Holley vs Edelbrock Carbs

Hack · Jun 30, 2005

D.Hearne said:
I believe him. My 427 Stang used to get 15-20 out on the highway at 70-80 mph. You're talking about an 11+to 1 compressioned big block that takes very little throttle to keep it going at those speeds. If you can keep your right foot disciplined, up to 20 mpg is possible. My Mom's old 70 Olds Delta 88 with a 455 used to get 20 mpg regularly at freeway speeds.

I believe it's possible for a big block to get 17 mph if it's babied at maybe 50 mph (highly unlikely though), but I don't believe it's possible for someone to actually drive that way . If you drive your big block in a manner that gets you the same mileage as my straight six, you should be forced to trade cars with me. I promise to drive it properly.

And at 80 mph the engine in an older non-overdrive car is going to be turning over plenty fast. I think your speedo/odometer must have been off, D. Hearne. No disrespect intended, but I think I would actually have to see this one before I'd believe it.

D.Hearne · Jun 30, 2005

It had 3.00's in the rear at the time. Later after rebuilding the car's suspension and going to 4 wheel discs, I kept the 2.50's in the Versailles rear. That's how it happened.

zookeeper · Jun 30, 2005

Hack said:
I believe it's possible for a big block to get 17 mph if it's babied at maybe 50 mph (highly unlikely though), but I don't believe it's possible for someone to actually drive that way . If you drive your big block in a manner that gets you the same mileage as my straight six, you should be forced to trade cars with me. I promise to drive it properly.

And at 80 mph the engine in an older non-overdrive car is going to be turning over plenty fast. I think your speedo/odometer must have been off, D. Hearne. No disrespect intended, but I think I would actually have to see this one before I'd believe it.

I really don't care what you believe. The car in question is a 1969 Corvette with the 390 horse 427, Muncie 4 spd and 3.36 rear gears. The carb is a 650cfm, Holley spreadbore intended as a direct replacement for a Q-Jet. I treat the car with respect, but I do not baby it just to save a buck on gas. Too many people (oddly enough, young people) think that cars need EFI and electronic everything to be even remotely driveable. The Corvette has points ignition and a carb and drives as well in traffic as our '97 Suburban. It also gets better milegae than that. The day I trade anything I own for a 6 banger anything will not be soon, I can assure you. BTW, if you don't believe the mileage produced by the 'vette, you really don't wnat to hear about the 2WD '72 Blazer my brother built a few years back. It had a 350 with a Dyer's Blower 6-71 and two 600 Holleys and got 13mpg on the freeway. Or my '88 GT that gets 26mpg. Ditch the 6 if power or mileage are of any importance to you.

Hack · Jun 30, 2005

http://auto.consumerguide.com/Auto/Used/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/2126/act/usedcarreviewspecs/

Consumer Reports managed to get 16.7 mpg from a 90s vette. I can see where an older 427 vette should be able to manage the same mileage as a modern vette with a 350. It's not like a modern engine is more efficient or anything. And you know how cruel those consumer reports testers are to their cars...

Oh and the older cars have much more aerodynamic shapes.

Anyway - I'll say that I believe you and I won't post any more in this thread. It isn't my intention to upset you. I just don't want others who read this thread to think something's wrong with their car if they can't get 20 mpg from their big blocks.

Edit: I probably wouldn't have even posted an objection, but I think reading the July issue of Hot Rod was fresh on my mind. They talk about a 400 mile highway drive in a hemi Cuda convertible. They don't say what mileage they got, but say they had to stop for fuel twice and that they "were approaching vapors" at the end of the trip and that "single-digit fuel economy helped kill the musclecar era.."

zookeeper · Jun 30, 2005

I wasn't upset, and anyone who's read many of my posts knows full well how much I despise those who post BS rather than facts as it relates to cars. But the fact is I didn't get my info from websites, magazines or second-hand rumors. I got my information from experience, first-hand and from the driver's seat. Roll your eyes all you want, but the facts are the facts. Can my wife's '69 run with a new Corvette? Hell, no. Not even close. The truth is, it likely couldn't run with many cars today, period. Does it ride well? Not on a bet. It's loud, it's hot inside and poorly insulated from road noise. But it DOES get 17 with ease at freeway (65-70mph). It gets the same mileage in the twisties of hwy 299 on the way to Redding, Ca where we generally make the trip to their April car show. If cars have come so far mileage-wise, why did my stock, 2barrel 289 '68 get 20 mpg? That's not too shabby, and while it was a dog, it was very practical as a driver. Smaller motors don't always mean marvelous mileage, either as you most likely know. My brother has an '01 Dodge Dakota with a V8 that gets about 21mpg. A guy at work has a newer Dakota with a 6 and it gets 16 or less! Go figure. Also, I wouldn't be reciting Hot Rod Magazine as any great fountain of knowledge, remember the '70's? If not, they were at the forefront of the infamous van era. The writers there haven't gotten any smarter, as far as I can tell...

ddonaca351 · Jul 1, 2005

snowball said:
I currently have a C code 67 coupe. It is an auto which still has the standard 2 barrel carb, and 2.79:1 diff but has the following mods:
edelbrock performer intake
cam (inlet lift .4536/exhaust lift .4779)
twin exhaust (2 inch)

Car is only street driven. I would like to liberate a few more horses, but don't want to go crazy due to the price of fuel here in Oz. I have in mind a 600 cfm carb, vacuum secondaries, with either a manual or auto choke (doesn't matter which).

Which carb is better, an Edelbrock or Holley? My knowledge of carbs is limited, but I have been told Holleys can be difficuly to tune. My carby guy has recommended an Edelbrock.

What do you guys think?

