Yeah the 1406 is an AFB clone.
The off-roading for this Jeep isn't too wild at this point, and I don't anticipate it becoming anything more than the 1406 or Qjet can handle. I plan on keeping the white walls and stock height, so it'll go farther than most street stuff off road but nothing too wild. I'm not going to expect it to go anywhere I wouldn't put a stock Wrangler or anything.Stuka wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 12:14 pm If the QuadraJet is brand new, then it would be the better offroad carb. If its an old used one, skip it. They tend to warp and leak.
The 1406 is not as good at steep angles as a QuadraJet due to the side hung floats. But it is a lot better on the street.
I ran a 1406 in my Cherokee. I lived at 2500ft, and I worked at 5000ft. And the trails here are 6000-8000ft in most cases. It did pretty well without me having to mess with it. I ran the offroad kit in it, and you can do the fuel hose mod for the rear channel. Also, setting the floats lower helps with inclines.
But if buying new, I would go with a truck avenger over both. Its the best offroad carb out there.
I mean, the spacer really just adjusts the low-end torque, more space=more low end torque, but if you make it open and/or shorter/cleaner that generally improves horsepower...right?OldFarmTruck22 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 8:12 am I always found it difficult to compare carburetor performance when the 2 carbs were used items, with problems. The comparison is just too problematic unless you KNOW that each carb is 100% perfect without leaks. That's really the starting point of any comparison. Throttle shaft leaks, warped plates, clogged passages, etc, make for a 'chasing your tail' experience.
I like the 1406 for the 360. You have to make sure to use the proper manifold spacer depending on if you are using an Edelbrock aluminum manifold or a factory manifold. Makes a big difference in how it runs.
Sorry. In my mind, it's just a gimme that you want to get all of that lined up so I didn't think about it.OldFarmTruck22 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 11:16 am That's not all. You must look at the phlenum of the manifold directly below the carb.
Things to look for:
1. Is it a wide open square bore?
2. Is it a 'separated' Left/ Right opening?
3. Is it a 4 hole manifold?
These manifold designs along with the carb itself will dictate the carb spacer you should be using.
Agree with you on the spacer, just make sure you use the correct spacer. Edelbrock does a great job now of mentioning this in their Owners MAnual and Set-up Guide that comes with a new carb. You can also download it online.Mopar_guy wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 5:57 pm I would take a Q jet over the Eddy any day but I've also had a lot of experience with them in the 70's thru the 90's. Much sharper throttle response and usually better mileage.The biggest drawback with the Eddy is how easy the gas boils in them during warm weather. In my experience with them, you need at least a 1" phenolic spacer to stop it along with blocking the crossover.
Spacers can actually have a big impact on the entire power band. EngineMasters has done a lot of testing with different types of spacers. The tapered combo is the hands down winner for power. But, they are all aluminum, so they will not insulate heat as much if you have a cast iron intake. Aluminum intakes transfer less heat to the carb.sierrablue wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 11:07 amI mean, the spacer really just adjusts the low-end torque, more space=more low end torque, but if you make it open and/or shorter/cleaner that generally improves horsepower...right?OldFarmTruck22 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 8:12 am I always found it difficult to compare carburetor performance when the 2 carbs were used items, with problems. The comparison is just too problematic unless you KNOW that each carb is 100% perfect without leaks. That's really the starting point of any comparison. Throttle shaft leaks, warped plates, clogged passages, etc, make for a 'chasing your tail' experience.
I like the 1406 for the 360. You have to make sure to use the proper manifold spacer depending on if you are using an Edelbrock aluminum manifold or a factory manifold. Makes a big difference in how it runs.
