Back in the 90's here in D.C. the politicians realized that the best way to get voted out of office was to screw up snow removal. Last winter when we got more than three feet the clearing went much better. By the way, the revised label is now global climate change. Global warming is a bit hard to fathom when you are wading through snow up to your arse for the first time. Steve
Mr. snowman Steve !!! You made me laugh , i like your sence of humor. HISTORY: Frosty was probably discovered in the North American continent around the 18th century and spread over the pond and into Europe where it became an instant hit in the northern European countries. The wild snowmen turned out to be low skilled and survival were cross-bred with the now-endangered snow leopard, to create a stem with more robust snowmen. From this main trunk are bred many different subspecies of the qualities people would have. We know best the usual or common snowman snowman in English. Facts; Snowman (Cucurbita invierno) is a plant in the pumpkin family and should not be confused with the Abominable Snowman (yetii yetii) that is related to Bigfoot (sasquatsh yetii). It is a winter crop, which, like the icicle (glacier carotene), grows and dies in the winter around populated areas. They are usually from about 100 to 170 cm high, but there are copies that have been over 37 meters high. The stem is white, round and through, and consists mainly of water. A snowman is usually made of two or more tribes, where tribes are greatest underscore at least at the top. The seeds are a carbon-based nut-like cookie that is on the outside and is black, they are in a number of the tribes and the number varies between 4 to 6 per copy. Fruit flesh is on top of the seed on the upper stem. This is rich in carotene, minerals, and can be eaten by humans. Frosty is also one of the few plants people like to decorate, but in contrast to the spruce tree tinsel and candles, dress up the snowman with hat, scarf and a sometimes rude chimney. Back in the 90's here in D.C. the politicians realized that the best way to get voted out of office was to screw up snow removal. Last winter when we got more than three feet the clearing went much better. By the way, the revised label is now global climate change. Global warming is a bit hard to fathom when you are wading through snow up to your arse for the first time. Steve[/QUOTE]
I'm getting ready to install a Tattersfield 2 x 1 intake, with 216 Rochester B's on my 235. The intake is for the 216. The carby experts say that it is better to use 216 carbs because 235 carbs provide too much gas. Here's one experts advice.... http://www.thecarburetorshop.com/RochestermultipleB.htm
I Call BULLSHYTE ! Because it cannot give too much fuel unless the driver gives too much throttle... I'd rather use the correct intake manifold for the engine and the right carbys , they're not that hard to find .
Now now Nate! The voice of reason as always Nate, I do agree with you of a sorts, but surely even you must have done something to your truck that was not possibly the most sensible thing to do, but because it looks damn good! Maybe???
Nate's BULLSHYTE answer You may be mechanic but it is obvious by your answer that you don't know much about multiple carbs and fuel delivery. Just because you claim to be a "Civil Servant, grew up in New England working these old nails on the farm" doesn't qualify you to be an expert. Nate, please try not to say the experts are full of "BULLSHYTE". I know I should never argue with an idiot... because he will drag you down to his level... and beat you with experience!
Basic Physics One needn't be much of a Mechanic to understand that mis - matching apertures on intake ports is a very bad thing..... Yes , I have done many an odd , weird or bad thing to my poor old '49 , it's no cherry nor show queen and I've never claimed differently ~ I imagine anyone here would be appalled at how bad my old Shop Truck is ,this doesn't change the basic facts of the matter . The most important thing to remember here is : my thoughts & advice are free and so have pretty much zero value .
Beautifull Tattersfield dual carb setup 216/235 CI. Hey man how are doing ? Have been reading the carburator shops article but in the midle of there expertize i dropped out. I understood the main princips in how to arrange setups that should give some advantages in petrol ecomomics and performance. So far understandeble if we know what the purpose is for truck use ; Street rodding , cruising long trips on the main road or racing purpose? By the way a beatifull intake manifold, i have been reading some history about the Tattersfield CO and racing history. Now your issue; 1.Your Tattersfield intake setup is for a 216 intake , if so how do you convert so it fits the 235 engine ports ? 2. If you use 216 carbs setup does it demands that you have to change your carb flange holes ? 3. Will less airflow reduction from carbs and intake have a positiv effect towards the engine fuel/air needs? 4.Will your setup be moore expencive then a regular 235 dual carb setup f. ex. 235 Offenhauser or fenton intake+ 235 Carter S tagged Y or YF carbs? Looking foreward to your answer Martinius.
2x1 intake when I posted..... "The carby experts say that it is better to use 216 carbs because 235 carbs provide too much gas". That was to help Volker understand that his 216 carbs would be fine on his 235. Volker said " It seems that i got a Intake for a 235 and have Carbs for a 216, hmmm i hope the carbs are really good restored and give enough gas for my 235." I don't want to hijack Volker's thread but.... little did I know that my 235 engine had a stock, 1 bbl, 216 intake and exhaust on it for many years and ran fine. I never knew it till one day I bought a reman 235 carb and it wouldn't fit on the intake. I later changed the intake and exhaust to a 235 and it ran the same. I also found out that you can not mix and match a 235 intake with a 216 exhaust or vice versa. The heat box bolts centers are different. Here's a good thread with pics, sizes, and of course Nate's wisdom. https://talk.classicparts.com/showthread.php?t=11957 Martinius, Good to hear from you. I'm doing fine, but a little cold here today 31 deg. F. Your questions are good ones... Yes, the 216 intake ports are smaller, they make alignment sleeves/rings to fit a 216 to 235. If you reverse them they will fit a 235 to 216. No, the 216 carb setup does not require the carb flange holes to be changed because the Tattersfield flange is 2 11/16 for 216 carbs. As far as air flow reduction and fuel/air needs......... the single 216 intake and carb worked fine on my stock 235. But I don't know how the 2x1 is gonna be, I'm gonna find out. I have a couple of 2x1 intakes, for a 216 and also 235 that I have been collecting over the years. I will experiment with them to see what works the best. Nice to talk to you Martinius.
Gentlemen...... Now gents, I want a clean fight, no biting, elbows or heads, if I say "break" I mean "BREAK" let's put on a good show and let the best man win, now shake hands.........
A real gentleman indeed ! Thanks for the exquisit answer , a real gentleman indeed. Hope you are doing fine with your project and that the result will come. Are you using the truck for normal road driving ? Hope your coming back with some pics of your new setup when ready, i am very curious the way your going to bolt the Tattersfield intake to your 235 CI block and if the arrangement will close with no leaking ? We`ll see as you say how it works out as you have moore options you can use. Next summer i will make the dual setup , wanna use Carter YF carbs , but i am still looking for a good intake solution that fits on my 235 block and gives the wanted results? It has been very cold here to as Norway is on the same latitude as Canada , therfore the weather is quite the same , minus 20 Celsius deg. and a lot of snow to . Then my truck project work has to wait until next spring. Nice talking to you to and thanks again.
' Nate's Wisdom ' Or lack thereof , is sort of covered in post # 12 there . I'm still at a loss to understand why all those POC Farm Rigs were working back in the 1960's . Also , I never claim (like Joe foe example) to know much . I just have the experience of working on these old nails back when they were just cheap used trucks & cars . Yes , my '46s 235 ran fine with the 216 intake & carby but it also ran _much_ stronger after I put a 235 intake and Rochester series 'B ' on it ~
Re:Bullshyte I'm not interested in starting an e-war here,but Nate's experience has always made him the go-to guy on this forum. I and many others have deferred to his advice over the years. Please try to unbunch your panties before you post!
Where does a bunched panty bolt onto the carb at? Is it one of them diapers they put on construction equipment on job sites to keep the oil off the ground?
Twisted Knickers........ Are only for those GMC guys ! knowwhutImean ? . Oh , wait , I now have a Jimmy it's parked outside) so nevermind . No worries , Tom's experience is different than mine is all . As it turns , I have much experience with multiple carbys as not only are they terrific in Stovebolt engines but they were standard fitment to many older European vehicles because they have smaller displacement engines and more precise metering of fuel not only gives more power but it also improves fuel economy greatly . Back before my hearing went away , I used to set up and adjust them for SMOG testing , by ear . Intake tracts , length , swirl , there's a whole science there that truth is : I don't ken well , this is why I try to follow the basics , dot the 'i's and cross the 't's because if you make a basic mistake (like putting a 216 carby onto a 235) it may run but nowhere near it's full potential . Tom may not be aware that I'm an old Farm / Junkyard / Used Car / ServceStation Mechanic , my Dealer years were short so my approach is different than many others . DO pay attention to other ideas , my advice is free and always worth maybe 1/4 it's cost . 'K ? . Can we please get back to teasing the AD GMC guys now ? they're such an easy target afterall
