Carburetor woes
#121
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carburetor woes
Yup, and I said fuel line, referring to the dual feed line that feeds both
bowls. The spacing between the bowls is different on the Dominators. Sorry
if I confused you on that, but I think we were referring to 2 different
things here.
Chris
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:40C28C06.909DB245@***.net...
> All double pumpers use the same float bowl fitting:
> http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin.../FuelLine.html
> As long as you keep limiting it to 200-300HP that's all it going to
> be. There absolutely no reason Travis couldn't blueprint it for more
> than a horsepower per cubic inch.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> c wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, I know they are up to 1250CFM, but I wasn't counting the Dominator
> > carbs since they use a different fuel line than the "regular" double
> > pumpers. And yeah, some guys even use 1/2" lines for drag racing these
days,
> > but like I said, it is not required for a 200-300HP engine.
> >
> > Chris
bowls. The spacing between the bowls is different on the Dominators. Sorry
if I confused you on that, but I think we were referring to 2 different
things here.
Chris
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:40C28C06.909DB245@***.net...
> All double pumpers use the same float bowl fitting:
> http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin.../FuelLine.html
> As long as you keep limiting it to 200-300HP that's all it going to
> be. There absolutely no reason Travis couldn't blueprint it for more
> than a horsepower per cubic inch.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> c wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, I know they are up to 1250CFM, but I wasn't counting the Dominator
> > carbs since they use a different fuel line than the "regular" double
> > pumpers. And yeah, some guys even use 1/2" lines for drag racing these
days,
> > but like I said, it is not required for a 200-300HP engine.
> >
> > Chris
#122
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carburetor woes
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 02:45:08 GMT, Jim85CJ <jim_85cj@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:
>"stock as far as I know except for headers/dual exhaust, edelbrock
>performer intake, holley 670 carb, and open-element air cleaner."
>
>LMAO
heh heh. I swear I wasn't trying to be funny, just trying to give an
accurate description of the engine. I was trying to say that nothing
really radical had been done to it. Factory cam (I guess), hasn't
been bored out (I don't think), etc, etc. Looking online I find:
AMC 304 1972-'78
Bore x Stroke 3.75" x 3.44"
Displacement 304 (4.98L)
Compression Ratio 8.4:1
Horsepower (gross) 150@4400
Torque (gross) 245@2600
Main Bearings 5
Valve Configuration OHV
Fuel 2bbl
So 150 hp from the factory. I figure that between the headers/dual
exhaust, intake and 4bbl carb and accounting for it not all being set
up optimally that 180 hp is a reasonable guess at what I'm making
right now with my "stock" engine. :-)
Source for above data:
http://www.jeepgod.net/304.html
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
wrote:
>"stock as far as I know except for headers/dual exhaust, edelbrock
>performer intake, holley 670 carb, and open-element air cleaner."
>
>LMAO
heh heh. I swear I wasn't trying to be funny, just trying to give an
accurate description of the engine. I was trying to say that nothing
really radical had been done to it. Factory cam (I guess), hasn't
been bored out (I don't think), etc, etc. Looking online I find:
AMC 304 1972-'78
Bore x Stroke 3.75" x 3.44"
Displacement 304 (4.98L)
Compression Ratio 8.4:1
Horsepower (gross) 150@4400
Torque (gross) 245@2600
Main Bearings 5
Valve Configuration OHV
Fuel 2bbl
So 150 hp from the factory. I figure that between the headers/dual
exhaust, intake and 4bbl carb and accounting for it not all being set
up optimally that 180 hp is a reasonable guess at what I'm making
right now with my "stock" engine. :-)
Source for above data:
http://www.jeepgod.net/304.html
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
#123
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carburetor woes
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 02:45:08 GMT, Jim85CJ <jim_85cj@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:
>"stock as far as I know except for headers/dual exhaust, edelbrock
>performer intake, holley 670 carb, and open-element air cleaner."
