QuickDart360
Well-Known Member
Anyone have a good pair of 1966 metering rods to sell? I am looking for some for my carb.
No metering rods?! Can motor run good without rods at all?That combo [ the Victor ] would probably want richer jetting. Try running it without the met rods, which will richen it up.......or put the old carb back on.
Try better and/or more octane fuel, the , go to your timing.Well carb in car now has 98 jets. Sometimes pings/detonates when I mash the go pedal. Previous carb had .101 jets so it would not ping. A co worker told me the richer jets helped. Engine is a 360 with 340 X-heads, a 292 mopar cam with kb-107 pistons. Intake is a Victor 340. 3.91's out back. Also 727 trans with a 9.5" FTI 3400-3600 stall converter.
Running a full unrestricted jet that normally has a metering rod is n it without reducing the size accordingly is nuts and something I would never do to see if making it richer solves anything.Rumble fish.
Post #8. Not crazy at all for the purpose of testing to see if a richer mixture improves/stops pinging. I have done it, many times. Just because you have not done it does not mean it doesn't work.
Perhaps I worded it poorly.Your post 9 & 11 are just nonsense. There is no such thing as the 'total area of the circumference'.
Horse ****If you bothered to fully read what I said, it was to cruise at light throttle [ on the idle cct, not the cruise step of the met rod so as to avoid plug fouling ] to the test location.
This I understand. The area of what is left over when the rod is in the jet is circular.Apparently you are unaware that when comparing fuel flow through a jet you use area, not diameter.
Horse ****.A 045 met rod tip in a 098 jet gives an area of 0.005953 sq in. With no met rod, 098 jet only, the area is 0.007543. The increase in area by removing the 045 met rod tip is only 16%, not the nonsense you came up with.
Actually the thermoquad on my car now is a different carb. This carb has .98 primary jets and 2024 rods. Secondary jets are .137. Prevoius carb had .101 primary jets and 1966 rods. Secondary jets were .147. So carb was more responsive. Reason for change is this carb started to leak fuel. Needs kit. New carb I had already rebuilt on shelf. So probably need to change rods and jets like old carb. I also want to try colder spark plugs. Now have rn12yc going to try rn9yc range like 1969 340 specs.
Champ calls for 10's in my 273-4. I switched to Autolite and somehow through the wonders of a conversion chart I got a 9 equivalent. I chased a rough rich idle for better than a year. Finally I went back to basics (and figured out that the issue started after the plug change) and changed to a warmer heat range and immediately the problem went away. Yes, let the plugs tell you what the engine wants.Be careful. Champion has NOT said to use that 9 in early 340’s since the early 1990’s. You could be stepping on your pee pee.
There is a reason catalogs get updated.
Let the plug that’s in there tell you what heat range you need and know this for a fact. Those cross reference charts are about junk.
You can take a Champion, an NGK and an Autolite that are supposed to be the same heat range and all three will read differently in the same engine with the same tune up.
So what I’m saying is don’t use an early catalog to pick your plug. Use the latest catalog and then look at the plug and it will tell you if the heat range is correct.
I may at some point post some pictures of the three above mentioned plugs so the difference can be seen.