Water cooled carb spacer. Any real benefit to leaving it on?
Moderator: Wklink
Water cooled carb spacer. Any real benefit to leaving it on?
Cool idea, dont know how necessary or beneficial it is. Any opinions?
1962 Thunderbird
More of a water heater than anything.
I see the benefits in very cold places, you don't want the carb getting cold and icing up.
I have a 427 dual quad intake on my bird which doesn't have the water heating and I also have the exhaust cross over blocked off but my carbs still get too hot to touch.
I'll see if there are any downsides this winter though...
I see the benefits in very cold places, you don't want the carb getting cold and icing up.
I have a 427 dual quad intake on my bird which doesn't have the water heating and I also have the exhaust cross over blocked off but my carbs still get too hot to touch.
I'll see if there are any downsides this winter though...
- Alan H. Tast
- Posts: 4214
- Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 10:52 pm
- Location: Omaha, NE
If your car has a PCV system, the spacer also provides an inlet nipple at the center rear for the hose that goes between the carb base and the PCV valve fitting that's bolted to the rear of the manifold. A rubber hose is placed to connect the two so that crankcase vapors can be drawn back into the engine and burned off. If your car has a road draft tube, then the spacer does not have this nipple but may have a little stub in its place.
And as noted above, the spacer provides a taper so that the caruburetor sits level (the intake manifold has the carb mounting face lower at the front than at the rear for use in full-size cars (i.e. Galaxie and Monterey) where the engine is tilted to the rear - the T-bird's engine sits level in the engine bay).
And as noted above, the spacer provides a taper so that the caruburetor sits level (the intake manifold has the carb mounting face lower at the front than at the rear for use in full-size cars (i.e. Galaxie and Monterey) where the engine is tilted to the rear - the T-bird's engine sits level in the engine bay).
Alan H. Tast, AIA
Technical Director/Past President,
Vintage Thunderbird Club Int'l.
Author, "Thunderbird 1955-1966" & "Thunderbird 50 Years"
1963 Hardtop & 1963 Sports Roadster
Technical Director/Past President,
Vintage Thunderbird Club Int'l.
Author, "Thunderbird 1955-1966" & "Thunderbird 50 Years"
1963 Hardtop & 1963 Sports Roadster
- redstangbob
- Posts: 3604
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 4:06 pm
- Location: 40 miles east of Wixom
Really?, after the taper was explained? You've never set up the floats on a 4100 I guess.Scrap it, just another 1/2 azzed idea some engineer had along with a list of many others when they built these cars.
Imagine what those engineers in the 60's had to say about the Model A. It's easy to look back 4 decades and criticize, imagine what engineers in 2053 will think of today's Lincolns and Mercedes. If the hot water under the carb bothers you, that can be addressed easily, but the spacer works for more reason than one. JMO, Bob Cwow would I have liked to have met the guy that designed that, the steering system............had to be the same guy, no damn way would any company have 2 guys with this little brain power engineering on the same team.
It's gonna be cool when it's done
And now it's really cool !!
59 convertible
58 convertible
65 hardtop
And now it's really cool !!
59 convertible
58 convertible
65 hardtop
- Alan H. Tast
- Posts: 4214
- Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 10:52 pm
- Location: Omaha, NE
Apparently you are not familiar with the history of how early '60s T-birds were being set up for front wheel drive. Long story short is that Ford was originally planning on making the 'Bird FWD for the '63 model year, and as such engineers moved away from springing the lower suspension arm off of the subframe and instead moving the coil spring over the upper arm so that drive shafts could be run to the front wheels from a chain-driven transaxle. So, in reality, Ford was thinking ahead - far from "2 guys with little brain power engineering on the same team."Bad Byrd wrote:Scrap it, just another 1/2 azzed idea some engineer had along with a list of many others when they built these cars.
I am knee deep in the middle of modifying a 61, and I am here to tell you I have seen some bad engineering in my day, but this is some eye opening stuff for sure.