>
>LMAO
heh heh. I swear I wasn't trying to be funny, just trying to give an
accurate description of the engine. I was trying to say that nothing
really radical had been done to it. Factory cam (I guess), hasn't
been bored out (I don't think), etc, etc. Looking online I find:
AMC 304 1972-'78
Bore x Stroke 3.75" x 3.44"
Displacement 304 (4.98L)
Compression Ratio 8.4:1
Horsepower (gross) 150@4400
Torque (gross) 245@2600
Main Bearings 5
Valve Configuration OHV
Fuel 2bbl
So 150 hp from the factory. I figure that between the headers/dual
exhaust, intake and 4bbl carb and accounting for it not all being set
up optimally that 180 hp is a reasonable guess at what I'm making
right now with my "stock" engine. :-)
Source for above data:
http://www.jeepgod.net/304.html
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
wrote:
>"stock as far as I know except for headers/dual exhaust, edelbrock
>performer intake, holley 670 carb, and open-element air cleaner."
>
>LMAO
heh heh. I swear I wasn't trying to be funny, just trying to give an
accurate description of the engine. I was trying to say that nothing
really radical had been done to it. Factory cam (I guess), hasn't
been bored out (I don't think), etc, etc. Looking online I find:
AMC 304 1972-'78
Bore x Stroke 3.75" x 3.44"
Displacement 304 (4.98L)
Compression Ratio 8.4:1
Horsepower (gross) 150@4400
Torque (gross) 245@2600
Main Bearings 5
Valve Configuration OHV
Fuel 2bbl
So 150 hp from the factory. I figure that between the headers/dual
exhaust, intake and 4bbl carb and accounting for it not all being set
up optimally that 180 hp is a reasonable guess at what I'm making
right now with my "stock" engine. :-)
Source for above data:
http://www.jeepgod.net/304.html
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
#124
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carburetor woes
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 02:45:08 GMT, Jim85CJ <jim_85cj@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:
>"stock as far as I know except for headers/dual exhaust, edelbrock
>performer intake, holley 670 carb, and open-element air cleaner."
>
>LMAO
heh heh. I swear I wasn't trying to be funny, just trying to give an
accurate description of the engine. I was trying to say that nothing
really radical had been done to it. Factory cam (I guess), hasn't
been bored out (I don't think), etc, etc. Looking online I find:
AMC 304 1972-'78
Bore x Stroke 3.75" x 3.44"
Displacement 304 (4.98L)
Compression Ratio 8.4:1
Horsepower (gross) 150@4400
Torque (gross) 245@2600
Main Bearings 5
Valve Configuration OHV
Fuel 2bbl
So 150 hp from the factory. I figure that between the headers/dual
exhaust, intake and 4bbl carb and accounting for it not all being set
up optimally that 180 hp is a reasonable guess at what I'm making
right now with my "stock" engine. :-)
Source for above data:
http://www.jeepgod.net/304.html
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
wrote:
>"stock as far as I know except for headers/dual exhaust, edelbrock
>performer intake, holley 670 carb, and open-element air cleaner."
>
>LMAO
heh heh. I swear I wasn't trying to be funny, just trying to give an
accurate description of the engine. I was trying to say that nothing
really radical had been done to it. Factory cam (I guess), hasn't
been bored out (I don't think), etc, etc. Looking online I find:
AMC 304 1972-'78
Bore x Stroke 3.75" x 3.44"
Displacement 304 (4.98L)
Compression Ratio 8.4:1
Horsepower (gross) 150@4400
Torque (gross) 245@2600
Main Bearings 5
Valve Configuration OHV
Fuel 2bbl
So 150 hp from the factory. I figure that between the headers/dual
exhaust, intake and 4bbl carb and accounting for it not all being set
up optimally that 180 hp is a reasonable guess at what I'm making
right now with my "stock" engine. :-)
Source for above data:
http://www.jeepgod.net/304.html
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
#125
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carburetor woes
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 02:45:08 GMT, Jim85CJ <jim_85cj@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:
>"stock as far as I know except for headers/dual exhaust, edelbrock
>performer intake, holley 670 carb, and open-element air cleaner."
