• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

Duraspark Conversion & Motorcraft 2150

Bronco648

Active Member
Joined
May 23, 2019
Messages
352
Reaction score
81
Points
28
Location
Chicago-land, Illinois
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
S
Engine Type
2.8 V6
Engine Size
2.8
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Tire Size
14"
I'm in the process of rebuilding and reinstalling the drivetrain in my '85 RCLB. I sourced a 2150 carb from the same folks that rebuilt the engine. I recently tore it apart, cleaned it and put it back together (with a rebuild kit). I have a few questions:

First, what's screwed to the left front corner of the carb (yellow arrow)? This appears to be shot, can I get another one?

carb1.jpg
 


Bronco648

Active Member
Joined
May 23, 2019
Messages
352
Reaction score
81
Points
28
Location
Chicago-land, Illinois
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
S
Engine Type
2.8 V6
Engine Size
2.8
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Tire Size
14"
Also noticed that this carb has the 1.08 venturis as opposed to the 1.21 version. I'm wondering if I wasted my time rebuilding it.
 

ford4wd08

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2018
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
504
Points
113
Location
Alcoa, TN
Engine Type
2.8 V6
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Also noticed that this carb has the 1.08 venturis as opposed to the 1.21 version. I'm wondering if I wasted my time rebuilding it.
1.08 is the desired size for the 2.8.

They're becoming somewhat rare as well.
 

Bronco648

Active Member
Joined
May 23, 2019
Messages
352
Reaction score
81
Points
28
Location
Chicago-land, Illinois
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
S
Engine Type
2.8 V6
Engine Size
2.8
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Tire Size
14"
1.08 is the desired size for the 2.8.

They're becoming somewhat rare as well.
That's a little confusing because the CFM for that carb is (obviously) much less than the 2150 1.21 and the Holley 2300. So, why does the Duraspark post in the Tech Library mention the Holley 2300 (350 CFM) when the 2150 1.08 is less than 200 CFM?
 

ford4wd08

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2018
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
504
Points
113
Location
Alcoa, TN
Engine Type
2.8 V6
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
That's a little confusing because the CFM for that carb is (obviously) much less than the 2150 1.21 and the Holley 2300. So, why does the Duraspark post in the Tech Library mention the Holley 2300 (350 CFM) when the 2150 1.08 is less than 200 CFM?
I don't think Holley makes a 2 barrel that is any smaller, not sure....

I'm going off memory, but the 1.08 gives the drivability the 2.8 needs in stock form.
 

Bronco648

Active Member
Joined
May 23, 2019
Messages
352
Reaction score
81
Points
28
Location
Chicago-land, Illinois
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
S
Engine Type
2.8 V6
Engine Size
2.8
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Tire Size
14"
Some quick Googling reveals that the 2150 1.08 is 287 CFM, the 2150 1.21 is 351 CFM and the Holley 2300 is 350 CFM.

The 2150 1.08 was put on 6 cylinder engines while the 2150 1.21 was put on V8s.

I get it now.
 

19Walt93

Well-Known Member
Ford Technician
V8 Engine Swap
Joined
Nov 13, 2018
Messages
3,839
Reaction score
3,494
Points
113
Location
Canaan,NH
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
351
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Total Drop
3"
Tire Size
235/55R16
My credo
If you don't have time to do it right will you have time to do it over?
Some quick Googling reveals that the 2150 1.08 is 287 CFM, the 2150 1.21 is 351 CFM and the Holley 2300 is 350 CFM.

The 2150 1.08 was put on 6 cylinder engines while the 2150 1.21 was put on V8s.

I get it now.
Late 70's 302s got the 1.08 carb, too. I think a 1.12 or 1.21 would have a soggy bottom end on a 2.8.
 

Bronco648

Active Member
Joined
May 23, 2019
Messages
352
Reaction score
81
Points
28
Location
Chicago-land, Illinois
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
S
Engine Type
2.8 V6
Engine Size
2.8
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Tire Size
14"
Late 70's 302s got the 1.08 carb, too. I think a 1.12 or 1.21 would have a soggy bottom end on a 2.8.
They really must have wanted to lean them out, at that point.

Yeah, I think the 1.21 would be too much for a standard (re)build 2.8.
 

19Walt93

Well-Known Member
Ford Technician
V8 Engine Swap
Joined
Nov 13, 2018
Messages
3,839
Reaction score
3,494
Points
113
Location
Canaan,NH
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
351
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Total Drop
3"
Tire Size
235/55R16
My credo
If you don't have time to do it right will you have time to do it over?
They really must have wanted to lean them out, at that point.

Yeah, I think the 1.21 would be too much for a standard (re)build 2.8.
A smaller carb wouldn't affect the mixture, it would just improve low end response and restrict flow at WOT. Keep in mind how they struggled to meet emissions standards in the 70's- lower compression, retarded ignition and cam timing, and worst of all, lousy heads with restricted exhaust flow because of cast-in thermactor passages. The 302 was 200+hp in 68 and they choked it down to 139 hp by about 1975. To add insult to injury, they killed gas mileage, too. A Mustang II with a 302 would get about 12 mpg and a 2.8 v6 with an automatic didn't do much better.
 

Bronco648

Active Member
Joined
May 23, 2019
Messages
352
Reaction score
81
Points
28
Location
Chicago-land, Illinois
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
S
Engine Type
2.8 V6
Engine Size
2.8
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Tire Size
14"
I remember, as I live thru those times. My saving grace was my '66 Mustang GT fastback with a 289.
 

4x4prepper

Active Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2015
Messages
479
Reaction score
195
Points
43
Location
Atlanta
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
Ford
Transmission
Manual
I had a Holley 2300 on a rebuilt 2.8L engine and it ran great. I put the same carb and ignition system on a stock 2.8L, that I am running now, and it was basically un-tunable. I bought a carb from O'Reilly's (before they turned into one of the worse places to buy parts around here), a 2150 for a 1974/1978 (forget which) Mustang II or Pinto (has the metal choke tube to the exhaust manifold) and it runs much better and was tunable. Going by the forumauls on-line the 171CI engine at 4,000 RPMS requires a 158 CFM carb.
 

superj

Well-Known Member
U.S. Military - Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2021
Messages
2,107
Reaction score
1,526
Points
113
Location
corpus christi, texas
Vehicle Year
2004
Make / Model
ranger edge
Engine Type
3.0 V6
Engine Size
3 liters of tire smoking power
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Total Lift
none
Total Drop
none
Tire Size
235s
My credo
Grew up in the 70s, 80s, and 90s
A weber 32/36 would probably also work great
 

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Top