97/48
 

Here is a pic I forgot I had. It is of the 777 at Bonneville in 1957.
While not the last word, it does substantiate my test findings of many moons ago in that chokes in 97's or 48's do NOT enhance air flow in racing applications.
I talked to Bill Kenz, Roy Leslie and Vic Edelbrock first hand about this.

Re: 97/48
 

Wow! Three flatheads, I'll bet that was something to see it run.

Re: 97/48
 

It was just about the most fun you could have with your clothes on.

Re: 97/48
 

If you read my book the actual testing results can be seen of "with" and "without" choke plates.

Re: 97/48
 

Pete - curious as to cfm flow rate differential between stock 97 vs 48 - I understand the 48 flows more?:confused:

Re: 97/48
 

JWL probably has test results on the 97 vs. 48 in his book as well. As you know, the stock 48 does have larger base venturi than 97, plus larger jets. I run a 97 on my '35 fordor thinking it may give better gas mileage than the 48, but no facts to back that up.
Now if you are running three engines and nine carburators, who even cares about gas mileage? :D

Re: 97/48
 

Thanks John - re "Now if you are running three engines and eighteen carburetors, who even cares about gas mileage" ...



I'm running only one flathead albeit 284 cid Supercharged with twin 48's and as for gas mileage ... well I do not worry about that:D - still very interested to understand the flow rate as I do not have the JWL book.

Re: 97/48
 

Pete . . . you keep your damn clothes on now will yah!

One too many 'martooonies' and Pete can get wild! :)

Thanks for sharing - any more great photos from back in the day? We should get high resolution scans done of all of those. Even better - if you had the negatives. (I'll ping yah).

Re: 97/48
 

That is a very tastefully done and beautiful engine - very nice!

On a side note, an option for more CFM is to run Holley 2110's (mid 50's carb). They will bolt right on and I believe they flow about 210 CFM or so. They do have bigger throttle plates - so the stock SCoT case has to be enlarged to match. I did this on my drag motor in the 70's.

They made this carb up into the 70's (though with a 4-hole base) - used it on VWs . . . named it the "Bug Spray" at the time.

But now Clive is making his new 'Big 97' carb - same outward appearance at a stock 97, but with 1.175 throttle plates and 250 CFM. This is what I'd LOVE to try on a motor like yours! :)

Re: 97/48
 

Pete, if you want to drink moonshine naked on your own porch have at it. Just don't post pic's. Rod

Re: 97/48
 

97's flow about 160.
48's flow about 175.
These numbers are not exact but are generally close.
The flow of either a 97 or a 48 can be increased about
10 cfm by internal machining.

Almost ALL race carb rebuilders will agree that these carbs flow more at wide open throttle WITHOUT the choke plates. I build race engines and am interested primarily in wide open throttle operation since that is where they make the most horsepower.

I am well aware that for street use you should leave the choke plates in because the flow signal has better stability for that application.

Re: 97/48
 

Two of the engines have 4 Carbs. each and the third only 3. ??

Re: 97/48
 

Old Family Story: I have a 59L block that supposedly came out of that car at some point. My Uncle grew up in Denver and lived there in the 50's/60's - managed to get his hands on it somewhere in the early 70's or so.

It had extensive port/relief work and a 3 5/16 bore. At least the "K&L being the source" is the story - so I'm sticking to it!

It really doesn't matter a damn bit - but was cool when it showed up under the XMas tree for a 15 year old newbie HotRodder. My Uncle was not the type of guy to exaggerate - and I knew he took the trip to Denver to pick it up and some other parts at the time -> Set of Zoomie headers, Harman & Collins dual-coil and a set of 49-53 Navarro heads . . .

D

Re: 97/48
 

Pete,
As far as I've been able to find out, the flow figures you posted are measured at a 1.5" depression, the depression used for flow testing 4 bbl carbs. Now then it's only the 97 family of carbs and the 94 family, are the only 2bbl carbs to have this 1.5" test. All the other 2bbl flow results are a 3" depression. This includes the 2GC Rochester carb.
I'd love for someone to flow test "our" carbs, I'd like to see this done so we can compare apple's with apple's. Obviously the 3" depression on the Rochester helps the cfm numbers greatly.
Whenever I pick up a 2GC off the shelf and look down through the air horn, it looks so much more messy than the 97/94 family. Yet the published cfm figures would have you believe the 2 GC flows a good chunk more, due to the test vacuum. The real late Ford/Holley carb of the Y block stuff has throttle butterfly size almost identical to the Rochester, and a much much cleaner air horn. This is what those bug spray carbs came from. I've seen cfm ratings for them around 300.
Do you know of any 3" test numbers for these 94/97 families?
Thanks
Martin.

Re: 97/48
 

"Do you know of any 3" test numbers for these 94/97 families?
Thanks
Martin."

Nope.

As for the 3 carbs, the 4th may be out of sight under the cowl.
All engines had 4 when I saw it run.

Dale: I talked to Ron Leslie about a year ago about the cams and he said the engines were all 296 ci. They all had 404A cams.

Re: 97/48
 

The front engine in the picture posted obviously has only three carbs; look at the fuel lines. Probably through the years, this car went through many iterations of power plants.

Re: 97/48
 

That 100% rules out my block . . . as the bore sure didn't decide to get smaller over the years! Maybe it came out of one of their pull cars or farm implements??? :)

Take care Pete . . . hope to see you soon!

D

Re: 97/48
 

Most-definitely only three carbs on the closest engine. Note only three fuel lines, as compared with four lines and carbs on the other two. Obviously, fuel is fed from the opposite side as well. Even the water plumbing is different on this rear engine for some reason. DD

https://www.fordbarn.com/forum/attach...8&d=1445653794

Re: 97/48
 

This is a bit off subject but the following details are what Holley did to the Y block 2110 The upgraded version of the Holley 2110 was produced for multi carb applications during the late sixties and early seventy's thy have a three bolt base the venturie diameter was increased to 1- 5/32 and the throttle plate diameter was increased to 1.425 the choke was eliminated and they came with extended throttle shafts. This version of the 2110 is rated at 365 CFM. On the street I ran three of these on my ARDUN for many years set up progressive once all three hit that engien would pull hard. Now I run two of them on a Scot blower gas milelage averages about 15 if I dont get to wild with the gas pedal!
Holley as Dale mentioned made them for the Jokeswagon tubular intakes this version had a four bolt base the veturie and throttle plate diameters are the same. This version included an electric coil on the choke assembly but they eliminated the extended throttle shaft.

Re: 97/48
 

This little tid-bit of additional info (below) may at least partially explain why the rear engine install had some differences. The rear engine, according to this info, was eventually added in the space previously occupied by the cockpit during it's twin-engine rendition. DD

"With Willie Young at the wheel, the ice blue 777 streamliner became the first hot rod to break the 200 mph barrier at Bonneville in 1950. A 255 mph run in 1952 made Young the first American to exceed 250 mph on land. With sponsorship from the Rocky Mountain Ford Dealers Association, Floyd Clymer, Wynn’s Friction Proofing and Bob Jones Skyland Ford, 777 ran well into the fifties, eventually with a third V8 where the cockpit had been, hanging the driver off the back, slingshot dragster style. The machine was finally retired in 1957 after posting a trap speed of over 270 mph."