Advice: Which Edelbrock 4 barrel intake and carb for a '69 Ford 429?

Hey Guys,

I really want to convert my Colony Park from a stock 2V carb to a 4V carb. It is a standard 1969 429 (not Boss 429). I want it to be a cruiser not a terror at the track - no high RPM revving for me. Does anybody know what Edelbrock intake manifold and carb I should be looking at? I have gone to the Edelbrock website but not found a link to ask a technician.

Thanks,

Rod

 

is there a reason you want to change it to a 4bbl?

aside from the intake taking 4 grown men and a donkey to lift ?

I personally have put 2 of mine back to 2bbl....(less fiddling around ...and more reliable)....just my 2 bits

 

I'm a big fan of the Edelbrock intakes and carbs. Better fuel economy, and more performance to boot. This is going to be one of those topics the Rev and I disagree on, I can tell already. Since you want a cruiser, the intake would be from the Performer series. They are all about low end torque and drivability. I'm not sure which carb would be the right one for that engine, though. Edelbrock does have a tech support telephone number, although I don't know what it is off hand. Call them, and they will guide you through the selection, including any custom tuning to the carburetor. Depending on how you use it which jets and metering rods they recommend. Good luck with the conversion. Let us know how it goes.

 

Hi Rod,

I would agree with Mike, go with the simple Performer (not Performer RPM, air gap, or any other type of intake). The Performer should deliver a modest bump in power, a similarly modest bump in the RPM of the power band, and shave a good 40+ lbs. off the front end.

As for the carb, volumetrically speaking (if I may coin a term), you should be good with a 700 CFM carb assuming 5500 RPM redline and 100% volumetric efficiency. However, you are highly unlikely to get anywhere near 100% VE, you probably need less than 650 CFM.

Likewise, from what I have read, most carbs won't flow as well as they are rated, and due to limitations in the ability of your carb to be tuned for ALL variable factors that affect its performance (air temp, altitude, quality of the fuel, etc. I would tend toward a 700-750 vac secondary. In fact, that is exactly what I have rebuilt and ready to go on my 429 along with a Performer intake.

Hope that helps out.
Paul

P.S. Here is a link to one of the dozens of calculators out there to help select a carb based upon the science of combustion, rather than the testosterone pumping through the veins.

 

One important detail to remember is that too much carb is as bad for performance as too little.

 

I agree. The problem is the ideal carb for performance is not the same as the ideal carb for cruising. Most people aren't driving their vehicles on the street at the max RPM most of the time, so when you are just cruising, you will be over-carbed.

Likewise, if you run a smaller carb to maximize cruising performance, drivability and mileage, you will be sacrificing performance.

Because an engine is an air pump (there is a calculable maximum amount of air that can be pumped through the engine at any given RPM), it's easy enough to get pretty close if you know how you intend to drive the car, the max RPM you plan to drive it, and a ball park estimate for the VE of the engine. Once you've done your homework, using a vacuum secondary carb, when properly tuned, will help compensate for any minor amount of overcarburetion that may exist.

I personally think that overcamming an engine is a much larger issue that people face when they are making performance upgrades as it is very difficult to make adjustments after the fact. A carb, on the other hand, can have severe flow restrictions due to something as simple as the choice of an air cleaner.

 

I believe Edelbrock is making a repro of the Quadrajet, which, in my opinion, is the best of both worlds.
Small primaries give great mileage at cruise, due to the higher velicity of small size, and you've the tire-frying huge secondaries, that're vacuum operated.
Just keep your foot out of it!!
A friend went from 2bbl. to Q-jet back in the 70's. and gained 5MPG with no other changes.
I had a '75 Cad limo that averaged 16 mpg with 500 cubic inches, with a Q-jet.

 

Edelbrock no longer makes a Quadrajet anymore, but they do make some parts (jets, rods). I run a 750 CFM Edelbrock carb on my 403. I selected the rods and jets which configure it for just about as lean as it will go. It is running pretty well. They sell a kit with a full set of rods, jets, and springs to tune your carb. I think it is around $60.

 

I also run the Edelbrock performer manifold and 650 cfm 4bbl carb combo, I also jetted and metered mine almost as lean as it would go, the car runs perfect and gets almost decent gas mileage. I have literally set it and forgot it...have not had a single problem to date. Have a mild Mopar camshaft and headers. The car is FAR too heavy to be fast but it sounds amazing and has plenty of power for me...here ends my two cents worth.

 

When my brother was doing up his 79 Thunderbird and the 86 Colony Park, both with 351W/AOD combos, he talked to the Edelbrock support centre about how the cars were to be used, and followed their suggestions. The Ford small blocks prefer the square bore, rather than the split bore carbs. No idea about the big blocks, though. With the exhausts done properly, both those boats were only using 7 litres per 100 kms, and that is 40 miles to the Imperial gallon, and performance was more than adequate. 1,100 kilometers (650 miles) on a single tank of gas in an 86 Mercury Colony Park is pretty good by anyone's standards.

 

Another vote for the Q-jet even though blasphemous on a Ford.
Selecting one intended for a similar displacement and weight GM application should be fine.
The Q-jet is easy to tune and adjust and will give better mileage than a 2bbl. with easy throttle application. BUT, as others have said keep your foot out of those secondaries if you are looking for fuel economy.

Definately a dual plane intake for your engine.

 

Oh, I'm not too worried about fuel economy, I only put a few hundred miles on the ol' gal each year. I just want something reliable and smooth. I might want to get on it a little, but not very often. With the highway gears I have in the rear end, I'm not going to be winning any light-to-light street races anyway. Keep your suggestions coming.

Thanks,

Rod

 

then heres a second suggestion
why not find a 'stock' 4bbl intake?

before this goes south...i'll explain...I have nothing against aftermarket stuff !!!

but the cars were designed for max performance and economy for the vehicle...from the factory....right?

so if your leaving the guts stock...then?........know what i mean?

I just think that WE as consumers are brainwashed..into the 'bigger is better' ....

so dont get me wrong...this is what I do for a living...I sell all this stuff !!
.....and everyday I find myself talking customers off the ledge

...the old "just cause you can...doesnt mean you should " theory

 

Yeah, you'll be able to use the hoist twice!
And what you save on the manifold, you'll be pay in shipping and medical bills, for your back!
Edelbrock manifilds are designed for better economy and H.P. than that heavy stock crap - just ask them!

 

I put an Edelbrock 650 performer carb on my 390 using a late 60's 4-bbl manifold and KNOW the economy improved over the original 2-bbl carb. Not to mention a huge improvement in cold starting and overall power. I will never look back!