Example the lower control arm..............wow would I have liked to have met the guy that designed that, the steering system............had to be the same guy, no damn way would any company have 2 guys with this little brain power engineering on the same team.
Incredible stuff to say the least!
Ford was apparently also toying with the FWD idea for unibody compact cars like the Falcon/Comet (and by extension the Mustang) plus Fairlane/Meteor as they used a similar suspension setup with the upper control arm/spring/shock tower (Those of you who frequent another popular Ford-based website may have seen recent photos of a FWD prototype first-generation Mustang that was in England until recently). Problems in developing the FWD system pushed this target back to '64, then to '65, and eventually Ford gave up on the idea. In fact, Ford sold the patents for their FWD concept to GM, and the end result was use of the aforementioned system in the Oldsmobile Toronado and the Cadillac ElDorado. Strangely enough, the unibodied compact and midisze Fords/Mercurys and Mustang/Cougar stayed with the shock tower and sprung upper control arm concept until body-on-frame construction returned in '72 for the Torino, while the Mustang changed in '74 with a slightly modified conventional suspension for the Mustang II.
Alan H. Tast, AIA
Technical Director/Past President,
Vintage Thunderbird Club Int'l.
Author, "Thunderbird 1955-1966" & "Thunderbird 50 Years"
1963 Hardtop & 1963 Sports Roadster
Technical Director/Past President,
Vintage Thunderbird Club Int'l.
Author, "Thunderbird 1955-1966" & "Thunderbird 50 Years"
1963 Hardtop & 1963 Sports Roadster
Hmmm. Straight axle better than independent ehh? Ford wanting to be an elite car builder you say? Who ever said the Third was an engineering marvel? Opinions are one thing but you are greatly lacking in facts. Your comments sound very familiar. They remind me why sometimes you need to flush twice. .
- redstangbob
- Posts: 3604
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 4:06 pm
- Location: 40 miles east of Wixom
As for the carb spacer, it seems a lot of guys switched to phenolic spacers with good results, and better than no spacer at all.
I was told years ago why Ford used this type of front suspension, by a former boss who started at a Ford factory, and later was a mechanic at a dealership, before opening his own shop.
It all had to do with McPherson struts. They were used in the early '50's on English and French Fords. One problem, was the harsh ride provided by those struts. Another was that none of the Big 3 wanted to use the struts on cars made in America, even though McPherson was an American himself.
One requirement for the struts, was the need for unibody construction. Ford engineers found a way to combine wishbone suspension with the basic design of the struts, providing a much smoother ride. If anyone remembers the Ford ads in the '60's and '70's, you might remember the pride they took in the comfortable, quiet ride of Ford Quality cars.
BTW, Those comments should sound familiar. Check out the Motor Updates Piks!!! thread in this forum.
I was told years ago why Ford used this type of front suspension, by a former boss who started at a Ford factory, and later was a mechanic at a dealership, before opening his own shop.
It all had to do with McPherson struts. They were used in the early '50's on English and French Fords. One problem, was the harsh ride provided by those struts. Another was that none of the Big 3 wanted to use the struts on cars made in America, even though McPherson was an American himself.
One requirement for the struts, was the need for unibody construction. Ford engineers found a way to combine wishbone suspension with the basic design of the struts, providing a much smoother ride. If anyone remembers the Ford ads in the '60's and '70's, you might remember the pride they took in the comfortable, quiet ride of Ford Quality cars.
BTW, Those comments should sound familiar. Check out the Motor Updates Piks!!! thread in this forum.
Last edited by edpol on Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
The only dilusion is that you are opened minded and truthfull. Its more of the same fat mouthing your opinions as facts when they more resemble farts. I'm in love with my wife not a car. I bore of a self proclamed expert with antagonistic immaturity. A guy with all your tallent and incite I'm sure is know as a world class builder of elite cars. How many cars have you produced for your millions of fans and follower's ? Do you have legions of admirers of your work laying all about your property awaiting what you do next or does someone clean up after the dog ?