Hey Mike,
I wasn't flaming you, just getting the point about SU's
The HIF is a good carb, and I don't have a good excuse to get rid of
mine.
HS's have their share of problems, but in good condition, they ain't bad
either.
I've got a set of HS2's on the Midget, and after a bit of needle
juggling initially (the engine has been "slightly" hotted up so the
original needles didn't make it), I've had very little problems out of
them.
I've also got several customers who run DGV's, and carb problems is not
one of the things they complain about.
Like you, I've no ax to grind either.
All the dyno tests I've ever seen quantify what you've experienced "seat
of the pants". The DCOE does give some small HP gain on the top end, but
was even with SU's in the mid range, and in fact, one showed that the
HIF6 on a 1320 A-series actually gained more HP in the mid range than it
gave up on top end, versus the DCOE.
I've never seen a side by side test of the DGV vs SU, but my gut feeling
is the DGV would not seem so impressive.
I agree, a race car is the ideal place for the DCOE. HP is the name of
the game, especially as we tend to run at the upper end of the tach.
Rick Morrison
72 MGBGT
74 Midget
On Wed, 25 Nov 1998 21:39:09 -0800 "Mike Gigante" <mikeg@vicnet.net.au>
writes:
>The HIF is an excellent carb, and a significant technical advance on
>the
>older style SU. For all around use (road) I'd be more than happy using
>a HIF. In fact I have used a HIF6 on a 1380cc spridget and was
>extremely
>happy with it. On that car I have used both Weber and HIF6 and with
>good manifolds, the performance difference was slightly in favour of
>the Weber at peak HP, but little or no difference elsewhere.
>
>Note that this is a different story than twin SUs of the older kind.
>
>Hey, remember - I have road-going cars with all three types - twin
>SUs,
>single HIF6 and Weber. I don't have any axe to grind, I am not a
>zealot.
>I just report my experience. In addition I have a racecar with a
>Weber.
>
>Mike
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Rick Morrison <gofastmg@juno.com>
>To: stritle@epix.net <stritle@epix.net>
>Cc: mgs@autox.team.net <mgs@autox.team.net>
>Date: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 8:26 PM
>Subject: Re: SU's vs Webers when converting a rubbernose
>
>
>>Sound's EXACTLY like my HIF's.
>>The only advantage I can see for the Weber's is that you don't have
>to
>>add oil periodically.
>> This is worth $300???? :>)
>>
>>Rick Morrison
>>72 MGBGT
>>74 Midget
>>
>>On Tue, 24 Nov 1998 17:37:30 -0500 Steven Tritle <stritle@epix.net>
>>writes:
>>>Sounds more like SU's than Webers.
>>>
>>>Steve
>>>52 TD
>>>Mike Gigante wrote:
>>>
>>>> Webers just sound so much better :-)
>>>>
>>>> In addition, unlike SUs, they are "set and forget" - they don't
>>>drift out
>>>> of tune, and they are less prone to wear problems. If they are set
>
>>>up
>>>> correctly, they are wonderful.
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Neil Cotty <neilc@tradesrv.com.au>
>>>> To: MG Mailing List (E-mail) <mgs@autox.team.net>
>>>> Date: Monday, November 23, 1998 10:01 PM
>>>> Subject: SU's vs Webers when converting a rubbernose
>>>>
>>>> >Hi all,
>>>> >
>>>> >I've read quite a bit lately on SU's, Webers etc and I'm not sure
>
>>>why there
>>>> >are so many people out there with rubbernose cars converting to a
>
>>>Weber
>>>> when
>>>> >they could convert to SU's. As far as I'm aware a single Weber
>>>*may* have
>>>> an
>>>> >advantage at very high RPM's (3-5 bhp according to the Special
>>>Tuning
>>>> manual
>>>> >with other mods) but SU's have the advantage lower down,
>producing
>>>more
>>>> >torque - at least thats what I hear from many racers and the
>books
>>>I've
>>>> >read - but essentially overall performance is similar - power
>band
>>>is
>>>> >different. If you own a single carbed B why not replace them with
>
>>>dual SU's
>>>> >instead of a single Weber? They leave more space in the engine
>bay
>>>thanks
>>>> to
>>>> >the smaller intake, and are more 'original' than webers. They
>also
>>>look
>>>> >quite pleasant! I'm not bagging Webers (I'd love a pair of
>>>sidedraft DCOE's
>>>> >and a xflow head!) I'm just genuinely wondering why Webers are
>>>chosen
>>>> before
>>>> >SU's. Is it a supply issue or one of 'perception', as Webers are
>>>really
>>>> seen
>>>> >as performance carburettors..
>>>> >
>>>> >I'd like to hear some comments on this rubbernose issue. The
>Weber
>>>route is
>>>> >chosen far more often than the SU when changing from single carbs
>
>>>to
>>>> >increase performance (*without* other engine mods!! not talking
>>>about head
>>>> >work, headers etc) - I'd think you'd get similar performance by
>>>going to
>>>> >dual HS4 SU's on a std car. I've never experienced a late model
>>>rubbernose
>>>> >so I can't appreciate how 'impaired' they actually are. My GT is
>no
>>>> >bahnstormer even as std with 94hp, in good nick with dual carbs,
>a
>>>lot more
>>>> >has to be done to improve it's performance! Heck even my A eats
>it
>>>for
>>>> >breakfast! <G> Yes, it really does.
>>>> >
>>>> >Cheers,
>>>> >Neil.
>>>> >--
>>>> >Neil Cotty - Sydney, Australia
>>>> >1970 MG B GT / 1959 MG A 1600 Mk1
>>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|