Absolutely, and a divided manifold intake plenum such as the Edelbrock AMC manifold needs a certain type of spacer when used with a square bore or spreadbore manifold. These guys aren't amateurs like us, they DYNO the crap out of these products to know what works best.Stuka wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 9:16 amSpacers can actually have a big impact on the entire power band. EngineMasters has done a lot of testing with different types of spacers. The tapered combo is the hands down winner for power. But, they are all aluminum, so they will not insulate heat as much if you have a cast iron intake. Aluminum intakes transfer less heat to the carb.sierrablue wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 11:07 amI mean, the spacer really just adjusts the low-end torque, more space=more low end torque, but if you make it open and/or shorter/cleaner that generally improves horsepower...right?OldFarmTruck22 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 8:12 am I always found it difficult to compare carburetor performance when the 2 carbs were used items, with problems. The comparison is just too problematic unless you KNOW that each carb is 100% perfect without leaks. That's really the starting point of any comparison. Throttle shaft leaks, warped plates, clogged passages, etc, make for a 'chasing your tail' experience.
I like the 1406 for the 360. You have to make sure to use the proper manifold spacer depending on if you are using an Edelbrock aluminum manifold or a factory manifold. Makes a big difference in how it runs.
What more do you want ... the Best of the Best has responded! lolsierrablue wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 6:45 pm C'mon, I know more than TWO people have to have experience/an opinion on this...feel free to put your vote in the pole!
Thanks! Ig I don't totally agree on the complexity (I already have the right rods+springs--these Buick 350s came from the factory with a Qjet on the 4-barrel Buicks), so it's really not any harder to tune than the Edelbrock. And I thought the whole point of the Qjet was that the smaller primaries made for better metering (thus better mileage and altitude/temperature compensation), and the massive secondaries were there for when you need to go.OldFarmTruck22 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 8:51 amWhat more do you want ... the Best of the Best has responded! lolsierrablue wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 6:45 pm C'mon, I know more than TWO people have to have experience/an opinion on this...feel free to put your vote in the pole!
Quadrajets are very old school caburetors designed for economy on production vehicles from the 60's through the 70's. They had to be hotrodded to accommodate performance and altitude. Now 60 years later, there are carburetors that you can easily tune to fit most any need. My opinion, why make your life more difficult when you don't have to. These boutique quadrajet shops out there will charge you deeply to get the performance you are looking for, compared to out of the box easy tuning with an Edelbrock.
As I recall, the Quadrajet was highly favored by Wagoneer owners a couple of decades ago. It was renowned as an excellent trail carburetor, since it would run up/down and on side hills, and keep running over rough terrain. It and the Motorcraft 2V were popular for this reason.OldFarmTruck22 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 8:51 am... Quadrajets are very old school caburetors designed for economy on production vehicles from the 60's through the 70's. They had to be hotrodded to accommodate performance and altitude. Now 60 years later, there are carburetors that you can easily tune to fit most any need. My opinion, why make your life more difficult when you don't have to. These boutique quadrajet shops out there will charge you deeply to get the performance you are looking for, compared to out of the box easy tuning with an Edelbrock.
That's all fair--assuming you don't want a better intake with your fuel injection. And cost is an issue too.tgreese wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 11:00 amAs I recall, the Quadrajet was highly favored by Wagoneer owners a couple of decades ago. It was renowned as an excellent trail carburetor, since it would run up/down and on side hills, and keep running over rough terrain. It and the Motorcraft 2V were popular for this reason.OldFarmTruck22 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 8:51 am... Quadrajets are very old school caburetors designed for economy on production vehicles from the 60's through the 70's. They had to be hotrodded to accommodate performance and altitude. Now 60 years later, there are carburetors that you can easily tune to fit most any need. My opinion, why make your life more difficult when you don't have to. These boutique quadrajet shops out there will charge you deeply to get the performance you are looking for, compared to out of the box easy tuning with an Edelbrock.
Certainly the QJet cores were more available and in better shape back then. Today there are newly manufactured carbs that compete, and the EFI kits are very popular. To me, EFI is simpler, more reliable, has better performance and works better on the trail than any carburetor. I'd guess the cost is about 3x what you'd pay for a new carburetor today, and about twice what you'd pay for the new carb and an aftermarket 4V manifold. Seems hard to justify either the old QJet or a new AFB clone, unless you just want to play with an archaic mechanico-vacuum-powered device.
You only gave 2 choices.sierrablue wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 6:45 pm C'mon, I know more than TWO people have to have experience/an opinion on this...feel free to put your vote in the pole!