97 vs 94 carbs

pooch

pooch

Well-known member
I have some of each, but am running a big number 97 because these seem to be the most desirable.

What is better on these 97/s over the 94?
 
Have both but usually use 97''s Just what seems to work for me. Just got a 97 & a 48 back from Uncle Max that he worked his magic on, kerk
 
I prefer the 97 because it does not have the vulnerable power valve problem, and I can take the top of the carb off to set the float level, versus the 94 where the float is mounted to the top piece and setting the float is a pain. And that external linkage to the accelerator pump just looks so cool!
 
On my model A/b engines, single 94 or 92 has worked well with currently available fuel disadvantages, with a bit of delay on the enrichment such as a 5.5, which gets rid of the wet plug symptom. The pulses from the banger seems to fool the power valve. On my 59A, the family of Chandler Groves carbs, again in single use, the 6.5 power valve worked OK, but not well observed. I also Model B, ran two 81 Strombergs just as the came off of the 60. Never got rid of the rid of the flat spot that should have been an accelerator pump thing, but again, never got there. Because of the very low price, later Holley/Ford 94s can be a good place to start while Strombergs are mired in that "cool" thing that makes them a different kind of issue. Good Luck: Fred A
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top