Do you just put annular boosters in front or in all 4? I have a 3310 with straight legs and put a metering block and jets in the rear. It is a 750. The Ford 428CJ carb was a 3310 with the truck annular boosters in front that made it a 735cfm. Btw, I have built 428 engines using the 128 formula and had solid cams ground straight up 109/109/109 and .580 lift. With the factory carb and tube headers in a 69 Torino you found religion.
I installed a Holley 830 "Competition" double-pumper on my 440 Dodge back in 1994, after reading an article on them in either Hot Rod or Popular Hot Rodding. It had annular boosters, old-school 1:1 bell-crank throttle linkage, and a really fat fuel curve. Was a great carb, and really responsive. I wish I would've known way back then your tips and tricks for making your own #8-32 jets for tuning all the fixed circuits. Would've been a game changer for me. Keep up the great content, Andy.
I was inspired to similar action about the same time. It made sense that a vehicle that was going to see a fair amount of part throttle driving but had occasional wot usage had room to improve. I can't jump out and swap carbs to pass somebody, or creep through traffic - that's stupid. Long story short, had a 750 four barrel modified/put in annular style boosters and results were pretty good - low manifold vacuum is what made me look at mods in the first place. The car was not a dedicated track machine, so converter was 2400.
@@bigblockjalopy I’ve seen many Holleys with straight leg boosters up front and downleg boosters in the secondaries. One model of the 3310 VS is set up this way, but is rated at 780 cfm rather than 750.....
@@trailerparkcryptoking5213 I wasn't talking downleg or straight, I just said annular, or multiple fuel bores vs just one. It wouldn't make sense to put an annular booster just to one side but I didn't know about mixed booster styles in one carb. So, If such a carb exists, it wasn't because of the annular booster but because of the leg design.
Good vid 👌🏼🏁 must of missed this some how..... funny how carbs can play out on certain parts/layout eg: your intake here ☝🏼 Mine was the Large Port 4V Heads I’d ran 🤷🏼♂️🏁, there’s a few rule of thumbs for a few different applications out there it seems🤷🏼♂️🏁 Thanks👍🏼
This topic is almost as frustrating as interesting to me, the more I learn the harder it is to make a decision! 😅 I have a 10,7:1 383 in my camaro with a 230@050 cam that pulls 11"hg in idle and I'm going from auto to manual transmission this winter and also going from perf rpm to a rpm airgap intake. So now I'm really wondering what and how big a difference it would be in terms of low rpm diveability and fuel consumption between downleg and annular boosters? I don't race it but some city traffic and a lot of countryside cruising around 2000rpm. It's only used summertime and it has a 3.42 rear.
If you went Annular, you would notice a nice increase in torque down low! Fuel mileage tends to go up because you get more output from the engine with less throttle input. If that makes sense Thanks for watching Andy
@@UnityMotorSportsGarage Thanks for sharing your knowledge, and replying! It makes sense that an annular booster would do that, but at the same time I would have thought that it could be leaned out more to reduce consumption. 🤔 On the other hand when tuning my ignition (your ignition video is gold btw) and 3310 carb I found that it runs a LOT more of the idle feed circuit when coasting at even speeds than I could ever imagined and using the wire trick I really got a lot more miles to the gallon. Perhaps the annular starts pulling through the main jets sooner and therefore end up using more fuel in total? Thanks/John
a dogleg booster may be better than a straight booster, but an annular booster is better yet...provided the carb venturi it big enough to still flow enough air to feed the motor. because the annular cuts some flow. but it's way more sensitive and pulls more fuel than a downleg. notice that's not in the David Vizard article you showed there.
Awesome vid Andy, I'm really enjoying your channel. It's cool to see the theories that Vizard writes about in his books illustrated in live action on your channel. Very helpful and informative videos, thanks.👍
Thanks, I did a ton of Dyno testing back in the day with DV for content in his books... When people put a single plane intake on.. first thing they notice is the torque loss down low... I found if you install a carb with a high gain booster at the same time you will retain most of your low-end torque that you would normally lose.. Basically getting to have your cake and eat it too! The cooler the intake runs in operation... The better booster you need! Glad you enjoyed it!
