Holley 4160

Have you contacted Holley by e-mail? Their technical department is very good (unlike most of their carburetors :) ).

If that were my Pontiac 400, it would have a Q-jet on it. Light years ahead of that Holley in all regards.

Joe--ASE Certified Parts Specialist & 10th Ann.Club Tech Director '80 Carousel Red Turbo T/A, 26k orig. '79 "Y89" 400/4 speed 10th Ann. T/A, 57k orig '84 Olds 88 Royale Bgm 2 dr, 307 "Rocket" (lol), 141k and still going.... '80 T/A project car...

I have now and they have answered.

You have mentioned your dislike of Holleys before, why do you think they are so bad?

To be a bit controversial, aren't all carburettors a poor way of mixing fuel with air and getting it into an engine? The best way to do it is with electronically controlled direct injection. A carb is a bunch of compromises, you need an idle circuit, main jets, power valve, accelerator pump and secondary chokes and after all that it is doing the mixing in the wrong place. It's done at the end of a manifold allowing the cold walls to condense the fuel back out of the mixture, or you heat the manifold thus reducing the amount of air going into the cylinder, and hence the power output. Before you say it, yes I agree that the car came from the factory with a carb so that it what should be on there now.

I have seen you posting on this newsgroup for several years now and this car has always done 141k, it must have done more than this by now. I have a Rover 214 (that's 1.4 litres) that has done 162k.

Thanks for your help

I'm stating that you'd be much better off with a Q-jet on an application like this. It will get better fuel mileage, idle better, run better and perform better.

Stick with what made it great in the first place :) Joe--ASE Certified Parts Specialist & 10th Ann.Club Tech Director '80 Carousel Red Turbo T/A, 26k orig. '79 "Y89" 400/4 speed 10th Ann. T/A, 57k orig '84 Olds 88 Royale Bgm 2 dr, 307 "Rocket" (lol), 141k and still going.... '80 T/A project car...