Weber / Edelbrock 500 Running Rich

General Chat About Exhaust, Cylinder Heads, Fuel Systems And Intake

Moderator: phpBB2 - Administrators

Post Reply
User avatar
john 215
Getting There
Getting There
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:01 pm
Location: luton

Weber / Edelbrock 500 Running Rich

Post by john 215 »

Hi Gents,
I have the above carb sitting on a Wildcat manifold, fitted to my 4.6, has stage 3 heads and running a Real Steel typhoon cam. When i MOT ed it the other week had to wind the 2 mixture screws nearly all the way home to get it to pass. It appears to be a lot more happy running at about 6% co. Have checked and regulated fuel pressure to 4 psi, checked the float hights they were ok.Ign timing set at 10 btdc, got a twin point Mallory with an optical conversion (Mallory). Do the needles have any effect on idle mixture :?: Was thinking about measuring engine vac? What would any of you gents rec as far as needles and springs for the above? The car drives fine, no bogging down or owt.
Cheers John


LIVE LIFE A QUARTER OF A MILE AT A TIME.
sidecar
Top Dog
Top Dog
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:52 pm

Post by sidecar »

I just posted this on the cobra forum, the guy is having issues with his webber 500:-

During the tests that I've done using a lambda probe I noted that the carb runs way too rich in the cruise mode but does not run too rich up on the power step and when running flat out. The cruise mode is either controlled by the jet (which will effect both modes to a degree, but the secondaries also have an effect) or is solely controlled by the thicker part of the needles, 65, 67, etc. In fact going from a 65 to a 67 is only a 2 thou increase in size but leans of the cruise I think by 6% from memory according to the chart.

My tests have confirmed that it leans off nicely with the AFR going to about 13.5:1 in cruise mode. Des Hammills book reckons that you can go as lean as 15:1 in cruise but my 3.5 and Grahams 3.5 both ran like bags of crap when we ran them leaner than 13.5:1. I've not tried going leaner than this on my 4.6 and have no intention of trying!

The out of the box setting is not too rich for the acceleration mode and WOT, in fact its a bit leaner than what is required for max BHP according to "Des". He reckons 12.5:1 which is similar to other general gumph that I've read so I do believe the book even though it's wrong about the cruise mode.

The 55 part of a 67x55 needle will have the acceleration mode at round 13.5:1 which I don't think is too lean to harm the engine (It's still classed as a rich AF ratio as it is richer than 14.7:1).

The needles that I've made are a set from the standard range available but are 67x52 (The 52 bit being the part that I thinned down to get this figure). Even these needles only get the acceleration down to 13.1 on my 4.6 lump. (but the WOT still stayed around 13.5:1)

I could not get the WOT settings richer than 13.5:1 with just my modified needles so I've increased the secondaries. I've gone off the scale with the ones supplied in the calibration kit so I bought some bigger ones (104's) Even these are only allowing the WOT to go to 13.1. I would like to point out that I've not noticed the car going any better as the mixture has richened up :(

As you can see it can all get a bit complicated if you let it!

What you do with your carb really depends on what you want from your motor. If you want every last BHP and need to run it rich because its tuned right to the limit then you need to do quite a bit of fiddling and you would need either a probe or a rolling road. (I don't think that any of our road lumps are what you would call "race tuned" as that would be horrible on the road, not to mention the fact that a race engine needs a re-build every 500 miles!)

If you want a degree of accomony whilst knowing that you are not washing the bores or running way too lean than its dead easy to setup the carb, bung it all back to standard and lob in the 67x55 needles.

You'd think that its not posible to make the above statment as each engine is different (in size and tune) but I was surprised to find that it is has proved to be true so far. My tuned 3.5 ran fine with just the needles, Grahams standard 3.5 runs fine, and my tuned 4.6 ran OK with them.

(Other people on the V8 forum have reported that their cars run OK as well).


I then posted this up:-

You are quite right, 95's are the standard secondaries. (My memory ain't what it used to be!) They will be fine if you want to run WOT at 13.5:1

When you put the new needles in I doubt that you will feel any more BHP but you will "smell" the difference between them and the standard ones with 86 jets.

You will also need to set the pilot screws. Get the engine up to temp, open each screw out to about 2+3/4 turns (if it does not like running this rich go for 2 + 1/2 turns) Once you have set them turn each one in slowly and listen to the engine, it might speed up at some point or it might just stay the same however there will be point at which the engine just starts to slow down (only just mind you). Stop turning screw and open it up 1/4 turn. Do the same with the other screw. This will set the AFR at about 13.5:1 and the CO at about 2.5 %. You can go in an 1/8 of a turn to get the AFR to 14:1 if you like but I run mine at 13.5:1 at idle.

I bet the screws end up between 1+3/4 and 2 turns! :D

The low floats will cause flooding as the fuel level will be too high.

Edlebrock only screw the carb together to make shipping it easlier, they don't seem to set the things up at all!

HTH

Pete
Last edited by sidecar on Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
CastleMGBV8
Top Dog
Top Dog
Posts: 2334
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 5:09 pm
Location: Sidcup, Kent, UK

Post by CastleMGBV8 »

Pete,

Thanks for that detailed information about suitable jetting for the Edelbrock 500.

I will need to re-jet mine when it goes on the new 4.35 engine, it's currently jetted for the 3.5 and runs well, it will pull direct top smoothly with a 3.07/1 rear end down to 1000RPM if required, and this is with Stage 1 heads and Hurricane cam

I have printed out your information for further use, one thing to take into consideration and can effect mixture requirements is how the heads have been modified and finished. My Buick 300 alloy heads have large ports probably the equivalent of what people call Stage 3 or possibly 4.

