• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

It Lives!!!!!!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Iron Woode
Originally posted by: alfa147x
Originally posted by: Emission
Feedback carbs change the base fuel mixture in accordance to a sensor in the exhaust manifold, they were used at the time to meet certain emissions standards.

so i guess thats bad for performance ?
firstly, my car did not have a feedback carb. It did have a 2bbl with some very rudimentary sensors attached to it. The car had the Lean Burn computer on it.

feedback carbs are horrible for performance. GM had a feedback quadrajet in the late 80's that was just awful.

It depends. Honda's feedback carbs weren't too bad IIRC. I mean, yes, they were a bit of a kludge, but not all of them were awful. They did all tend to be a nightmare when something went awry, but that's the case with anything that required so many vacuum lines to operate correctly.

ZV
 
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: Iron Woode
Originally posted by: alfa147x
Originally posted by: Emission
Feedback carbs change the base fuel mixture in accordance to a sensor in the exhaust manifold, they were used at the time to meet certain emissions standards.

so i guess thats bad for performance ?
firstly, my car did not have a feedback carb. It did have a 2bbl with some very rudimentary sensors attached to it. The car had the Lean Burn computer on it.

feedback carbs are horrible for performance. GM had a feedback quadrajet in the late 80's that was just awful.

It depends. Honda's feedback carbs weren't too bad IIRC. I mean, yes, they were a bit of a kludge, but not all of them were awful. They did all tend to be a nightmare when something went awry, but that's the case with anything that required so many vacuum lines to operate correctly.

ZV
and weird electronic gizmos attached to the inner workings of carbs. Those Qjets were just horrible to service back in the day. And don't get me started on the Thermoquads either. Electronics and carbs don't go together. Fuel injection was a big step forward back then.
 
Originally posted by: Raduque
Nice car. How much power you putting to the ground?
not sure considering the crappy 318 heads and 8.5:1 compression.

probably 200hp or so at the rear.
 
Originally posted by: Iron Woode
Originally posted by: Raduque
Nice car. How much power you putting to the ground?
not sure considering the crappy 318 heads and 8.5:1 compression.

probably 200hp or so at the rear.

Hey, that beats my 330 CID. I'm probably only putting down about 185hp or so of my rated 260. (worn out spark plugs, auto 4wd)
 
Back
Top