Close



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 45
  1. #1
    FEP Power Member 85stanggt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,199

    Default Rebuilding 4180c - a good cleaner and dual stage PV

    So I picked up a fully stock 4180c recently that's got the original tag still on it and is 98% intact, except for the idle plugs being removed and aftermarket needle and seats. Best part is the numbers and date code fit for my car

    My current 4180 on the car is running pretty good, aside from a couple small issues, so I want to take my time with this one cleaning and rebuilding it. I got some nice brushes and different sized needles to help clean small passages and orifices.

    My first question is about the best cleaner to use. I bought an ultrasonic cleaner with heating element to to get the carb cleaned and break up the stuck on dirt. From reviews that I read, people would put their carbs in the ultrasonic with 1:1 white vinegar and water or a 2:1 water and simple green mix. They said that things cleaned up incredibly well. Not sure if that, in combination with the ultrasonic, is sufficient to remove everything or if a stronger solvent is needed.

    For my last 4180 rebuild I used the Berryman Chemdip that you can get at the parts stores. I could put that in the ultrasonic, but soaking for a long time in that strips off the bronze plating. Is there a cleaner that you all have used that works well, but won't strip off the finish?

    Next question is the dual stage power valve that came factory. Holley doesn't sell dual stage power valves anymore, and the kit comes with a single stage. Is this a big deal? Is there an aftermarket source for a dual stage PV? Just replace it with a single stage, but which one?
    1985 Mustang GT Convertible
    Stock and original @ 213k, except for dynomax ultraflos.

  2. #2

    Default

    I, like you, hate the new Berryman's Carb dip. It leaches zink or something from the pot metal and not only removes the cadmium but if you leave it in too long (2 hours), it will turn the carb parts black.

    I also do not like simple green as it is corrosive to aluminum (which I believe is a portion of the metal in the carb. I like CLR or Lime Away but not sure if they affect the cadmium (most carbs I do that coating is long gone).

    The dual stage PV sucked anyways. The seem to run better with the single state. If you are stock, I would think a 6.5 would do nicely.

    Kenny

  3. #3

    Default

    Good for you. I recently acquired an original '85 Mustang 4180 too, unfortunately with a busted base plate.

    Lately I've been using 50/50 solution of regular pine-sol and distilled water for an hour or two, inside, since the (70 bucks a gallon!) napa "carb cleaner", that really hasn't got any more miles left on it, out in the shed, has been slush to near solid all winter... and a 50/50 solution of vinegar and distilled water and some brushing, (not soaking, that'll take the zinc dichromate off, the gold/green finish) for getting rid of scale or corrosion in the bowls or wherever. If there's an abundance of cooked on black soot in the carburetor throats, let 'er soak longer, but and/or there's scrubbing to do. The good old school regular Holley bases are aluminum, the rest is cast zinc.

    I don't have one, but have heard from others that you might even be surprised at how well just distilled water works on things in an ultrasonic cleaner... spark plugs etc too...

    The last E4Z 4180 I did, I used a Napa kit, and it was a quality kit with good, correct components.
    Link for some of the process when I did that one:
    http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...-Secondary-Tip

    A fellow on ebay out west (BC Canada/WA USA) I've dealt with and gotten a number of parts and kits from, carries the rebuild kits, with 2 stage power valve, and with or without the de-choke diaphragm. Unlike so many others and places, he's realistically wallet-friendly to boot. Here's his listing as of today of the 4180 Holley items he carries:
    https://www.ebay.ca/sch/m.html?_ssn=...w=4180&_sop=15

    Good luck with it
    Last edited by Walking-Tall; 03-07-2018 at 03:39 PM.
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible 3.8L ---> BUILD THREAD
    1983 Mercury Cougar 3.8L LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird 5.0L ELAN
    1966 Ford Fairlane sedan 200-6
    1966 Ford Fairlane GT (390ci 4spd)
    1981 Mercury Marquis Brougham
    1980 Capri RS Turbo
    1971 Mustang Fastback
    1974 Pontiac Luxury LeMans

  4. #4
    FEP Power Member 85stanggt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    Thanks for the info. I picked up some Simple Green Pro HD, which is marketed to be safe for all metals. I've started cleaning parts in the ultrasonic. So far, pretty impressive.

    Does anyone know what the original stamping was on the Holley 2 stage power valve that was originally fitted in the carbs from the factory? The PV that came out of this carb has 2 three digit stampings, which doesn't jive with Holley's literature online. One stamping looks like 254 and the other 4J0. One is supposed to be the identification number and the other the date code. I guess if the 4J0 is the date code and the 254 is the ID code, drop the 4 and 25 corresponds to a 55 single stage PV. Problem is, I don't know if this is an aftermarket PV or if dropping the 4 from the number is ok.
    1985 Mustang GT Convertible
    Stock and original @ 213k, except for dynomax ultraflos.

  5. #5
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    2,914

    Default

    Here is some work I did on it at Ford Six.com. Walking-Tall has added to it in this post with mrriggs.

    http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...e-Power-Valves


    Your right. 25 is correct. 23 and 24 were unlisted confirmations from other "in field" data, and other Motorcraft replacements work as well.


    Quote Originally Posted by xctasy View Post
    P/N, 1st Stage Opening, 2nd Stage Opening, and any known 1st stage restriction

    Holley Lists 3 now, down from 7 a while ago, down from 21 a long time ago.
    125-206 12.5” Hg 5.5” Hg .028”, like the old Holley PN 2-4311 (later 25BP-475A-12)
    125-207 10.5” Hg 5.0” Hg .021” like the old Holley PN 2-4312 (later 25BP-475A-25)
    125-208 10.5” Hg 5.5” Hg .028”
    Others

    125-213, 11.5, 5.0
    125-212, 12.0, 6.5
    125-215, 10.5, 6.0
    125-218, 11.0, 5.5 (23 means a 125-218 )

    Holley had 21 total if you include the unlisted “24” we found lurking under the hood of an 83 Mustang 5.0 GLX





    Examples:-There are date prefixes before the Holley 2 stage call number
    A6-7 Stock AMC 304 Motorcraft 2100 1.08 model 5.5
    8 '85 Capri/Mustang 5.0 Holley 4180C stamped "8", means the 2nd stage would come in at 4.5
    B1 8 Ford 460 F250 4X4 with 4180c come in at 4.5
    13 On some IH 2300C truck carbs come in at 6.5
    16 carbs with this PV come in at 6.5
    23 = 1984 Capri/Mustang 5.0 Holley 4180C F1 23, or 125-218, 11.0, 5.5, but says it comes in at 6.5
    24 = 83 Mustang 5.0 GLX 5.0 not on list
    Standard rebuild Capri/Mustang 5.0 Holley 4180C 3-1346 kits = 10.5/6.5, no traditional stamping

    MIKES Carburettor Parts Has 11or 12 generic Number:70-1000 2 Stage Power Valves




    Napa offers a total of 8 diff. 2-stage power valves.

    PN 2-4311 1st stage opens @ 9.0"Hg, 2nd stage @ 2.5"Hg 1st stage restriction .035

    PN 2-4312 1st stage opens @ 10.5"Hg, 2nd stage @ 5.5"Hg 1st stage restr. .021

    PN 2-4405 1st stage opens @ 9.0"Hg, 2nd stage @ 2.5" Hg 1st stage restr. .028

    PN 2-4406 1st stage opens @ 10.5" Hg, 2nd stage @ 5.0"Hg 1st stage restr. .020

    PN 2-4409 1st stage opens @ 11.0"Hg, 2nd stage @ 7.5"Hg 1st stage restr. .028

    PN 2-4410 1st stage opens @ 10.5" Hg, 2nd stage @ 5.0"Hg 1st stage restr. .028

    PN 2-4412 1st stage opens @ 11.0"Hg, 2nd stage @ 6.0"Hg 1st stage restr. .0225

    PN 2-4413 1st stage opens @ 11.0"Hg, 2nd stage @ 7.0"Hg 1st stage restr. .024

    Ford had five Motorcraft 2150 2 Stage Power valves from 1974 to 1979. Since it has a wide range of crack off vacuums, I've listed them as Nominal so you can determine the pattern in power valve rank.

    CE105 Nominal 7.0”Hg/ 2.0”Hg
    CE120 , CE123 & CE122 Nominal 7.0”Hg/ 2.0”Hg
    CE126 Nominal 10.0”Hg/ 3.5”Hg
    CE130 Nominal 10.25”Hg/ 5.0”Hg
    CE132 Nominal 10.25”Hg/ 6.0”Hg





  6. #6
    FEP Power Member 85stanggt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    Hey thanks!

    So a Holley "25" 2 stage PV opens at what vacuums?

    My current E5ZE carb uses the standard PV that came in the 3-1346 kit back in...2007? I have an annoying flat spot at WOT that doesn't go away until about 3k rpm. It's not the secondary spring, since that's stock. I'm wondering if the PV that came stock in the kit isn't right for this engine.

    Edit: the new kit I just got to rebuild the new carb I picked up has a 4.5 single stage PV in it. According to Holley, the 25 2-stage should be a 55 single stage. So this 4.5 single stage in the kit is wrong for the car. If that is the same rating that was used in the kit from 2007, then my car may be suffering the flat spot from lack of fuel under harder acceleration, right?

    Here's another question: Holley says to take your idle vacuum and divide by 2 to get the PV rating. My vacuum at idle is 21". So according to Holley, 21" / 2 = 10.5. So do I need a 10.5" vacuum PV? Or go with the 55 PV that they have in their chart? WTF Holley. Not consistent at all.
    Last edited by 85stanggt; 03-10-2018 at 10:00 PM.
    1985 Mustang GT Convertible
    Stock and original @ 213k, except for dynomax ultraflos.

  7. #7
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    2,914

    Default

    See fine print below...


    My personal take on it is not cynical, I love Holley's, and the 4180c more than most.......The two stage power valve miss-information is purely because Holley doesn't want to make 2 stage power valves, and believes Oxygenated fuel blends don't require it to make them. The appallingly bad quality single stage power valve gasket they place within its re-kit works really badly with the stock 2 stage Ford gasket, and its another example of Holley trying to stop anyone ever using the two stage power valve. The stock 4180c power valve requires a better qulity power valve gasket thick enough to avoid leaking.

    Like a two seat only Thunderbird, Holley believes it has the numbers to eliminate the 2 stage power valve, and bury it for eva...... pænitentia, unction, sorori nostræ....

    The 2 stage power valve exists on Fords to help the cold start emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Econmy figures....the 4180 is rich when cold, lean when hot on a cruise, and rich and fat under wide open throttle, and its all becasue of the way it used the Ignition advance and power valve, EGR and Theractor to light off the 3 way catayst. The Throttle Body and Port EFi 5 liters didn't get better fuel numbers than the manual M code 2 and 4-bbls with 157 to 210 hp didn't loos a mpg to the over geared automatic Throttle body EFi or the 1986 or 87 EFi's.


    Ford used no electronics asside from the ignition on the 1982 to 1985 carb GT HO engines, and they were expertly tuned with respect to the four corner idle, the throttle kicker, the Load Control Valve, the primary catalyst light off, and all aspects of the twin snorkle air cleaner and how it worked under the cold, warm up, and warm and wide open throttle conditions. Idle Stop Solenoid, the A/C kicker, VOTM, the choke pulloff, the twin snorkle intake with hot air stove, the 2 stage power valve with aggressive spark advance on the Duraspark.

    The 5.0's have overdriven top gears because it allows the 2 stage powervalve to work like it does in a blunt faced 4-bbl 302, 351, 370, 429 or 460 4bbl truck, RV, SUV, or 4X4.

