Re: [FWDLK]

[cpollock@xxxxxxxx]

Hi All,
Actually, the "new" Edelbrock 750 is actually a Carter AFB.  This came about when
the old Carter Corp sold the rights to the AFB to Edelbrock in the late 70's.  When
Federal Mogul bought  Carter in the early 80's they found the copyright was still
open and began producing the old AFB again.  Then, in the early 90's Edelbrock
decided to produce the old AFB again, but market it as a "Performer" brand
product.  The two are identical, the parts interchange and if you want a bargain
buy the same carb from Carter proper for about 100 bucks less.  Personally, my cars
run AVS Carburetors or Thermoquads, due to the ease of adjustability of the
secondaries.  The exception is the old WCFB which is on most of our beloved Forward
Look cars and the early AFB, which mainly is due to the funky reverse pattern on
the throttle.  Later cars pull the cable back and open the primaries.  The older
cars push the primaries with a bellcrank arrangement.  For fuel economy, it is hard
to beat the Thermoquad. The small primaries give you mileage like a 2 barrel, but
the HUGE secondaries are there when you need to step on that Mustang or Camaro in
the next lane.

Hope this helps,
Chargin'Charles--->>>


spencer wrote:

> I've been told this for a long time by people who have used after market carbs
> on 413's and 440's. personally i still use the old original Carter 4 barrell
> which seems to work ok but better gas mileage would be nice and that is one of
> the benefits of switching over; in addition to better running and smoother
> idling. i probably will upgrade eventually, and Edelbrock's performer series 750
> cfm is the best I've been told since it can be easily calibrated and tuned.
>
> Jim Pristelski wrote:
>
> > HI Spencer,
> >
> > Why do you feel that an aftermarket carb is an improvement?  What carb would
> > you recommend?  Thanks, Jim
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: spencer <bluemoon61@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: Jim Pristelski <ajp002@xxxxxxx>
> > Cc: L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 11:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: [FWDLK]
> >
> > >actually 65' was the last year for the 413 in passenger cars but they were
> > used
> > >in motor homes thru 73'. as already stated there would be problems using a
> > later
> > >motor and would not be worth the hassle. You could try the same thing I did
> > and
> > >locate a 61' New Yorker or Imperial 413 which is a direct bolt-in and will
> > give
> > >the car a very noticable boost on the road. an aftermarket carb would help
> > >also.                              spencer  61" Newport  (413)
> > >
> > >Jim Pristelski wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi David,
> > >>
> > >> I thought that Chrysler discontinued the 413 in 1966.  I would guess that
> > >> the engine in the 70's motorhome would be a 440.  But even if 413's were
> > >> made into the 1970's, you will have problems because:
> > >>
> > >> 1. 1961 was the last year for the cast iron torqueflight tranny.  The
> > tranny
> > >> in the motorhome  is probably a aluminum case 727 that uses a column
> > shift
> > >> arrangement.  Definitely not compatible with your pushbuttons in your
> > 1961
> > >> Chrysler which actuate a shift cable to the tranny.
> > >>
> > >> 2. The 1961 and earlier 413's have a different flange on the crankshaft
> > that
> > >> bolts directly to the torque converter.  The 1962 and later 413's have a
> > >> flange on the crankshaft that bolts to a flex plate, that in turn bolts
> > to
> > >> the torque converter.  Again, not compatible.  If you could find a 413
> > >> crankshaft from 1961 or earlier, you could switch it with the one in the
> > >> 70's engine and then it would bolt up to the torqueflight tranny
> > currently
> > >> in your 1961 Chrysler.  You may be better off trying to find a 1961 or
> > >> earlier 413 if you want to avoid a crankshaft swap.
> > >>
> > >> 3. On the 1961 413 engines, there should be an engine code stamped into a
> > >> flat boss up front near the distributor.  The code should be "R41", "R"
> > for
> > >> 1961 and "41" for 413.  The 61 Newports came with a 361 engine as
> > standard,
> > >> so you might see "R36".  Similarly, for a 383 equipped 1961, you would
> > see
> > >> "R38".  The 300G's with the 413 crossram engine will have the code
> > "R41HP"
> > >> since these engines had dual valve springs, a higher performance timing
> > >> chain, etc, in addition to the crossram induction arrangement.
> > >>
> > >> 4. Sorry, I don't know much about performance parts availability for the
> > >> 413.  Best regards, Jiim
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: David Charles Gedraitis <dcg@xxxxxxx>
> > >> To: L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> Date: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 8:19 PM
> > >> Subject: [FWDLK]
> > >>
> > >> >hi list,
> > >> >
> > >> >alrighty-as far as I know, there were two different types of 413 out
> > >> >there. One was for trucks, one for cars. Is there anyway to tell without
> > >> >having to pull the motor apart to look at the bolt pattern on the crank?
> > >> >I've been offered one fairly cheap from a 70's motorhome-any thoughts on
> > >> >how well this will fit in my '61 newport?  Is this motor different from
> > >> >the ones that came in the 300's?  And if this is the motor I think it
> > is,
> > >> >what trannies could I bolt it up to? Would they fit in my car? and what
> > >> >performance parts are out there for this? I'm looking for some real
> > power,
> > >> >so i'm looking for some thoughts on building up a motor like this?
> > >> >thoughts in general?
> > >> >
> > >> >~dave
> > >> >
> > >> >'61 Newport
> > >> >'67 Kaiser M-715
> > >> >'55 Windsor Wagon
> > >> >
> > >