Found this in my shed yesterday....

-

Brooks James

VET, CPT, Huey Medevac Pilot
FABO Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2020
Messages
5,005
Reaction score
3,285
Location
Fruitland Park Fl
Competition Series AFB, 400 CFM
I'm 65 and I've never seen a real one until now. It was in a box of carbs my friend gave me.

Looking at the size of the venturis and butterflies makes me think that the primary CFM is less than 200 cfm which will work on the mileage 273
I've gathered all the parts for.

My friend was a NHRA racer for years. He campaigned a 63 Plymouth wagon with a factory 383/343 hp.
I think the 383 hp rating at the time was 330 single four barrel. The 383/343 hp had two 4 barrels, each 400 CFM AFB.

The point here....my friend is like many other racers of the era who cheated until they got caught.
When I saw the size of the rear boosters on my carb today, I knew they were from a 750 CFM carb.
I could be wrong but the brass fuel feed tube on the underside of the primary boosters, compared to others, looks large to me for a 400 CFM.

I do know that he seriously cut the heads on that car, so much he had to seriously elongate the intake mounting bolt holes. He put washers just big enough to cover the elongation, then sprayed a little paint on it.

This is the same guy I was telling you about that spent a day with a propane torch and scraper, getting the undercoat off the car. Total weight of scraped off undercoat, 25 lbs the equivalent of .25 or a 1/4 of a second.

Back in the day another trick was of course to reduce compression chamber volume to raise compression ratio.

If you car was contested, and you were accused of cheating, there was a teardown of your engine by NHRA officials , at your expense. My friend got a plug from "somewhere" (he worked for and did some racing for Chrysler)

Your plug was the plug the officials used to measure the combustion chamber volume of your heads. The spark plugs were designed to look stock and hold an extra 5cc of fluid. 5cc X 8 combustion chambers is 40cc. So the cc volume would be correct as measured by the officials, but the true situation would be an increase in compression.

PXL_20230605_224807272.jpg


PXL_20230605_224827515.jpg


PXL_20230605_224731318.jpg


PXL_20230605_224744211.jpg


PXL_20230605_224412556.jpg


PXL_20230605_224422942.jpg


PXL_20230605_224840434.MP.jpg
 
That's very cool stuff, Brooks. Thanks for sharing. I'm confused on one point though. What time frame are you saying this carburetor is from? I ask because the early factory style AFB carburetors were smaller than the 5 1/8" diameter where the air cleaner installs and that one appears to be 5 1/8" which indicates it is a later Competition style, like you do say. I bet it would be very responsive on a slant 6.
 
That's very cool stuff, Brooks. Thanks for sharing. I'm confused on one point though. What time frame are you saying this carburetor is from? I ask because the early factory style AFB carburetors were smaller than the 5 1/8" diameter where the air cleaner installs and that one appears to be 5 1/8" which indicates it is a later Competition style, like you do say. I bet it would be very responsive on a slant 6.
Yes you're right. I made an assumption that may not be correct.

......That were no Small throat AFB's that were 750 CFM.or above.i think that NHRA allowed the 400 CFM Comp Series as a replacement carb for stock. .if the stook one weren't
Available

For example, I have an Edelbrock 750 which is a NHRA legal replacement for a 65 Max wedge intake. Go figure that.

So ...again I'm guessing that the 400 CFM Competition Series was the correct replacement carb and CFM, and that the carbs were made by the same manufacturer definitely didn't hurt.
I'm saying that the secondary boosters pictured here are from A Competition series 750 CFM, stuffed inside the 400 CFM body,

That had the correct carb number to pass NHRA inspection.Even if the small throat AFB secondary boosters fit in the Competition series carb, I haven't seen a small throat AFB with a booster as big as the one pictured here

So if these were replacement carbs, then by using the 750 boosters he had more fuel flow , add that to the compression ratio increase I mentioned earlier, etc.etc
You get the idea
 
Last edited:
Does this carb have the foil tag that says Competition Series on the front? The first series of aftermarket AFB's were 9000 Series-that is what you have, I'm pretty sure. The Competition Series came just a little after that. I have a couple Carter Performance Products books from 10-1975. The 9000 Series has the 400 but the Competition Series starts at 500 cfm. From what I've heard, the 9000 series are better carbs that the Edelbrock Performer series.
 