@@UnityMotorSportsGarage wow.. This exact scenario is something I've been struggling with lately. I have a 448ci Big block Mopar , I've been running the performer RPM dual plane for years and really like it, but since upgrading my cylinder heads, exhaust and soon a longer duration camshaft I've been contemplating switching to the new Trickflow single plane. It has long sweeping runners that I think would prove better than most for torque production. I also have been running an annular booster holley 850dp with the RPM intake and love it. Do you think it would be possible to retain my low end torque if that 850 carb and Trickflow single plane were optimized ? My engine is by no means a screamer.. it's done by 6,200.. which I think is on the ragged edge of where I might see a benefit ( with the new cam and possibly intake the 6,200 will probably change?)from a single plane. But, Fuel distribution is so much better with a single plane .. I'm torn. One more thing, I run a 1" spacer on the RPM intake, so would that already be more of a single plane in theory? Sorry for the long post, I appreciate any feedback, thanks.
@@Torquemonster440 here is the thing... If your engine is done at 6200 I would be very reluctant to swap manifolds.. what is the rest of the combination and do you drag race this, or is it for just the street?
@@UnityMotorSportsGarage yeah, I'm reluctant too. Yes, its slowly transforming into more of a race car... lol.. going faster seems to be priority when I'm wrenching on it.. here's the combo : 1966 Plymouth Satellite 448ci.. 10.3-1 cr ..KB hyper flat tops Promaxx 210cc aluminum heads "bowl blended " Mopar .528 solid purpleshaft 242/242@.050 on a 112 lsa (Soon to be Howard's .550/.555 solid ft 252/260 @.050 on a 108 lsa) Performer RPM intake - 1" phenolic spacer 850 Holley dp annular booster( best "seat of the pants" upgrade I ever made) Mopar electronic ignition. All in 37° @1,800 rpm - No vac. advance 1 7/8" patriot headers- ceramic coated- 3"collectors into 3" Dynomax race bullets - dumps at rear axle. 727 trans 3,600 converter, 8 3/4" rear 3.91-1 limited slip 28x9x15 M/T Pro bracket radials. Car weighs 3,700 at the line. Best so far with a corrected altitude density - 12.28 @108.5 1.84 60'
@@Torquemonster440 with your combo and going to that Howard's cam (it's a big step in the right direction) I say that manifold will probably work pretty good... A B or RB Mopar has some good things going for it in the manifold dept. One it is a dry setup.. and two by having a valley pan under it.. They run cool! You will find with those Annular boosters the amount of torque you would typically expect to see lost with a single plane will be at a minimum! I would give it a try.. my only reservation is that Manifold has a big cross sectional area.. given your displacement.. I might would look for one of the old M1 Single planes that Mopar offered.. because you still have to pick a Manifold that matches the rest of the combination.. I will say this.. I haven't tested that manifold, I did some testing back in the day of an old TM7 vs the M1 and the M1 walked away from the old Edelbrock!
So what would u recommend for a 351W ina pickup. It has 11:1 comp as it’s a 69 w closed chamber heads that are ported. It has an Edelbrock performer w a 600 Holley 4160 and long tube headers.
You will have Straight legs in a 600 Holley and they will work well with a Edelbrock performer intake.. since it is a heated intake... Even if you block the heat crossover passage! Sounds like a fun ride!!!
I am thinking of trying a 670 truck avenger (same size as a 600) with annular boosters on the primaries for my street driven 351w that has 9.6:1 compression, stock GT40 iron heads, Stealth knock-off dual plane and an E303 camshaft. Engine is in a 1985 Mustang convertible with a t5 and 3.27 gears. My goal is to improve fuel mileage and off idle power and drivability. Ford put annular boosters on the primaries of the 4180 carbs they put on the truck 351w and 5.0 HO motors. I tried to use a 351w specific 4180 on this motor but could not get it to run right so I thought a traditional 4160 carb would be a better choice. I have not tried to get a 5.0 HO specific 4180 carb to work on it. One issue I can see with trying to use the truck avenger is I think I will need to remove the special truck avenger bowl vent so I can use my low profile, stock 1985 dual snorkel air cleaner. I need to use this air cleaner as I have no air cleaner to hood clearance with the 351w and the stock hood. Any thoughts on if annular boosters will be of value for my goals in this combo? Thanks.
