Anybody know about these. A common float on two sus
| ausmini https://www.ausmini.com/forums/ |
|
| Common Float https://www.ausmini.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=31243 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Blokeinamoke [ Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Common Float |
Anybody know about these. A common float on two sus
|
|
| Author: | gafmo [ Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
An't seen one of those...I guess its up to the Oldies 
|
|
| Author: | Morris 1100 [ Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Have seen them before, not very common. Looks like a Climax motor in an eleven, they probably mounted the float bowl to the chassis rail to reduce the engine vibrations from frothing the fuel. |
|
| Author: | Black 66 DeLuxe [ Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm pretty sue they are H2's of a supercharched setup, or another form of forced induction |
|
| Author: | Black 66 DeLuxe [ Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Or possible of an Austin A40 sports |
|
| Author: | Blokeinamoke [ Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Morris 1100 wrote: Have seen them before, not very common.
Looks like a Climax motor in an eleven, they probably mounted the float bowl to the chassis rail to reduce the engine vibrations from frothing the fuel. Yep Its is from an Lotus XI. I was just wondering why and how? Why would one float redice frothing as compared to two? |
|
| Author: | Morris 1100 [ Sun Apr 29, 2007 8:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mounting the bowl to the chassis would reduce the frothing not the number of float bowls, it does not really matter how many float bowls you have, they just have to be at the right height. Like the soft mountings for Webers there have been a lot of different ways of arranging carbys in race cars. Ferrari used to mount the Webers on the chassis in their 52/53 F2 cars wirth a flexible hose to the motor. BRM used to mount their Webers the same way in the late 50s. Because the SU has a seperate float bowl it means you can mount the carby solid and the float bowl soft or remote. The Coventry Climax FPE engines had some strange vibration periods and they used to do silly things like break the starter if the engine was kept over 6500rpm for extended periods. |
|
| Author: | slinkey inc [ Sun Apr 29, 2007 9:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Morris 1100 wrote: The Coventry Climax FPE engines had some strange vibration periods and they used to do silly things like break the starter if the engine was kept over 6500rpm for extended periods.
British engineering..... |
|
| Author: | mickmini [ Sun Apr 29, 2007 11:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
slinkey inc wrote: Morris 1100 wrote: The Coventry Climax FPE engines had some strange vibration periods and they used to do silly things like break the starter if the engine was kept over 6500rpm for extended periods. British engineering..... thats what you get when you use a fire pump motor for a race engine 
|
|
| Author: | sports850 [ Mon Apr 30, 2007 7:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Is this the dual choke SU (not twin su's but dual choke) I've read about but never been able to find pictures of ? I've seen references recently to someone wanting to put it back into production for some reason . Also , some early mini racers modified normal SU's to have dual float chambers , one either side to counter fuel starving on corners . |
|
| Author: | Blokeinamoke [ Mon Apr 30, 2007 7:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Da linkey he workey again |
|
| Author: | Matt68 [ Mon Apr 30, 2007 8:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Common Float |
Blokeinamoke wrote: Anybody know about these. A common float on two sus
There used to be a common mod in the 60s, where they would use one fuel bowl only, as it meant that the fuel height was identical for the two carbies. If you have ever had a set of twins with mismatched fuel bowls you know why! (never get them matched properly). Don't know if this was ever a factory release? |
|
| Author: | Morris 1100 [ Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I figured that this was the place to stick unusual SU's. How about these ones? 
|
|
| Author: | drmini in aust [ Sun Jul 01, 2007 6:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hmmm.. M1100, that pic brings up an interesting question- if a single SU can feed a port with intermittent flow characteristics, WHY does a twin SU manifold on a Mini need a balance pipe? A Weber one doesn't .... Vizard said the balance pipe/port intersection on a BMC twin SU manifold is the worst contributor to its bad flow. Anyone ever filled a balance pipe with epoxy to see what happens?
|
|
| Author: | Morris 1100 [ Sun Jul 01, 2007 5:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have noticed that the heads with siamese ports are the ones that always use a balance pipe. (Holdens, Minis, etc.) Former Mini racer Steve Jagger had a manifold with epoxy in the balance pipe in the 70s/80s. I almost bought it in about 83. He had filled it right up and then drilled a hole up the middle (about 7/16" or 1/2") to restore balance. He said it was the right thing to do. Here are some more photos of some more dual choke SU's that I found on Ebay. 
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|