stromberg 48 ???????

[aussie merc]

ok stripping down a 48 for refurb need some of our experts to chime in some advice 1 what size are the holes in the emulsion tubes has anyone ever altered these if so what was the effect for the size 2 what jetting is standard and is high altitude still 3 sizes down on these 3 float level at what fuel psi with what size fuel inlet

[Terry,OH]

The 97,48 and 81 take the same emulsion tubes #36 (0.1065) and #57 (0.043) closing the small holes will effect performance make sure all holes appear to be circular in shape. Std. main Jets are .048 and #63 (0.037) power valve. Use the 0.098 inlet valve and fuel pressure between 2-2.5

[Bored&Stroked]

Originally Posted by Terry,OH

The 97,48 and 81 take the same emulsion tubes #36 (0.1065) and #57 (0.043) closing the small holes will effect performance make sure all holes appear to be circular in shape. Std. main Jets are .048 and #63 (0.037) power valve. Use the 0.098 inlet valve and fuel pressure between 2-2.5

Thanks for the details on the drill sizes!

[aussie merc]

ok which holes are the small ones as they all appear to be the same size

[Terry,OH]

The hole through the center from one end to the other, is the larger hole

[scicala]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

The smaller holes on the side are there to allow air from the main air bleed to mix with the fuel to help vaporize the it.

Sal

[aussie merc]

so i gather putting a tap in them to extract them basicly destroys them as the bore will now be oversize

[Terry,OH]

Tapping the end with a few threads, so they can be pulled out, does not make them bad.

[scicala]

They are not in there very tight. I have used a fine tipped easy out without any damage done.

Sal

[Bored&Stroked]

I've pulled them out many times - sometimes I replace them with new ones from Clive (Stromberg 97). Usually they pull right out (I just tap the ends of them a bit and put a screw/nut on them to pull them out). Then I take a fine file to clean up the bore ends when they're out.

[glennpm]

In the next day or two, I'm going to be removing my Stromberg 97s to replace the main jets and the power valves as mentioned in this other thread, https://www.fordbarn.com/forum/showthread.php?t=350547 This morning I've been viewing some great YouTube videos that Charlie Price recorded and. During the disassembly in Part 1 Charlie talks about looking of compression damage to the small holes and that the early emulsion tubes had 4 holes and were changed to 2 holes for later tubes.

Originally Posted by Terry,OH

The 97,48 and 81 take the same emulsion tubes #36 (0.1065) and #57 (0.043) closing the small holes will effect performance make sure all holes appear to be circular in shape. Std. main Jets are .048 and #63 (0.037) power valve. Use the 0.098 inlet valve and fuel pressure between 2-2.5

Are the #63 drill sizes for the 2-hole or the 4-hole version?

Glenn

[glennpm]

I found that ALL the small holes in both the early 4 hole and later 2-hole to be 0.042", a number 58 drill bit.









Glenn

[Bored&Stroked]

Does anybody have any data on how well the 2 vs 4-hole versions atomize? Also wondering if one type tends to run richer/leaner than the other type?

[Bored&Stroked]

Also, remember that on actual 48's, you do not have the two-position accelerator rod bases - only a single location. If you have "spare" 97 style bases, you can swap them in and then have the two adjustments for fuel-rod stroke.

Note: If you do this, then make sure you have the 97 accel pump rods . . . as they are a different length than the 81/48 versions.

[glennpm]

Originally Posted by Bored&Stroked

Does anybody have any data on how well the 2 vs 4-hole versions atomize? Also wondering if one type tends to run richer/leaner than the other type?

Hi, I have Stromberg 97s but all the E-tubes are the same. From Terry and other net sources, "The 97,48 and 81 take the same emulsion tubes"

I was wondering about atomization too. I plan to use the 4-hole version as the center carb on my two carb setup.

Also regarding the drill sizes, I checked as go-no-go. Trying the #57 on one of the lower longitudinal holes, the #57 would not go in on the drill bit shaft but would start on the machined portion but very tight, therefore I say #58 are correct. YMMV