recommendations for a little more hp & torque?

I don't have any dyno to prove it but a riser under the carb is supposed to improve torque in the mid to upper rpm range. I put 2" risers on my 3x2 Offy manifold, for looks and to make it possible to invert the progressive linkage. It might be worth a try for very low $$. After installing the riser, be sure the linkage from firewall to carb is still long enough to let the carb get to the idle stop. I had to fabricate an adjustable linkage.

If you do try it, maybe put a stop watch on throttle slam high gear acceleration from 40 to 60, before and after.
 
In general an increase in the intake runner length shifts the torque to a higher rpm range. No increase in power, just a shift in rpm range.
 
JSeery said:
In general an increase in the intake runner length shifts the torque to a higher rpm range. No increase in power, just a shift in rpm range.
Click to expand...

Uh, I've always read that longer intake runners shift the power band to a lower RPM range, not higher.
 
Short wide runners for high rew...long narrow for low rew.
Little more to it then just that to...the airflow hitting the valve when it closes causes a pulse that goes back into the runner.
You have to calculate the lenght to gain some effect of getting that pulse in the right place before the valve opens again.
And a long narrow runner reaches it´s maximum velocity pushing most air into the cylinder at a lower rew.
On top of that you have the plenum size to.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that is my wife's 1936 Ariel Red Hunter. I built it for her from a basketcase (i'm not sure if that is a phrase used in the car world) --I bought a frame and forks in a basket, then had to source all other items. Built the crank, gearbox, laced the wheels, etc. That took me a while, but the bike has now done many thousands of miles in the past 15 years.

The ignition seems good. A local guy rebuilt the dizzy this summer for me. He backed off the timing retard screw so that it runs at full advance. I questioned him on that, but he said it runs best that way and then there is no issue with the timing accidentally being retarded. I've never heard the motor ping so far...

jrvariel48 said:
Is that an Ariel on the trailer??!!
Click to expand...
 
Thanks Tubman. The previous owner put a 91-99 carb in it (Ford/Holley model AA 1939-1941). I installed a rebuilt kit from Daytona Parts Co this summer. That helped a lot, as the old power valve was very dirty and sticking. I'll have to study the 91-99 versus the 2100 series. I can tell you all about motorcycle carbs from 80-100 years ago, but I'm just learning Ford stuff now. :)


tubman said:
I would also suggest going with a larger 2 BBL carburetor, either a Ford 2100 series or maybe even a Rochester 2GC
Click to expand...
 
The 3-bolt flange version of the Holley 2110 is a great carb - and it will bolt right onto the Stromberg style intake flange. These carbs were used on a few different Fords around 1956 - 1957 or so (going from memory here). The three-bolt version from the 50's flows about 210 CFM.

The throttle plates are larger (seems to me they're around 1 1/32??? - so you should port the top of the intake to match the throttle bores of the 2110. If you don't do this, I really don't see much advantage in trying to use them.
 
Bored&Stroked said:
The 3-bolt flange version of the Holley 2110 is a great carb - and it will bolt right onto the Stromberg style intake flange. These carbs were used on a few different Fords around 1956 - 1957 or so (going from memory here). The three-bolt version from the 50's flows about 210 CFM.

The throttle plates are larger (seems to me they're around 1 1/32??? - so you should port the top of the intake to match the throttle bores of the 2110. If you don't do this, I really don't see much advantage in trying to use them.
Click to expand...

That 2110 is for a 292 engine so might be a mite big for a 221. You might have to wind up that 221 in second to get any more power. At normal cruising speed, I doubt you would see any advantage.
 
Surely the larger carb would only come into play at higher RPMs,my 33 has a 265ci 99a engine,stock 33 cam and valves,stock 33manifold and 97 carb,stock exh manifolds and single exhuast,and it works great up to about 65 mph,this with a 3,78 rear,it will go way faster but doesnt seem as nice over that,
Am I missing some HP or something with the small carb,sure, but I dont need to be going over 60-65.
Lawrie
 
mumpsimus said:
Yes, that is my wife's 1936 Ariel Red Hunter. I built it for her from a basketcase (i'm not sure if that is a phrase used in the car world) --I bought a frame and forks in a basket, then had to source all other items. Built the crank, gearbox, laced the wheels, etc. That took me a while, but the bike has now done many thousands of miles in the past 15 years.

The ignition seems good. A local guy rebuilt the dizzy this summer for me. He backed off the timing retard screw so that it runs at full advance. I questioned him on that, but he said it runs best that way and then there is no issue with the timing accidentally being retarded. I've never heard the motor ping so far...
Click to expand...

Nice! I restored a 1948 Red Hunter 500 single and a 1937 Square Four!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top