Weber carb rebuild

Home Forums General Discussion Weber carb rebuild

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #232867
    Steve Crites
    Participant

    @ringo

    Spent the last week re-building my weber 32/36 DGEV carb. Took a week ’cause I had hand surgery recently and my dexterity isn’t up to speed. Lot’s of fine rust powder throughout from the old fuel tank and lines.  When putting it back on I noticied the carb base to manifold gasket was on backwards so that the 36mm secondary was blocked off by at least 4mm all around. Hard to spot unless your’re kinda obsessive. 

    Took her out after adjustment and boy….BIG difference.  don’t know how much was due to the re-build or simply putting the gasket on correctly. 

    Lesson here is not to trust that the previous owner did things right, even if the car is running fairly good to start with.  

    Ringo

    #240546
    edward ericson
    Participant

    @edsnova

    Way to go Ringo. At about what RPM does the secondary kick in?

    #240547
    Steve Crites
    Participant

    @ringo

    Ed

    It’s a manual progressive linkage so it basically starts when my foot gets about halfway into the fast pedal.  Before the rebuild it felt like standard, normal acceleration. The big differance now is that when I punch it, it starts winding up at 1800 to 2000 rpm and gets to 3500 and climbing so much quicker than before that I may need to lighten up……..As if! 

    #240548
    edward ericson
    Participant

    @edsnova

    I’m thinking those Ford-powered cars must be wicked fast, especially compared to us stock VW folks. I’ve got maybe 50 horse, and that feels like it’ll do just fine. You’ve got to have double that at least with only a bit more weight.

    I wonder if anyone’s plopped one of those SVO Mustang turbo engines in one of these. . . only drawback I can imagine is, what happens to these cars, handling-wise, when they get to 120 or 130 mph?

    OK, so I looked at your taillight job again. Very inspired, shining them through those spokes on your spare. I was even thinking about doing something similar with LEDs, shining them through one of the holes in my steel wheels. Too much bother, I conclude, and not as cool as yours. I got another idea I think will work.

    #240549
    Paul Mossberg
    Keymaster

    @pmossberg

    Back in the day…1982…when Classic Roadsters Ltd. delivered my Duchess kit (with their own staff, and on their own trucks!), the delivery guys told me they were running a front engine V6 Duchess around at the factory.

    I forget the details. But even with the additional engine weight, they said it would get the front wheels off the ground if you punched it just right.

    Paul Mossberg
    Former Owner of a 1981 Classic Roadsters Ltd. Duchess (VW)
    2005 Intermeccanica Roadster

    If you own a TDr and are not in the Registry, please go to https://tdreplica.com/forums/topic/mg-td-replica-registry/ and register (you need to copy and paste the link)

    #240550
    Larry Murphy
    Participant

    @larry-murphy

     Paul, I know I’m getting off the topic, but your comments about the delivery of your car brought up a question that I hope you or Ringo can answer. If you want to move it to a new thread I understand.

     Were the duchess front engine cars with Ford engines built with Chevette rearends? I seem to remember reading something about the chassis being adaptable to either brand or some combination of them.

    #240551
    Steve Crites
    Participant

    @ringo

    Larry,

    A year or so ago I met a retired man who said he had worked at the Classic factory and told me the factory built cars came with Chevette rears unless they were specifically ordered otherwise.  He said the Chevette rear suspension was a drop in compared to the Fords which required cutting the leaf springs. 

    Ringo40197.8939583333

    #240552
    Greg Stickney
    Participant

    @stickney

    While I doubt if I could get the fronts off the ground, that 180+ hp I generate with my 2.3L engine does incite some puckering in certain places, especially if you don’t know it’s coming.

    My car has the same hp to weight ratio the shelby does. Scary isn’t it?

    I also doubt the chevette rear would sustain the stress of a well turned out engine, and I know from personal experience that if you are willing to risk it, 200 hp is available from a chevette engine…once. After that it’s just plain junk. The best I4 built by GM is the Iron Duke. Cast iron block, tight valve train, easy to work on, and easier to juice up. Takes a small turbo and makes an easy 190 hp all day.

    After the ford 2.3L, that would be my choice.

    Greg

    #240553
    edward ericson
    Participant

    @edsnova

    And here I thought I was speeding down the dangerous side of life with my ’67 Nova, with a measly 300hp in 2900 pounds. If the weather was just right, that car was good for mid 14s on the strip. And (even with sway bars and disk brakes) she sure felt dangerous above 110 on the highway, particularly in those curvy spots.

    Greg’s car would run rings around her, and probably Ringo’s would too.

    Takes some cojones to run that kind of power in this kind of car, imho.

    #240554
    Larry Murphy
    Participant

    @larry-murphy

     Ringo, Thanks for the reply. I thought I had read your post about the ClassicRoadster factory guy but could not find it again. I had seen a CR Chevette build on another site but did not know about the different combinations the factory made available.  Guess I won’t be exactly leading the pack with my stock 1.6 Chevette! I remember Mark telling me it was about the same power to weight ratio as the original MG. That just makes it more authentic and thats OK for an old guy.Smile

    #240555
    Greg Stickney
    Participant

    @stickney

    Speed is all about the amount of hp that reaches the rubber. I was turning low 9’s with my hemi, but ate rubber like crazy. It always comes to hp to weight and delivering the hp to the road.

    I love my MG and the close ratio 4 speed makes it fun to drive.

    Greg

    #240556
    Paul Mossberg
    Keymaster

    @pmossberg

    Asked and answered before I got back here.

    But (and I’m working solely on memory here), yes, I recall all of the above was correct for Classic roadsters. Ford engine, Chevette rear. No idea why they went that way tho.

    Paul Mossberg
    Former Owner of a 1981 Classic Roadsters Ltd. Duchess (VW)
    2005 Intermeccanica Roadster

    If you own a TDr and are not in the Registry, please go to https://tdreplica.com/forums/topic/mg-td-replica-registry/ and register (you need to copy and paste the link)

    #240557
    Larry Murphy
    Participant

    @larry-murphy

     Now I’m still curious. If the Classic Roadster cars used Chevette rearends, did the also use Chevette front suspension also? Is this how they managed to keep the wheels under the fenders without making the fenders wider?. All the front engine CR cars that I remember seeing had wire wheels so that may be the answer,whereas CMC front engine cars used wire basket wheels which I think are wider or at least not backspaced so that may account for the need for wider fenders.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.