Me either. I've always read the old 100 pounds = 1/10 of a second.
Edit: my math error,
Yes, 100 lbs loss of weight equals 1/10 of a second quicker, so 25 lbs loss of weight would be 1/40 of a second faster
The point I was trying to make was that my buddy would do anything just to go a little quicker
 
Does this carb have the foil tag that says Competition Series on the front? The first series of aftermarket AFB's were 9000 Series-that is what you have, I'm pretty sure. The Competition Series came just a little after that. I have a couple Carter Performance Products books from 10-1975. The 9000 Series has the 400 but the Competition Series starts at 500 cfm. From what I've heard, the 9000 series are better carbs that the Edelbrock Performer series.
No foil tag on the 400
Thanks for the clarification
 
So if these were replacement carbs, then by using the 750 boosters he had more fuel flow
Not quite, The 400 secondary booster is far more restrictive than the large secondary from a 750.
 
Edit: my math error,
Yes, 100 lbs loss of weight equals 1/10 of a second quicker, so 25 lbs loss of weight would be 1/40 of a second faster
The point I was trying to make was that my buddy would do anything just to go a little quicker
A friend raced a Boss 302 Mustang in the TransAm series. It took the mechanics two evenings after wwork to clean all the under coating off the underside.
 
I wonder how the AVS2 500CFM annular boosters would work in that carb. Annular tends to give better fuel atomization. Should work well on a slant.
Theres an idea. I have an AVS off a 69 Roadrunner, are the current AVS2 boosters better than early AVS's ?
 
Theres an idea. I have an AVS off a 69 Roadrunner, are the current AVS2 boosters better than early AVS's ?
The primary boosters are annular discharge. This provides better signal and atomization. This aids on an airgap style manifold or the slant six with a Dutra or Hyper Pac intake.
Talk to Dan at The Carburetor Shop in Minnisota. The AVS2 500 CFM boosters should work.
The old AVS or Air Valve Secondary have regular boosters, so you need the AVS2 annular boosters.
 
Edit: my math error,
Yes, 100 lbs loss of weight equals 1/10 of a second quicker, so 25 lbs loss of weight would be 1/40 of a second faster
The point I was trying to make was that my buddy would do anything just to go a little quicker
No biggie, buddy. I flunked math too. I passed titties 101, though.
 
Is there a model # stamped on one of the mounting feet?
Couple of comments:
- if this is a Comp Series carb, it is the 2nd iteration
- The original Comp Series were 500 -750 cfm, #s 4758 - 4762
- Early 60s Buick engines had AFBs with the 5" airhorn, known as the 'E' series.
 
Edit: my math error,
Yes, 100 lbs loss of weight equals 1/10 of a second quicker, so 25 lbs loss of weight would be 1/40 of a second faster
The point I was trying to make was that my buddy would do anything just to go a little quicker
class racers are fanatical that way. They have to be. Like when Warren Johnson was questioned about testing vacuum belts. The guy said, at best you might only see a 1/4 hp.!
Johnsons reply was "yes, but if i do one hundred things to gain a 1/4 hp, I have gained 25,! And that, my friends, is why some dominate!
 
class racers are fanatical that way. They have to be. Like when Warren Johnson was questioned about testing vacuum belts. The guy said, at best you might only see a 1/4 hp.!
Johnsons reply was "yes, but if i do one hundred things to gain a 1/4 hp, I have gained 25,! And that, my friends, is why some dominate!
Lol, that is an awesome point...I'm taking that into my build.
 
Edit: my math error,
Yes, 100 lbs loss of weight equals 1/10 of a second quicker, so 25 lbs loss of weight would be 1/40 of a second faster
The point I was trying to make was that my buddy would do anything just to go a little quicker
Nope. 25 is 1/4 of 100 not 40. .0025 or 2 1/2 tenths of a second.
 
If losing 100 lbs makes you a tenth quicker (0.100) 25 lbs should result in .025, a quarter of a tenth.
Frankly, you'll need a car that is DEADLY consistent to see .02 dependably
 
-
Back
Top