>
>LMAO
heh heh. I swear I wasn't trying to be funny, just trying to give an
accurate description of the engine. I was trying to say that nothing
really radical had been done to it. Factory cam (I guess), hasn't
been bored out (I don't think), etc, etc. Looking online I find:
AMC 304 1972-'78
Bore x Stroke 3.75" x 3.44"
Displacement 304 (4.98L)
Compression Ratio 8.4:1
Horsepower (gross) 150@4400
Torque (gross) 245@2600
Main Bearings 5
Valve Configuration OHV
Fuel 2bbl
So 150 hp from the factory. I figure that between the headers/dual
exhaust, intake and 4bbl carb and accounting for it not all being set
up optimally that 180 hp is a reasonable guess at what I'm making
right now with my "stock" engine. :-)
Source for above data:
http://www.jeepgod.net/304.html
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
wrote:
>"stock as far as I know except for headers/dual exhaust, edelbrock
>performer intake, holley 670 carb, and open-element air cleaner."
>
>LMAO
heh heh. I swear I wasn't trying to be funny, just trying to give an
accurate description of the engine. I was trying to say that nothing
really radical had been done to it. Factory cam (I guess), hasn't
been bored out (I don't think), etc, etc. Looking online I find:
AMC 304 1972-'78
Bore x Stroke 3.75" x 3.44"
Displacement 304 (4.98L)
Compression Ratio 8.4:1
Horsepower (gross) 150@4400
Torque (gross) 245@2600
Main Bearings 5
Valve Configuration OHV
Fuel 2bbl
So 150 hp from the factory. I figure that between the headers/dual
exhaust, intake and 4bbl carb and accounting for it not all being set
up optimally that 180 hp is a reasonable guess at what I'm making
right now with my "stock" engine. :-)
Source for above data:
http://www.jeepgod.net/304.html
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
#126
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carburetor woes
On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:14:14 -0700, L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> All double pumpers use the same float bowl fitting:
>http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin.../FuelLine.html
> As long as you keep limiting it to 200-300HP that's all it going to
>be. There absolutely no reason Travis couldn't blueprint it for more
>than a horsepower per cubic inch.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
I'm flattered by that statement, Bill, but there is at least one
reason I couldn't blueprint it for more than a horsepower per cubic
inch, that being that I don't know what I'm doing well enough to do
that. :-) Hell, I had to ask for advice to confirm my suspicion that
my float level was set to high on my carburetor, and it took me WAAAY
too long to track down the vacuum leak that was causing me so much
trouble after the intake/carb swap.
>
>c wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I know they are up to 1250CFM, but I wasn't counting the Dominator
>> carbs since they use a different fuel line than the "regular" double
>> pumpers. And yeah, some guys even use 1/2" lines for drag racing these days,
>> but like I said, it is not required for a 200-300HP engine.
>>
>> Chris
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> All double pumpers use the same float bowl fitting:
>http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin.../FuelLine.html
> As long as you keep limiting it to 200-300HP that's all it going to
>be. There absolutely no reason Travis couldn't blueprint it for more
>than a horsepower per cubic inch.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
I'm flattered by that statement, Bill, but there is at least one
reason I couldn't blueprint it for more than a horsepower per cubic
inch, that being that I don't know what I'm doing well enough to do
that. :-) Hell, I had to ask for advice to confirm my suspicion that
my float level was set to high on my carburetor, and it took me WAAAY
too long to track down the vacuum leak that was causing me so much
trouble after the intake/carb swap.
>
>c wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I know they are up to 1250CFM, but I wasn't counting the Dominator
>> carbs since they use a different fuel line than the "regular" double
>> pumpers. And yeah, some guys even use 1/2" lines for drag racing these days,
>> but like I said, it is not required for a 200-300HP engine.
>>
>> Chris
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
#127
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carburetor woes
On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:14:14 -0700, L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> All double pumpers use the same float bowl fitting:
>http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin.../FuelLine.html
> As long as you keep limiting it to 200-300HP that's all it going to
>be. There absolutely no reason Travis couldn't blueprint it for more
>than a horsepower per cubic inch.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
I'm flattered by that statement, Bill, but there is at least one
reason I couldn't blueprint it for more than a horsepower per cubic
inch, that being that I don't know what I'm doing well enough to do
that. :-) Hell, I had to ask for advice to confirm my suspicion that
my float level was set to high on my carburetor, and it took me WAAAY
too long to track down the vacuum leak that was causing me so much
trouble after the intake/carb swap.