I think your idea is a perfect one.. having Annular boosters on the primaries will let you have your cake and eat it too! Keep me informed on how it runs.. tunnelram393w@gmail.com is my email address.. Andy
I did some testing back in 07 on my Mustang.. picked up over 20hp at the wheels by just changing from straight leg booster to stepped downlegs... The more active booster you have means you can get away with a more cfm carb too without losing anything down low
I’ve been interested in changing my boosters for quite a while now. I see that you have the ones that you can screw in with a spanner wrench. Where can you get those? I remember Barry Grant had them, but I don’t know how to get a set
Hey man i got a 1972 dodge charger Rallye with a tunnel ram system, i commented on one of your videos before asking about a higher than usual rev on startup. Looking into the carburetor more i actually noticed two of my straight leg boosters were burned to a crisp out of the 4 that sits in one of them, the other being fine. Would that give me any issues with the engine? Not running the vehicle hard other than it being a temporary daily as well.
I could see it causing some distribution issues... It could also lead to a power loss if the fuel isn't being atomized properly... Are they damaged/distorted or just sooted up?
i have been learning as much as possible from you and mr vizard's book and other videos trying to solve my tuning woes. i was actually considering possibly sending you my carburetor to have it modified and upgraded if you do that type of work?
I have found down leg boosters work better overall, annular with auto trans, with a lose converter, great to the 330, but the annular impede's air flow, and sad numbers on wet flow on the high rpm's..You will never see a straight on a 575 + mill. Just another shit opinion.. Someone teach my me otherwise..
Please post link to "8-32 jet modification "
Do you just put annular boosters in front or in all 4? I have a 3310 with straight legs and put a metering block and jets in the rear. It is a 750. The Ford 428CJ carb was a 3310 with the truck annular boosters in front that made it a 735cfm. Btw, I have built 428 engines using the 128 formula and had solid cams ground straight up 109/109/109 and .580 lift. With the factory carb and tube headers in a 69 Torino you found religion.
Great info. I had never thought of different boosters as being suitable for different applications.
Thanks, it does make a huge difference by having the correct style booster for your combo!
I installed a Holley 830 "Competition" double-pumper on my 440 Dodge back in 1994, after reading an article on them in either Hot Rod or Popular Hot Rodding. It had annular boosters, old-school 1:1 bell-crank throttle linkage, and a really fat fuel curve. Was a great carb, and really responsive. I wish I would've known way back then your tips and tricks for making your own #8-32 jets for tuning all the fixed circuits. Would've been a game changer for me.
Keep up the great content, Andy.
Thanks for the kind words!!! I will keep them coming!
Andy
I was inspired to similar action about the same time. It made sense that a vehicle that was going to see a fair amount of part throttle driving but had occasional wot usage had room to improve. I can't jump out and swap carbs to pass somebody, or creep through traffic - that's stupid. Long story short, had a 750 four barrel modified/put in annular style boosters and results were pretty good - low manifold vacuum is what made me look at mods in the first place. The car was not a dedicated track machine, so converter was 2400.
If you are NOT running a heat riser with a crossover (what most people unfortunately do) you MUST use a annular Booster.
Primary or secondary or both?
@@trailerparkcryptoking5213 I'm not aware of any carburetors with different boosters on both sides
@@bigblockjalopy I’ve seen many Holleys with straight leg boosters up front and downleg boosters in the secondaries. One model of the 3310 VS is set up this way, but is rated at 780 cfm rather than 750.....
@@trailerparkcryptoking5213 I wasn't talking downleg or straight, I just said annular, or multiple fuel bores vs just one. It wouldn't make sense to put an annular booster just to one side but I didn't know about mixed booster styles in one carb. So, If such a carb exists, it wasn't because of the annular booster but because of the leg design.
The 4180 Holley's that came on the F150's and last Carbed Mustang GT '85 had annular in the primaries and straight legs in the secondaries
Andy
Good vid 👌🏼🏁 must of missed this some how..... funny how carbs can play out on certain parts/layout eg: your intake here ☝🏼
Mine was the Large Port 4V Heads I’d ran 🤷🏼♂️🏁, there’s a few rule of thumbs for a few different applications out there it seems🤷🏼♂️🏁
Thanks👍🏼
I'm glad you got something from it Brother... It's a Balancing act really!