IMHO edelbrock carbs are pos... but that being said,

If you are not going to do the tuning, then get whatever your "carb guy" can work on. If he is an edelbrock guy, and you bring him a Holley, I can assure you it will leave more screwed up than when it came in.

If you are going to do it yourself as a learning experience, I highly reccomend a Holley about 600-650 cfm and vacuum secondaries. Buy a book on tuning Holleys, (holley has several) and you wont be sorry.

Dave-

mustangman70 · Jul 1, 2005

Ok so i got the holley in and all i can say is i will never own another edelbrock, the difference in performence and trhottle response is UNBELEAVABLE!!

I got a crash course at tuning holley carbs yester day and all the hype about them bieng hard to tune and a pain in the ass and complicated is real BS, just find someone who knows what they are talking about, its really quite simple.

Oh did i mention the carb is like 10 years old? It was rebuilt by my uncle who rebuilds his carb (holley) evrey week for the saturday night races, i can say that the carb is no better then the person tuning it. The stang is UNREAl from a dig now, it just boils the tires if im not careful, and before the edelbrock wouldent evan chirp them.........case closed, holleys ROCK ,,,,,OH and for a story, 2 weeks ago i got walked by a stock 5.0 mustang with intake and exhaust from a stop (about a car and a half or so)......last night after a little bit of tuning we raced again (with the holley on this time) and i walked him by about 2 cars!!!

10secgoal · Jul 1, 2005

Another brought to the darkside.

ddonaca351 · Jul 1, 2005

"clinging as the cocoon of the silk worm, fragile as the wings of the butterfly, when you can *tune dual accelerator pumps and not stumble* you will have learned"

edited from old david caradine shows....

Glad you have seen the light. Those stories about being hard to tune are from people who didnt know what they were doing, and so blamed it on the carb, instead of their lack of knowledge.

DD

Mosse · Jul 2, 2005

17 mpg is same as 14 liters/100 km, as we say here in the old country

I wouldnt say thats impossible... My hardly tuned -66 with 351w takes about 13,5 liters/100km...

One guy here with megasquirted 351w in 67 stang, has gotten it going for 9 liters/100 km...

My stang is running with thrown in 600cfm edelbrock, which I bought from swap meet. No adjusting done and it works well: starts well, accelerates fairly and gets decent gas mileage...

Only one thing I don´t like about edelbrock.. It stumbles when cornering hard, which I know is typical for it? Or am I lost here?

If I were you, I´d still get some DemonCarb there...

Route666 · Jul 2, 2005

Hack said:
http://auto.consumerguide.com/Auto/Used/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/2126/act/usedcarreviewspecs/

Consumer Reports managed to get 16.7 mpg from a 90s vette. I can see where an older 427 vette should be able to manage the same mileage as a modern vette with a 350. It's not like a modern engine is more efficient or anything. And you know how cruel those consumer reports testers are to their cars...

Oh and the older cars have much more aerodynamic shapes.

Anyway - I'll say that I believe you and I won't post any more in this thread. It isn't my intention to upset you. I just don't want others who read this thread to think something's wrong with their car if they can't get 20 mpg from their big blocks.

Edit: I probably wouldn't have even posted an objection, but I think reading the July issue of Hot Rod was fresh on my mind. They talk about a 400 mile highway drive in a hemi Cuda convertible. They don't say what mileage they got, but say they had to stop for fuel twice and that they "were approaching vapors" at the end of the trip and that "single-digit fuel economy helped kill the musclecar era.."

Hack the big blocks of old getting these fuel mileages are higher CR than used in todays motors, so it could well be that they are more efficient. Build the same modern motor with higher CR and run in on the octane of fuel that used to be available, and you'll see even better efficiency. There is also engine torque that plays into actual driving fuel economy. - Small four cylinders are cheap to run but a 2 litre 4-cylinder isn't 3 times as cheap to run as a 6 litre, especially if it were the same weight. It uses less fuel per cycle because it's smaller BUT you have to floor the piss out of it to accelerate decently. Big blocks can almost be driven without the throttle. Put it this way, if you were to accelerate two cars at the same rate, one being a big block and the other a tiny 4-cylinder, the big block would be close to the 4 cylinder. You do have to be very responsible with the throttle though and it is hard to drive a muscle car like a limo.

I think that experience shown us that powerful cars get bad fuel mileage, but what isn't factored in to that thinking is that those same cars also used that fuel getting a (usually) heavier car the hell out of dodge a lot faster than the boring refrigerator white camry teenage taxis, etc.

mustangman70 · Jul 2, 2005

Now all i need is a nice plate kit underneath that carb

Will be PM'ing you soon lol

12sec67 · Jul 3, 2005

10secgoal said:
Another brought to the darkside.

hey, didn't you have an edelbrock 600 cfm at one time on your street driven mustang---- and i thought you loved it!

10secgoal · Jul 4, 2005

I did, until I started getting traction, then I couldn't tune it. I am also running a full sec faster in the 1/8 now too.

Rapid · Jul 4, 2005

zookeeper said:
That sounds a bit low for a stock 289. My wife's 427 Corvette gets 17mpg, my stock 289 got about 20-ish. A 500cfm carb on a small block should at least get the same mileage as a bigger motored, heavier car, don't you think?

Might be. I have a suspect tranny and am not going to do much more tuning till it is fixed.

Holley vs Edelbrock Carbs

Hack

D.Hearne

New Member

zookeeper

Hack

zookeeper

ddonaca351

Active Member

mustangman70

10secgoal

Active Member

ddonaca351

Active Member

Mosse

Route666

Active Member

mustangman70

12sec67

Active Member

10secgoal

Active Member

Rapid

New Member

Similar threads

Holley vs Edelbrock Carbs

New Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency