A carb still has to match engine capabilities the same that the efi system is. You cant just load a 1000cfm double pumper onto a stock 327 and expect twice the power in the same respect that you can not just change your cam in a tbi motor to make 450 hp without upgrading the aspiration. You can install injectors that increase the fuel supply (lbs/hr) and then modify the fuel curve but this all costs money in the end. The same as it cost you money to upgrade the intake manifold, cam, lifters, exhaust and CARB to make your 450 hp. It is for this very reason that I do not mess with motors or have the need for 450 hp. Why would I be in such a hurry? If I did have such a need for these horsies I would not be playing with a gasoline motor...it would be a diesel with mechanical injection and turbo.
This is another reason a Q-jet is a great carb. You CAN throw a 850cfm(biggest q-jet I have seen) q-jet on a stock 327 and it will still perform well. In fact I always run the bigblock/corvette q-jets which are 795 CFM and I get people telling me all the time its too much carb. Q-jets have pretty small primarys and variable venturi secondaries. This means you can cruise around on basically a small 2bbl carb then open it up and it will only supply the maximum CFM that the engine can use. Basically the carb will only open as much as the engine can "suck" it open. Where as the other 2 popular carb designs (holly and carter AFB) can actually flood an engine out if they are too big for the application.
-
However You are still completely correct. Even a q-jet should be tuned to the application, as with any aspiration on any engine.
_
Unfourtunatly I have to disagree with your theory of not needing so much power though. I mean seriously what was the stock HP of your 78 bronco? Late 70's anything was really low power output no matter how it is figured. And here I am going to go into a completely different fuel for my example.
PROPANE or LPG is the fuel I will use to make my point.
Here in the USA it isnt uncommon to see LPG powered slightly older vehicles, its a cheaper alternitive to gasoline.
Now the reason Im using LPG as my example is because its power output. Converting your stock engine to run LPG will give you slightly less power and deliver slightly less MPG. But its much cheaper and a lot cleaner. However LPG responds VERY well to "hot rodding" modifications. It does not detonate as bad as gasoline, in fact LPG is equilivent to 104-105 octane gasoline, This means it can run higher compression. Higher compression means a hotter combustion, which in turn means more fuel is burnt, which means the engine runs more efficiant. In highschool I got in on a LPG only/specific 302 ford build. We actually built that engine with 12.5:1 pistons and with the head work done the engine was somewhere near 13.75:1 compression! Thats drag racing style engine building! It was coupled with a custom ground cam, a single plane weiand intake manifold, and just for giggles we also port matched and polished the heads. Now the kicker was the cam wasn't radical it was actually close to stock but with differnt duration and lobe separation(long explaination so if you dont understand it just pretend you do).
ANYWAY on to the point of the story.
When all was said and done it was put into a 1974 ford f150 4wd short bed pickup 3 speed auto, on 35" tires and ended up getting 21mpg on long trips and had enough power to shred the tires at will. *never dyno'ed but Im guessing well over 400HP* Now this is an alternate fueled engine so honestly comparing it to a gasoline engine is kinda like comparing a gasoline engine to a diesel. Or apples to oranges.
-
So when you say you dont need that much horsepower, I say your wrong. You need the most horsepower that makes your engine the most efficiant.
Sorry for the long post and I mean no disrespect.
![cropjeep.jpg[img\]](http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/crleo2003/cropjeep.jpg[img\])
