Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

173 and a holley 350

Started by _Kevy_ , Sep 30 2012 05:43 PM

Next

Please log in to reply

70 replies to this topic

#1 _Kevy_

Guests

Posted 30 September 2012 - 05:43 PM

Gday, Im wondering if i've had good advice or not . iv'e got an lj 4dr auto with a stock 173 ,it has extractors already on it . Iv'e picked up a holley 350 with a redline manifold almost new and iv'e been told to install a pair of redline venturi sleeves to get it to 320 cfm and two size 50 jets it has size 61 jets at the moment . Would this setup be ok until i get the head ported and cam replaced or should i put up with driving a slug and do the whole lot in 1 go

Back to top

#2 _Bomber Watson_

Guests

Posted 30 September 2012 - 05:51 PM

350's are borderline to small anyway, even for a stock engine, yourse being a 173 wouldnt be so bad. I definitely would not sleeve the venturi's though.

I'd be inclined to leave the 61's as well, but with no real experience with a 350 on a holden six thats a guess. .

Cheers.

Back to top

#3 _Torrie_Man_

Guests

Posted 30 September 2012 - 10:33 PM

hey mate. i have a relatively stock 173 (rebuilt, mild cam and extractors 350 and lynx manifold) when i bought it it already had a 350 holley. It ran like shit until i rebuilt the holley and jetted it down. Runs like a dream, no flatspots and plenty of power (for a 2.85) Dunno why every one shit bags them, they are a great carby

Back to top

#4 _Quagmire_

Guests

Posted 01 October 2012 - 06:24 AM

if it ain't broke....
i've had holley 350/500's on 302's and 253's/308's and they work fine
you just need to stay on top of the tune and jet em right which is easy enough at home with a few tools

Back to top

#5 _Kevy_

Guests

Posted 01 October 2012 - 06:31 PM

Cool thanks johnno ill try it i checked the compression today before doin anything to it , all 180 psi dunno what there supposed to be but there all the same so i supose thats a good start

Back to top

#6 _Bomber Watson_

Guests

Posted 01 October 2012 - 06:58 PM

Thats fine.

Back to top

#7 _judgelj_

Guests

Posted 01 October 2012 - 09:32 PM

I've noticed that people either insist it is too small or the biggest Holley you should use on a 202.

Back to top

#8 _Bomber Watson_

Guests

Posted 01 October 2012 - 09:40 PM

considering i've used a 600 on a mild 202 i'd say a 350 is a bit small lol.

Back to top

#9 _judgelj_

Guests

Posted 01 October 2012 - 10:40 PM

Yeah that's the interesting thing.Try telling that to some people and they will spit their sausage at you

Back to top

#10 Ice

Cool

Members
15,176 posts

Name:Gene
Location:Galaxy's away from Ipswich
Car:77 HZ Sandman Van
Joined: 03-January 07

Posted 01 October 2012 - 11:01 PM

considering i've used a 600 on a mild 202 i'd say a 350 is a bit small lol.

overkill and you know it bomber

Back to top

#11 Collo

( . Y . )

Members
114,647 posts

Location:Newcastle...Home of me.
Car:A Black POS
Joined: 29-February 08

Posted 02 October 2012 - 03:52 AM

I don't think Bomber knows the meaning of that word

Edited by slr_v8, 02 October 2012 - 03:52 AM.

Back to top

#12 _oldjohnno_

Guests

Posted 02 October 2012 - 04:24 AM

When you're sizing a carb, don't worry about the capacity of the engine - work on its HP instead. There is a much closer connection between CFM and horsepower than CFM and cubic inches. I've found that the 500cfm 2 barrel Holley is a good match for a mild (say 180 - 200hp) 202 while a 350 is a good fit with a stock or close-to-stock engine.
Another thing I've found with the two barrel Holleys is that it takes more than just jet changes to get the best of both power and economy out of them. They tend to be quite rich off idle and at part throttle cruise and need bigger IABs and/or smaller IFRs to correct this. If you just jet it for all round performance the mileage is usually pretty ordinary even though there is no hesitations or flat spots. The 500s in particular also tend to have a rich peak at the very top end and need bigger MABs to address this. Thorough tuning makes a huge difference to the performance and especially the mileage of these things, and there's a big difference between one that's merely been jetted to run cleanly and one that's been tuned to give a constant fuel curve right through the range.
Definitely avoid those MickeyMouse sleeves, they're just a crutch for poor tuning or sizing. For a stock or stockish engine I think the Falcon Weber is a better choice than the 350.

Back to top

#13 _Bomber Watson_

Guests

Posted 02 October 2012 - 05:41 PM

Yeah that's the interesting thing.Try telling that to some people and they will spit their sausage at you

overkill and you know it bomber

Admittedly i had the stiffest secondary spring in it haha, did slide the second stiffest in and it went a bit better, third stiffest was to soft. So yeah, to big, but it was just to prove a point to a mate on his combo (202, touched over yt stage 3, crow 626) that the 350 the engine shop he was going though convinced him to buy was to small hehe....

Cheers.

Back to top

#14 warrenm

Forum Fixture

Members
2,114 posts

Location:Central West NSW
Car:1972 LJ Torana
Joined: 08-November 05

View Garage

Posted 03 October 2012 - 06:33 AM

600cfm isn't to big, 3x2" SU's flow much more than that.

