bench, or someone who has done it. Maybe somebody with more brains than me could come up with a formula that could calculate it.
Sal
Thanks
Martin."
Martin, I'm afraid we just have to assume carbs that are flowed at 3" hg will be higher flow. Would be nice to know how much, but would need to have access to a flow bench, or someone who has done it. Maybe somebody with more brains than me could come up with a formula that could calculate it.
Sal
Sal my friend,
There are formulae for doing the conversion from 3"-1.5" and 1.5"-3". My problem with this is that's it becomes a theoretical figure. This is fine for some. To me, I want facts, cold hard facts. I get that what ever The factual number comes out at, doesn't prove that this carb is better than that carb, I do fully understand that, but like I said, I want facts. I don't have a flow bench, probably never will, if I do get one I'm sure you can guess what's gonna be shoved on the sucker before its even out of the box!
My problem with theoretical numbers is that they can "proved" wrong with another theory.
Martin.
There are formulae for doing the conversion from 3"-1.5" and 1.5"-3". My problem with this is that's it becomes a theoretical figure. This is fine for some. To me, I want facts, cold hard facts. I get that what ever The factual number comes out at, doesn't prove that this carb is better than that carb, I do fully understand that, but like I said, I want facts. I don't have a flow bench, probably never will, if I do get one I'm sure you can guess what's gonna be shoved on the sucker before its even out of the box!
My problem with theoretical numbers is that they can "proved" wrong with another theory.
Martin.
V8 Bob
Well-known member
The 3 engine car was rebuilt with 4 wheel drive. The 3 carb engine drives the rear axle, and the coupled front engines are reversed 180 and drive the front axle, if I remember the build article correctly. I think the single engine brought the car up to some speed, and the dual engines ran the high end. All three were built by Edelbrock, were 296" and ran an alky/nitro mix for around 250 hp each.
Correction-the car was converted to 4-wheel drive in '54 while still running two engines.
Last edited:
Ralph Moore
Well-known member
Did some research on this car and it topped 250 mph in 1952( with only two flatheads), and was retired in 1957 when it reached a top speed of 270 mph.