>
>c wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I know they are up to 1250CFM, but I wasn't counting the Dominator
>> carbs since they use a different fuel line than the "regular" double
>> pumpers. And yeah, some guys even use 1/2" lines for drag racing these days,
>> but like I said, it is not required for a 200-300HP engine.
>>
>> Chris
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> All double pumpers use the same float bowl fitting:
>http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin.../FuelLine.html
> As long as you keep limiting it to 200-300HP that's all it going to
>be. There absolutely no reason Travis couldn't blueprint it for more
>than a horsepower per cubic inch.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
I'm flattered by that statement, Bill, but there is at least one
reason I couldn't blueprint it for more than a horsepower per cubic
inch, that being that I don't know what I'm doing well enough to do
that. :-) Hell, I had to ask for advice to confirm my suspicion that
my float level was set to high on my carburetor, and it took me WAAAY
too long to track down the vacuum leak that was causing me so much
trouble after the intake/carb swap.
>
>c wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I know they are up to 1250CFM, but I wasn't counting the Dominator
>> carbs since they use a different fuel line than the "regular" double
>> pumpers. And yeah, some guys even use 1/2" lines for drag racing these days,
>> but like I said, it is not required for a 200-300HP engine.
>>
>> Chris
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
#128
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carburetor woes
On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:14:14 -0700, L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> All double pumpers use the same float bowl fitting:
>http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin.../FuelLine.html
> As long as you keep limiting it to 200-300HP that's all it going to
>be. There absolutely no reason Travis couldn't blueprint it for more
>than a horsepower per cubic inch.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
I'm flattered by that statement, Bill, but there is at least one
reason I couldn't blueprint it for more than a horsepower per cubic
inch, that being that I don't know what I'm doing well enough to do
that. :-) Hell, I had to ask for advice to confirm my suspicion that
my float level was set to high on my carburetor, and it took me WAAAY
too long to track down the vacuum leak that was causing me so much
trouble after the intake/carb swap.
>
>c wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I know they are up to 1250CFM, but I wasn't counting the Dominator
>> carbs since they use a different fuel line than the "regular" double
>> pumpers. And yeah, some guys even use 1/2" lines for drag racing these days,
>> but like I said, it is not required for a 200-300HP engine.
>>
>> Chris
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> All double pumpers use the same float bowl fitting:
>http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin.../FuelLine.html
> As long as you keep limiting it to 200-300HP that's all it going to
>be. There absolutely no reason Travis couldn't blueprint it for more
>than a horsepower per cubic inch.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
I'm flattered by that statement, Bill, but there is at least one
reason I couldn't blueprint it for more than a horsepower per cubic
inch, that being that I don't know what I'm doing well enough to do
that. :-) Hell, I had to ask for advice to confirm my suspicion that
my float level was set to high on my carburetor, and it took me WAAAY
too long to track down the vacuum leak that was causing me so much
trouble after the intake/carb swap.
>
>c wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I know they are up to 1250CFM, but I wasn't counting the Dominator
>> carbs since they use a different fuel line than the "regular" double
>> pumpers. And yeah, some guys even use 1/2" lines for drag racing these days,
>> but like I said, it is not required for a 200-300HP engine.
>>
>> Chris
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
#129
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carburetor woes
On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:14:14 -0700, L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> All double pumpers use the same float bowl fitting:
>http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin.../FuelLine.html
> As long as you keep limiting it to 200-300HP that's all it going to
>be. There absolutely no reason Travis couldn't blueprint it for more
>than a horsepower per cubic inch.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
I'm flattered by that statement, Bill, but there is at least one
reason I couldn't blueprint it for more than a horsepower per cubic
inch, that being that I don't know what I'm doing well enough to do
that. :-) Hell, I had to ask for advice to confirm my suspicion that
my float level was set to high on my carburetor, and it took me WAAAY
too long to track down the vacuum leak that was causing me so much
trouble after the intake/carb swap.