I have increased the valve sizes to 1.63" Inlet and 1.4" exhaust but have purposely left the port walls as cast to retain turbulence and avoid the fuel dropping out of suspension, which should be helpful for the production of low down torque but still allow a good top end with the Crower 50232 cam which has .488 valve lift, cant remember the duration spec as the info is with the engine builder, but am hoping it will be reasonably well behaved on the road and perform well on track if required.

I will probably start the carb tuning from the original base line jet settings, even the 3.5 ran ok on them but was obvious quite rich.

Interesting what you were saying about the mixture in cruise mode, I will have to re-read the book but from memory, (a dangerous thing) I believe you can change the step up spring so that the carb stays in the lean step of the rod, during cruise and high vacuum, with the current price of fuel I feel I need to squeeze as many miles as possible out of a gallon. My MGB GT is geared to approx 2300RPM in 5th at 70MPH which should make distance driving as economical as possible.

I am hoping to install a lamba sensor in the collector of a least one of the manifolds which can be done when the engines are swapped, the manifolds are stainless and I have a pair of stainless bungs to weld on and hope my guy can tig weld, if not I'm going to have find someone local who can do it in a hurry whilst the old engine is out, and before the new one goes in, you cant fit the MGRV8 manifolds once the engines in place and they would be difficult to do in situ.

Once the new engine has got some miles on it I will get on a rolling road and hopefully set the carb up properly.

Kevin.
User avatar
Eliot
Top Dog
Top Dog
Posts: 1765
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 9:46 am
Location: Milton Keynes
Contact:

Post by Eliot »

Yep - get some lambda probes on it and eliminate the guesswork.
Eliot Mansfield
5.7 Dakar 4x4, 4.6 P38 & L322 TDV8
www.mez.co.uk / www.efilive.co.uk
sidecar
Top Dog
Top Dog
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:52 pm

Post by sidecar »

Hi Kevin,

I noticed a slight cock up in my post which I have corrected!

Your printed out copy will still have the cockup!

Your printed version will say "I could not get the WOT settings leaner than 13.5:1"

It needs to say "I could not get the WOT settings richer than 13.5:1"


Regards,

Pete
CastleMGBV8
Top Dog
Top Dog
Posts: 2334
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 5:09 pm
Location: Sidcup, Kent, UK

Post by CastleMGBV8 »

Pete,

Duly noted, 13.5 is obviously a bit lean for WOT so I will need to do some work on the rolling road the manual suggests some where between 12 - 12.7 and if we can get cruise to around the 15 mark that would be ideal for power and reasonable economy, the Crower 50232 cam should be smoothed out by 2500-3000RPM hopefully.

Kevin.
sidecar
Top Dog
Top Dog
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:52 pm

Post by sidecar »

CastleMGBV8 wrote:Pete,

Duly noted, 13.5 is obviously a bit lean for WOT so I will need to do some work on the rolling road the manual suggests some where between 12 - 12.7 and if we can get cruise to around the 15 mark that would be ideal for power and reasonable economy, the Crower 50232 cam should be smoothed out by 2500-3000RPM hopefully.

Kevin.
I don't "think" that 13.5:1 is too lean at WOT to cause damage, its still classed as rich as its richer than 14.7:1 but I guess that it depends on how near the edge your motor is tuned! It might be too lean for max BHP but not too lean to melt a piston. (Don't hold me to that though :lol: ).

Having said all that I did get get mine richer at WOT than 13.5:1 so I've just blown my own argument out of the water! (curently 13:1)

I do think that you will have to up the secondaries to get a richer WOT and as they do not seem anywhere near as sensitive as the primaries you'll have to go alot bigger on them to make a change to the AFR.

The darn problem with these carbs is that there is not enough choice in the needles department. I reckon that going thinner on the power step would richen up the WOT and the acceleration mode possibly with more effect than the secondaries but there isn't a set that will allow this whilst keeping the cruise mode in the range that I want it in.

Thinning down the needles is a one-way trip, if you go too far its a new set of needles! :(

My old 3.5 and my mates 3.5 won't run with the cruise any leaner an 13.5:1

A guy on the Cobra forum running a clever EFI setup does run his cruise this lean (15:1) but I reckon that he can because the EFI produces a more homogeneous mix than a carb. (You can see great blobs of fuel dripping from the spraybar of the carb and I'm not talking about the accelerator pump!)

One last thing, if you do up the secondaries you may have to reduce the accelerator pump stroke to avoid a rich bog when you floor it...I did.

Good luck...keep us posted!

Pete
CastleMGBV8
Top Dog
Top Dog
Posts: 2334
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 5:09 pm
Location: Sidcup, Kent, UK

Post by CastleMGBV8 »

John.

Just re-read your original post and realised that the Wildcat manifold is unheated.

This is probably the cause of the high readings at tickover, especially if the engine had cooled down prior to testing and caused by the fuel dropping out of suspension.

Kevin
sidecar
Top Dog
Top Dog
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:52 pm

Post by sidecar »

CastleMGBV8 wrote:John.

Just re-read your original post and realised that the Wildcat manifold is unheated.

This is probably the cause of the high readings at tickover, especially if the engine had cooled down prior to testing and caused by the fuel dropping out of suspension.

Kevin
You mean that I wrote all that lot for nothing! :shock: :D :shock:
CastleMGBV8
Top Dog
Top Dog
Posts: 2334
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 5:09 pm
Location: Sidcup, Kent, UK

Post by CastleMGBV8 »

Pete.

No it is all usefull stuff.

Kevin.
Post Reply

Return to “Exhaust, Cylinder Heads, Fuel And Intake Area”