@@UnityMotorSportsGarage it sure is Andy , awesome 👌🏼🏁
good info i probably won't hear anywhere else.
I'm glad you can get the info you needed! David and I have done alot of Dyno testing on this subject.
Andy
This topic is almost as frustrating as interesting to me, the more I learn the harder it is to make a decision! 😅
I have a 10,7:1 383 in my camaro with a 230@050 cam that pulls 11"hg in idle and I'm going from auto to manual transmission this winter and also going from perf rpm to a rpm airgap intake. So now I'm really wondering what and how big a difference it would be in terms of low rpm diveability and fuel consumption between downleg and annular boosters? I don't race it but some city traffic and a lot of countryside cruising around 2000rpm. It's only used summertime and it has a 3.42 rear.
If you went Annular, you would notice a nice increase in torque down low! Fuel mileage tends to go up because you get more output from the engine with less throttle input. If that makes sense
Thanks for watching
Andy
@@UnityMotorSportsGarage Thanks for sharing your knowledge, and replying!
It makes sense that an annular booster would do that, but at the same time I would have thought that it could be leaned out more to reduce consumption. 🤔
On the other hand when tuning my ignition (your ignition video is gold btw) and 3310 carb I found that it runs a LOT more of the idle feed circuit when coasting at even speeds than I could ever imagined and using the wire trick I really got a lot more miles to the gallon.
Perhaps the annular starts pulling through the main jets sooner and therefore end up using more fuel in total? Thanks/John
a dogleg booster may be better than a straight booster, but an annular booster is better yet...provided the carb venturi it big enough to still flow enough air to feed the motor. because the annular cuts some flow. but it's way more sensitive and pulls more fuel than a downleg. notice that's not in the David Vizard article you showed there.
I'm curious if you can tell me how much of a lose in cfm with the annular? I've tried to find this out for a while.
Awesome vid Andy, I'm really enjoying your channel. It's cool to see the theories that Vizard writes about in his books illustrated in live action on your channel. Very helpful and informative videos, thanks.👍
Thanks, I did a ton of Dyno testing back in the day with DV for content in his books... When people put a single plane intake on.. first thing they notice is the torque loss down low... I found if you install a carb with a high gain booster at the same time you will retain most of your low-end torque that you would normally lose.. Basically getting to have your cake and eat it too! The cooler the intake runs in operation... The better booster you need! Glad you enjoyed it!
@@UnityMotorSportsGarage wow.. This exact scenario is something I've been struggling with lately. I have a 448ci Big block Mopar , I've been running the performer RPM dual plane for years and really like it, but since upgrading my cylinder heads, exhaust and soon a longer duration camshaft I've been contemplating switching to the new Trickflow single plane. It has long sweeping runners that I think would prove better than most for torque production. I also have been running an annular booster holley 850dp with the RPM intake and love it. Do you think it would be possible to retain my low end torque if that 850 carb and Trickflow single plane were optimized ? My engine is by no means a screamer.. it's done by 6,200.. which I think is on the ragged edge of where I might see a benefit ( with the new cam and possibly intake the 6,200 will probably change?)from a single plane. But, Fuel distribution is so much better with a single plane .. I'm torn. One more thing, I run a 1" spacer on the RPM intake, so would that already be more of a single plane in theory? Sorry for the long post, I appreciate any feedback, thanks.
@@Torquemonster440 here is the thing... If your engine is done at 6200 I would be very reluctant to swap manifolds.. what is the rest of the combination and do you drag race this, or is it for just the street?
@@UnityMotorSportsGarage yeah, I'm reluctant too. Yes, its slowly transforming into more of a race car... lol.. going faster seems to be priority when I'm wrenching on it.. here's the combo :
1966 Plymouth Satellite
448ci.. 10.3-1 cr ..KB hyper flat tops
Promaxx 210cc aluminum heads "bowl blended "
Mopar .528 solid purpleshaft 242/242@.050 on a 112 lsa
(Soon to be Howard's .550/.555 solid ft 252/260 @.050 on a 108 lsa)
Performer RPM intake - 1" phenolic spacer
850 Holley dp annular booster( best "seat of the pants" upgrade I ever made)
Mopar electronic ignition. All in 37° @1,800 rpm - No vac. advance
1 7/8" patriot headers- ceramic coated-
3"collectors into 3" Dynomax race bullets - dumps at rear axle.
