Logo
FULL SITE MENU

Edelbrock vs. Carter

B

bushwood

Contributing Member
If a guy had twin 440s with Carter AFBs and cruised around 1900 rpm and burned around 8-9 gal/hr (total), would it be worth it to consider the Edelbrock's? Would they deliver the cost benefit?

Also, the hot gas smell one gets after turning off the hot big blocks, would the Edelbrocks eliminate that? Running the blower works, but the residual gas in the carb is cooking, regardless. Keeping my wife's nose happy is important.

Thanks!
 
IF that's an accurate GPH reading (measured by a Flo Scan or equivalent, not a math calculation) then that's not bad at all. I assume the boat is on FULL plane at that speed. If not, your MPG (what really matters) will be bloody awful!

On the gas stink, Carters are famous for allowing gas to leak out the back of the carb where the gasket between top and bottom is. Not only is this wasteful of fuel, it's dangerous! A good rebuild--or new Edelbrocks--would eliminate that.

Finally, going to an Edelbrock 1409s from the old Carters gained me about 1/2 GPH per engine. Worth it on that score alone.

Jeff
 
Fastjeff,

At 1900, I'm around 8-9 kts kts, not on plane (close to hull speed). I thought a gal/per kt wasn't bad, but if the Edelbrocks can possibly deliver a better gph, I have to rethink.

The 440s are pushing a 22,000 lb boat. I know 440s are infamous for being thirsty. The calculations are mathematical. Being a working class guy, Floscan verses carbs would be the question of which to purchase. Right now, I am leaning toward carbs for the aforementioned reasons.

Thanks!
 
Tough choice: The Flo Scan would show you what's your best speed for gas mileage; the new carbs would eliminate the stink issue and improve mileage. Not sure which I would do either.

Jeff

PS: Though I run twins, I have one one flowmeter, and it's on the port engine. (I'm a cheapskate.) I do fill up comparisons to see what the other motor is doing.
 
Back
Top