Back to top

#15 _oldjohnno_

Guests

Posted 03 October 2012 - 06:57 AM

600cfm isn't to big, 3x2" SU's flow much more than that.

True, but the different style of manifolding with the SUs means that the engine needs the extra flow.
Getting back to single carbs on a common plenum, I haven't tried a 500 Edelbrock on a 202 but I suspect that its secondary design would work very well on a six.

Back to top

#16 LHSL

Forum Fixture

Members
995 posts

Name:Phillip
Location:SYDNEY
Car:1974 LH SL; 2 x 1975 LH S Toranas
Joined: 30-March 07

Posted 03 October 2012 - 05:41 PM

True, but the different style of manifolding with the SUs means that the engine needs the extra flow.
Getting back to single carbs on a common plenum, I haven't tried a 500 Edelbrock on a 202 but I suspect that its secondary design would work very well on a six.

I love reading your posts johnno and the write up on building a holden 6 is legendary. Keep them coming. Yours and Dr Terry's posts are informative and constructive.
Phillip

Back to top

#17 yel327

Oh My, Don't you post alot

Members
13,570 posts

Joined: 10-February 08

Posted 03 October 2012 - 06:15 PM

I used to run a vacuum secondary 390 4BBL Holley on a mild 202, on a Cain manifold (old style big runner, not the later Redline style). It went pretty well, and was OK on fuel. It was just a blue bottom end with 30/70 Waggot cam and Yella Terra head with extractors. From memory it dynoed at about 100-110hp at the rear wheels. It was a much better car than the same engine with a 350 on it, especially on fuel. I used to tow my ski boat with the car (LX hatch) and the 390 was much better on the boat ramps than the 350. It was a Celica 5spd and 3.08:1 Salisbury, 265/50/14 tyres. It wasn't really any more powerful with the 390 over the 350, just more driveable.

Back to top

#18 _Kevy_

Guests

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:34 PM

Thanks for all your advice , put the 350 holley on the stock 173 and it runs just fine straight out of the box , Cam next week im leaning towards crow 35602 cam

Back to top

#19 _Quagmire_

Guests

Posted 04 December 2012 - 02:19 AM

I used to run a vacuum secondary 390 4BBL Holley on a mild 202, on a Cain manifold (old style big runner, not the later Redline style). It went pretty well, and was OK on fuel. It was just a blue bottom end with 30/70 Waggot cam and Yella Terra head with extractors. From memory it dynoed at about 100-110hp at the rear wheels. It was a much better car than the same engine with a 350 on it, especially on fuel. I used to tow my ski boat with the car (LX hatch) and the 390 was much better on the boat ramps than the 350. It was a Celica 5spd and 3.08:1 Salisbury, 265/50/14 tyres. It wasn't really any more powerful with the 390 over the 350, just more driveable.

yeah...but if you do the same with a 2bbl stromie and replace with a 4 bbl quaddie/holley on a 308
you get the same result...if your careful with the right foot

Edited by Quagmire, 04 December 2012 - 02:19 AM.

Back to top

#20 N/A-PWR

CABIN ENGINE CONTROLS GALORE

Members
9,630 posts

Name:Dave I
Location:Wooroloo, 65km's East of Perth
Car:'1969' LC RAT TORANA
Joined: 08-December 12

Posted 14 January 2013 - 03:09 AM

600cfm isn't to big, 3x2" SU's flow much more than that.

Hi warrenm,
I found this 650cfm 2bbl carby for a good $1000:-
Posted Image

http://dambest.com/carbs/index.html

http://dambest.com/b...es/6502bbl.html

Looking forward to some extra flow. Dave I

Edited by TORYPOWER, 14 January 2013 - 03:15 AM.

Back to top

#21 N/A-PWR

CABIN ENGINE CONTROLS GALORE

Members
9,630 posts

Name:Dave I
Location:Wooroloo, 65km's East of Perth
Car:'1969' LC RAT TORANA
Joined: 08-December 12

Posted 15 January 2013 - 02:19 AM

Hi All,
Just added another 2bbl as we don't have a dedicated Carby thread,
This 2bbl Holley, part #6425 ( normally 650cfm) has been bored out to 735cfm:-

Posted Image

http://www.vendio.co...orm/lid=4242801

would do very well on a Fully worked Six. Dave I

Edited by TORYPOWER, 15 January 2013 - 02:20 AM.

Back to top

#22 _Bomber Watson_

Guests

Posted 15 January 2013 - 05:16 PM

Wow, annular boosters that ARE the venturi's, recon it would be real nice down low at part throttle lol.

Back to top

#23 _oldjohnno_

Guests

Posted 15 January 2013 - 07:55 PM

The only reason weird stuff like this exists at all is so that sufficient peak power can be made when the rules specify two barrels only as well as maximum venturi and throttle diameters. All sorts of things are sacrificed for raw airflow. You sure as hell wouldn't run anything like that if you didn't have to.

As for doing well on a fully worked six, I can't imagine it running well at all with anything less than 450 - 500hp; numbers that are waaaaaaaaaay over anything I could dream of getting from a NA 202.