727 trans 3,600 converter, 8 3/4" rear 3.91-1 limited slip 28x9x15 M/T Pro bracket radials.
Car weighs 3,700 at the line.
Best so far with a corrected altitude density - 12.28 @108.5 1.84 60'
@@Torquemonster440 with your combo and going to that Howard's cam (it's a big step in the right direction) I say that manifold will probably work pretty good... A B or RB Mopar has some good things going for it in the manifold dept. One it is a dry setup.. and two by having a valley pan under it.. They run cool!
You will find with those Annular boosters the amount of torque you would typically expect to see lost with a single plane will be at a minimum! I would give it a try.. my only reservation is that Manifold has a big cross sectional area.. given your displacement.. I might would look for one of the old M1 Single planes that Mopar offered.. because you still have to pick a Manifold that matches the rest of the combination.. I will say this.. I haven't tested that manifold, I did some testing back in the day of an old TM7 vs the M1 and the M1 walked away from the old Edelbrock!
So what would u recommend for a 351W ina pickup. It has 11:1 comp as it’s a 69 w closed chamber heads that are ported. It has an Edelbrock performer w a 600 Holley 4160 and long tube headers.
You will have Straight legs in a 600 Holley and they will work well with a Edelbrock performer intake.. since it is a heated intake... Even if you block the heat crossover passage!
Sounds like a fun ride!!!
I am thinking of trying a 670 truck avenger (same size as a 600) with annular boosters on the primaries for my street driven 351w that has 9.6:1 compression, stock GT40 iron heads, Stealth knock-off dual plane and an E303 camshaft. Engine is in a 1985 Mustang convertible with a t5 and 3.27 gears. My goal is to improve fuel mileage and off idle power and drivability. Ford put annular boosters on the primaries of the 4180 carbs they put on the truck 351w and 5.0 HO motors. I tried to use a 351w specific 4180 on this motor but could not get it to run right so I thought a traditional 4160 carb would be a better choice. I have not tried to get a 5.0 HO specific 4180 carb to work on it.
One issue I can see with trying to use the truck avenger is I think I will need to remove the special truck avenger bowl vent so I can use my low profile, stock 1985 dual snorkel air cleaner. I need to use this air cleaner as I have no air cleaner to hood clearance with the 351w and the stock hood.
Any thoughts on if annular boosters will be of value for my goals in this combo? Thanks.
I think your idea is a perfect one.. having Annular boosters on the primaries will let you have your cake and eat it too! Keep me informed on how it runs.. tunnelram393w@gmail.com is my email address..
Andy
I’ve never bothered to change the boosters, probably been leaving gains left on the table.
I did some testing back in 07 on my Mustang.. picked up over 20hp at the wheels by just changing from straight leg booster to stepped downlegs... The more active booster you have means you can get away with a more cfm carb too without losing anything down low
I’ve been interested in changing my boosters for quite a while now. I see that you have the ones that you can screw in with a spanner wrench. Where can you get those? I remember Barry Grant had them, but I don’t know how to get a set
Steven, I get all of my carb supplies from Allstate Carburetor in NY.. they are great to deal with and can hook you up! Thanks for Watching
Andy
Hey man i got a 1972 dodge charger Rallye with a tunnel ram system, i commented on one of your videos before asking about a higher than usual rev on startup. Looking into the carburetor more i actually noticed two of my straight leg boosters were burned to a crisp out of the 4 that sits in one of them, the other being fine. Would that give me any issues with the engine? Not running the vehicle hard other than it being a temporary daily as well.
I could see it causing some distribution issues... It could also lead to a power loss if the fuel isn't being atomized properly... Are they damaged/distorted or just sooted up?
@@UnityMotorSportsGarage one seems to be damaged the other burned off entirely.
i have been learning as much as possible from you and mr vizard's book and other videos trying to solve my tuning woes. i was actually considering possibly sending you my carburetor to have it modified and upgraded if you do that type of work?
I have found down leg boosters work better overall, annular with auto trans, with a lose converter, great to the 330, but the annular impede's air flow, and sad numbers on wet flow on the high rpm's..You will never see a straight on a 575 + mill. Just another shit opinion.. Someone teach my me otherwise..
The stepped down legs are the best all around booster in my opinion..
Andy