>
>c wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I know they are up to 1250CFM, but I wasn't counting the Dominator
>> carbs since they use a different fuel line than the "regular" double
>> pumpers. And yeah, some guys even use 1/2" lines for drag racing these days,
>> but like I said, it is not required for a 200-300HP engine.
>>
>> Chris
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> All double pumpers use the same float bowl fitting:
>http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin.../FuelLine.html
> As long as you keep limiting it to 200-300HP that's all it going to
>be. There absolutely no reason Travis couldn't blueprint it for more
>than a horsepower per cubic inch.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
I'm flattered by that statement, Bill, but there is at least one
reason I couldn't blueprint it for more than a horsepower per cubic
inch, that being that I don't know what I'm doing well enough to do
that. :-) Hell, I had to ask for advice to confirm my suspicion that
my float level was set to high on my carburetor, and it took me WAAAY
too long to track down the vacuum leak that was causing me so much
trouble after the intake/carb swap.
>
>c wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I know they are up to 1250CFM, but I wasn't counting the Dominator
>> carbs since they use a different fuel line than the "regular" double
>> pumpers. And yeah, some guys even use 1/2" lines for drag racing these days,
>> but like I said, it is not required for a 200-300HP engine.
>>
>> Chris
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
#130
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carburetor woes
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 07:23:30 -0400, Shaggie <blah@blah.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 02:45:08 GMT, Jim85CJ <jim_85cj@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>"stock as far as I know except for headers/dual exhaust, edelbrock
>>performer intake, holley 670 carb, and open-element air cleaner."
>>
>>LMAO
>
Oh yeah, and I put one of those Davis Unified Ignitions on it too.
Maybe that gives me a few more hp but I'd guess I'm still at 200 hp
or lower.
>heh heh. I swear I wasn't trying to be funny, just trying to give an
>accurate description of the engine. I was trying to say that nothing
>really radical had been done to it. Factory cam (I guess), hasn't
>been bored out (I don't think), etc, etc. Looking online I find:
>
>AMC 304 1972-'78
>Bore x Stroke 3.75" x 3.44"
>Displacement 304 (4.98L)
>Compression Ratio 8.4:1
>Horsepower (gross) 150@4400
>Torque (gross) 245@2600
>Main Bearings 5
>Valve Configuration OHV
>Fuel 2bbl
>
>So 150 hp from the factory. I figure that between the headers/dual
>exhaust, intake and 4bbl carb and accounting for it not all being set
>up optimally that 180 hp is a reasonable guess at what I'm making
>right now with my "stock" engine. :-)
>Source for above data:
>http://www.jeepgod.net/304.html
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields
>On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 02:45:08 GMT, Jim85CJ <jim_85cj@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>"stock as far as I know except for headers/dual exhaust, edelbrock
>>performer intake, holley 670 carb, and open-element air cleaner."
>>
>>LMAO
>
Oh yeah, and I put one of those Davis Unified Ignitions on it too.
Maybe that gives me a few more hp but I'd guess I'm still at 200 hp
or lower.
>heh heh. I swear I wasn't trying to be funny, just trying to give an
>accurate description of the engine. I was trying to say that nothing
>really radical had been done to it. Factory cam (I guess), hasn't
>been bored out (I don't think), etc, etc. Looking online I find:
>
>AMC 304 1972-'78
>Bore x Stroke 3.75" x 3.44"
>Displacement 304 (4.98L)
>Compression Ratio 8.4:1
>Horsepower (gross) 150@4400
>Torque (gross) 245@2600
>Main Bearings 5
>Valve Configuration OHV
>Fuel 2bbl
>
>So 150 hp from the factory. I figure that between the headers/dual
>exhaust, intake and 4bbl carb and accounting for it not all being set
>up optimally that 180 hp is a reasonable guess at what I'm making
>right now with my "stock" engine. :-)
>Source for above data:
>http://www.jeepgod.net/304.html
--
Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields