• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

carburator sizing cfms????

  • Thread starter Thread starter 68dustin
  • Start date Start date Dec 2, 2008

68dustin

Member
Oct 8, 2008
173
2
19
Dec 2, 2008
#1
  • Dec 2, 2008
  • #1
carburetor sizing cfms????

ok, i know ive heard a 302 is good enough with a 600 to 650 size carburator. The question is: if your running a 750 tunned correctly on a 302 where are you losing? power wise & performance.... other than you wasted extra money on a bigger carb. Please answer my question if you can because i cant find much on the cons of running a little bigger carburator. thanks


:SNSign:
 

SoCalCruising

Founding Member
Jul 25, 2000
2,437
0
47
SoCal
Dec 2, 2008
#2
  • Dec 2, 2008
  • #2
The main thing is throttle response, esp. at lower RPMs, and ease of tuning. I ran a Carb shop 750 DP for a while, then replaced it with a 650 HP series DP. Throttle response was snappier and fuel consumption went down. It is VERY unlikely that their will be any difference in power (up top) with the 750 on a 302.
 

68dustin

Member
Oct 8, 2008
173
2
19
Dec 2, 2008
#3
  • Dec 2, 2008
  • #3
thanks..i was just wondering because i have a 750 and i like it way better than the 650 had before. other than gas mileage like you said, the 750 had more power and better et's at the track.
 

rbohm

Founding Member
Apr 12, 2002
6,698
550
204
tucson,az
Dec 2, 2008
#4
  • Dec 2, 2008
  • #4
dustin, it really depends on what you are doing with the car as to what carb cfm you want to use. for racing at the strip, or on tracks with long straights, you will pick up a bit of top end power, but at the expense of low end throttle response. it also depends on how your engine is built as well. there are also times where a larger carb will actually gain low end power over a smaller carb. it all depends on the combination, and that includes the drive train as well.
 
1

10secgoal

Active Member
Dec 1, 2003
2,801
3
49
San Diego
Dec 3, 2008
#5
  • Dec 3, 2008
  • #5
I had a 750 on my 302 also. It did everything better at the track.60ft, mph. A 750 can get as good MPG as a 650 if tuned correctly.
 

68dustin

Member
Oct 8, 2008
173
2
19
Dec 3, 2008
#6
  • Dec 3, 2008
  • #6
its kinda nice hearing from other people they got the same idea. Everyone trys to beat it in me and preach saying a 750 is way too big and you only need a 600. i dont give a flying fu*k if a 600 is all i need, but my car isnt a daily driver & far from a gas saver. Im going for power not a stock powerless mustang...... :Track:
 
1

1968notchback

New Member
Jun 22, 2008
4
0
0
Dec 3, 2008
#7
  • Dec 3, 2008
  • #7
68dustin said:
its kinda nice hearing from other people they got the same idea. Everyone trys to beat it in me and preach saying a 750 is way too big and you only need a 600. i dont give a flying fu*k if a 600 is all i need, but my car isnt a daily driver & far from a gas saver. Im going for power not a stock powerless mustang...... :Track:
Click to expand...

If you have already made up your mind that you need a 750, then why did you even post the question?

I suggest using a 1250 cfm. Or what about TWO Holley 1250 Dominators! You can help send up the oil company stock prices.

There, feel better?
 

woodsnake

15 Year Member
Jan 16, 2007
1,352
15
69
Hicksville, NY
Dec 3, 2008
#8
  • Dec 3, 2008
  • #8
There are some good threads about carbs/cfm ratings over on S B F Techdotcom.

If you aren't concerned about mileage, and have some decent heads,
Run the 750!!
 

68dustin

Member
Oct 8, 2008
173
2
19
Dec 3, 2008
#9
  • Dec 3, 2008
  • #9
1968notchback said:
If you have already made up your mind that you need a 750, then why did you even post the question?

I suggest using a 1250 cfm. Or what about TWO Holley 1250 Dominators! You can help send up the oil company stock prices.

There, feel better?
Click to expand...

its not that i have my mind set on the 750. in fact i have both carbs. i have a new 750 on the car and a new 650 off the car. i have tryed both, and as of right now the 750 out performs the 650. i am trying to see what other people think between the two carbs on a small block since ive looked and cant find any info. If you read any book or talk to 99% of people and you say you have a 750 on a small block they laugh and say "thats way to big". oh and by the way, i will be glad to run up some oil prices with my 3 old schools gross poluting the world & making the climate a little warmer...
 

rbohm

Founding Member
Apr 12, 2002
6,698
550
204
tucson,az
Dec 3, 2008
#10
  • Dec 3, 2008
  • #10
i say use the carb that works best for your application. my 289, when it finally gets built, will use a 480cfm autolite carb because it will be a street engine, and will need to actually get some decent fuel economy.

if a 750 gives you the best results for what you want, then go with it.
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Dec 3, 2008
#11
  • Dec 3, 2008
  • #11
68dustin said:
its not that i have my mind set on the 750. in fact i have both carbs. i have a new 750 on the car and a new 650 off the car. i have tryed both, and as of right now the 750 out performs the 650. i am trying to see what other people think between the two carbs on a small block since ive looked and cant find any info. If you read any book or talk to 99% of people and you say you have a 750 on a small block they laugh and say "thats way to big". oh and by the way, i will be glad to run up some oil prices with my 3 old schools gross poluting the world & making the climate a little warmer...
Click to expand...

I'll put in my 2 cents here. Not knowing what you've got in the build, the 650 is plenty of carb for a 302. You MIGHT gain a teeny-tiny bit on the top end with a 750, but only on the top. This only applies if the 750 is a vacuum sec carb. If it's a double pumper, the 750 is definately too big, you WILL loose power on the bottom to mid range. If you managed to make gains on the bottom end,(with a DP750) it's only because the lost bottom end performance has affected the traction and bettered the bottom end due to the tires not breaking loose because of the carb being too big on the bottom end. And if you really want my advice, you need more than one carb , something like a 2x4 or sixpack in place of a single four.
 

68dustin

Member
Oct 8, 2008
173
2
19
Dec 3, 2008
#12
  • Dec 3, 2008
  • #12
D.Hearne said:
I'll put in my 2 cents here. Not knowing what you've got in the build, the 650 is plenty of carb for a 302. You MIGHT gain a teeny-tiny bit on the top end with a 750, but only on the top. This only applies if the 750 is a vacuum sec carb. If it's a double pumper, the 750 is definately too big, you WILL loose power on the bottom to mid range. If you managed to make gains on the bottom end,(with a DP750) it's only because the lost bottom end performance has affected the traction and bettered the bottom end due to the tires not breaking loose because of the carb being too big on the bottom end. And if you really want my advice, you need more than one carb , something like a 2x4 or sixpack in place of a single four.
Click to expand...


i like the six pack idea...those look so tight.... oh by the way my build is: 68 mustang and is 2900 lbs. i got a 302 bored 30 over, air gap dual plane intake, 4:11 gears, t-5 5speed, trick flow twisted wedge heads, holley 750 carb double pumper dual feed, decent size cam....cant remember specs of the top of my head, all msd ignition, holley fuel system, shorty headers, 2-1/2" exhaust dumped at axles..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Wheels-Tires LS mii swap and rear rim size/axle questions....
  • 78mIIman
  • Feb 2, 2025
  • 1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech
Replies
6
Views
682
1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech May 6, 2025
78 Mach1
6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
669
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Feb 28, 2026
Noobz347
Stiffer front springs writeup from the old .net site
  • LILCBRA
  • Oct 24, 2022
  • 1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech
Replies
1
Views
1K
1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech Oct 29, 2022
Enzio
Engine Idle issue - Possible Vac leak - canister purge valve?
  • R82148V
  • Feb 16, 2022
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
34
Views
6K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Aug 22, 2022
mattys91gt
H
'86 New Turbo Build First Start/Idle Trouble. Full Tune specs attached
  • Heffay
  • Jul 10, 2022
  • Digital Self-tuning Forum
Replies
8
Views
3K
Digital Self-tuning Forum Jul 12, 2022
Heffay
H
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?