350cfm holley?

[Rusty_Ranger]

hi, i was wondering if the 350cfm carburator fits on the stock manifold? and in the FI swap section is says that the 350cfm TB with the swap really wakes up the 2.8, would this happen as well with the larger carburator? and is any one running a 4bbl on there stock/ported intake? i've seen 4 to 2bbl adaptors and vice versa but i was wondering if it would be worth it?

 

[Broncodude]

Are you wanting carb or injection? I have a Holley on a 2.8 and it runs great.

 

[skippy]

Are you wanting carb or injection? I have a Holley on a 2.8 and it runs great.

which carb and which manifold?

 

[enginepaul]

The throttle body is a different set-up entirely; it still uses a computer, the Holley doesn't.
I never tried it, but I doubt if an adapter would work very well.

 

[Rusty_Ranger]

sorry, i wasnt clear enough. i'm keeping the the carburation, i know the diffence of FI vs carburation. i was just compairing what it said about the flow rate of the TB and the response from the engine and if a same flow rate carb would have similar results power wise. i was thinking of keeping the stock manifold but porting it. and for the adaptor, would it be worth puting a small 4bbl on a stock/ported manifold? or would it be a waste of fuel? (BTW I think carburators are rated for flow of fuel [mixed gasoline and air], not just gas right?)

 

[Ozwynn]

I don't see why it wouldn't work but it would not be as powerful for reasons you mentioned. the flow rate from the injector in the throttle body would be more consistent than the carb dumping the fuel in. case in point. in 1988 (maybe all the way through 95, I seem to recall test driving a new 94 Tahoe, called a K5, but it was still a Tahoe, and it was carbed) there were 2 versions of the 350sb availible for the chevy 1500. one was carbed and one was TBI. the TBI has much better throttle response and no choke problems.

you would also need a bigger cam to take advantage of the porting and polishing of the intake. biger cam means bigger exhaust.

those 4bbl to 2bbl adapters are a joke, they serve no purpose and still restrict the flow. the only 2 advantages I seen (on the same car) was on 1976 olds omega that I had. it had a 260ci small block V8 and there was no 4bbl intake for it. Advantage 1 was being able to swap a 4bbl carb on this engine. Advantage 2 was using less gas with the 500 holley than the stock 2bbl because it had small primaries and huge secondaries that didn't open til I put my foot in it. but there is a 4bbl intake for the 2.8L

 

[skippy]

ah,but is there a 2 barrel carb that bolts directly to stock manifold?i plan to do the duraspark this summer,and i want the 2150 feedback carb hanging from a nail in the man cave.any thoughts?

 

[Old Red Ranger]

The stock "feedback carburetor" should also be replaced with an earlier non emission controlled 2 BBL carburetor to make this conversion function properly. You can get a 2 BBL carburetor from a Ford 2.8L that had a Duraspark ignition or upgrade to a Holley 350 CFM 2 BBL carburetor P/N 0-7448. This will eliminate the need for, and make the stock EEC nonfunctional. This is not a complicated swap. Not as complicated as people make it sound.

copied directly from the tech page. I too am thinking of durasparking this summer and it would appear to me that the Holley unit is a direct bolt on. I've found it online for around $270 at a few places. I would like to get the offy intake manifold, but unless I can find a used one for cheap I will probably just port or extrude hone the stock manifold. I guess we will have to get verification on the compatibility from someone who has actually done the wrenching on this exact setup(holley 2BBL and stock manifold)

 

[skippy]

thanks,i printed out the duraspark info and have it on the workbench,i found a 2 barrel at advance auto parts for $174.it's listed for 2.8 pinto and is of course rebuilt.guess i can take it back if it doen't fit.

 

[Tony Raine]

i run a holley 350 2 barrel on a duraspark'ed 2.8, and it runs great. i think i ran #58 jets (they come with #61). carb bolts right on. stock throttle cable too. don't use a carb adapter to run a 4-barrel. i used one (quadrajet to 2 barrel intake) and it cracked when i tightened the bolts by hand with just a socket.

 

[skippy]

i run a holley 350 2 barrel on a duraspark'ed 2.8, and it runs great. i think i ran #58 jets (they come with #61). carb bolts right on. stock throttle cable too. don't use a carb adapter to run a 4-barrel. i used one (quadrajet to 2 barrel intake) and it cracked when i tightened the bolts by hand with just a socket.

thanks a bunch!picture is worth a thousand words.thats exactly what i had in mind.engine looks kinda naked there.

 

[jester77]

uh.... steam cleaner?? Just kidding. This is the setup I am looking for my 85 Ranger 4x4. I can't wait to start my weekend project. My real questions are- Does the Duraspark conversion page give accurate details on changing the ignition?? And mainly- do you notice any improvement in the performance? I really want to get a bit more out of my ranger.

 

[jester77]

quick question- what is the round thing with the electrical connector just in front of the carburator?? When you did the swap do you eliminate the EGR valve and the catalytic converter?

 

[skippy]

quick question- what is the round thing with the electrical connector just in front of the carburator?? When you did the swap do you eliminate the EGR valve and the catalytic converter?

that would be the egr valve and sensor.i plan to get rid of or blank off the ports between the valve and intake.don't know about the cat,we need some more input from duraspark converts out there.my understanding is that "all" emissions parts can go bye-bye,not that i would do anything to break the law.

 

[Tony Raine]

engine looks kinda naked there.

yeah, getting rid of the stock garbage frees up a lot of room. plus that is an "in progress" pic. at that time, i didn't have some stuff done yet (fuel line, choke cable, etc....)

uh.... steam cleaner?? Just kidding. This is the setup I am looking for my 85 Ranger 4x4. I can't wait to start my weekend project. My real questions are- Does the Duraspark conversion page give accurate details on changing the ignition?? And mainly- do you notice any improvement in the performance? I really want to get a bit more out of my ranger.

if i cleaned the motor, it would be harder to tell which parts are new and which still need to be replaced, haha. mines an 84, so i don't know if yours will be different. mine was just splicing a few wires (didn't use stock plugs), pretty easy stuff. as far as performance (and reliability, and better gas mileage), it was worth every penny.

and i don't have a cat for now (yes, thats illegal), but would like to get one someday after i get all the other problems sorted out. and i don't know about the round thing. engine has been running good for a few years like this, so i'll just leave it alone for now