    "2 stage power valves are for RV's. The rationale behind the two stage valve was really for big 302, 351 and Lima truck 370 and 460's, which got the 4180C/4190EG in a few applications. With a V8 4-bbl and 175 hp engine piloting a Mustang with just half the frontal area, 20 odd feet of frontal area rather than 40. At 60 mph, a small throttle opening won't require a huge amount of richning, just a small amount as speed rises. Add higher gearing, and a 60 to 65 mph speed change needs a lot more fuel progressively. On an Econoline or F250 dualie draging a U haul, or a Carpenter F600, the frontal area and road loads go up massively from 60 to 65 mph, and frontal areas are often twice that of a sedan, and GVW figures four times that of a Fox body is some instance. The same 175 hp of engine requires a huge spike of fuel progressively to effect a rate of change with a 1.95 to 2.47 effective axle ratio top gear, so a 2 stage power valve helps make a High Output 4180 c meter its fuel out much more accurately."




    Fine print.


    While I respect Holley's history and great basic name and design precepts, the company today lives on Name and not Quality, not so much. Having said that, some of the cheap 570 cfm and 670 cfm 4-bbl carbs are some of the best carbs for the dollar you'll get. The Street Avenger is a mass produced carb that when set up right gives a great result. Would I use it? Yes, if the price is right. The new Summit 4010/4011 is the old Holley 4010/4011 properly made. Its almost as good as a 4100 Autolite 4-bbl the Holley carb was modeled off.

    IMHO, Since 1987 when the 4010 and 4011 came out, quality nose dived, and the laughable anologue Pro Jection versions and System Max Throttle 4DI bodies and movement away from making the brilliant 2380C, 4150, 4160 and 4180 carbs Emissions and EO legal screwed the whole company over.

    The Barry Grant and Demon era showed that Holley was on the ropes. If Holley didn't use its mercenary work done by the company, it would have deap sixed itself.

    I personally think its decision not to continue with the 4180 aftermarket carb, and instead focus on the lame duck 4360 and 4010/4011 was the worst decision making ever.

    Every Feedback 2150 2-BBL or CFi 5.0 or Variable Venturi 2-bbl Ford 2.8 V6, 4.2/5.0 or 5.8 could have had an EO approved 2380 EG from the 370 Ford F 600 or 700, or the 4-bbl 4180/4190EG from the Holley catalogue, each with a 2 stage power valve, and Fords service back up with the Feedback 2150, VV 2700, VV 7200 and CFi would have been taken over with a bolt on aftermarket Holley 2 or 4-bbl carb with an EO number.

    Fords inability to network with Holley after 1985 had Ford concerned that it might loose control over service and maintenace of its cars, and CARB would have just said yes to any 4-bbl or 2-bbl changeover carb...that's what they did in 1985 with the 350 and 500 cfm 2-bbl replacements for the Variable Venturi.


    Quote Originally Posted by xctasy View Post
    .....


    What I have found is that as long as it passes its IM test, the CA testing guys often cut you some visual slack since the VV7200 is out of production and has no parts supply.


    1981 5 liter Panther guys, like Richard Lentinello, and 1988 5.8 cars, use the approved carb EO VV7200 1981 LTD Holley #1-591 or#1-684 2bbl carb, to which the stock E0 TPS or perhaps the Innovate RTD-TPS-1001 or Ryan Brown TPS is fitted. The stock VV 7200 stepper motor controls idle.






    Holley just saw what the EPA did to Carter in 1985 (multi millon dollar suit against ACF) and the California to Fords San Jose plant (1981 plant closure due to pollution) and just got scared of the Government departments.

  8. #8

    Default

    Do yourself a favor, and forget whatever Holley says, lol... they can't be trusted to even answer legitimate questions anymore... they're too busy collecting premium dollars for efi kits and pillow sitting in boardroom meetings dreaming up new scary names for the well waxed PIECES OF $HIT formerly known as carburetors that they sell (market, jack up price to "what the market will bear", vomits in disgust... quality? what's that?... I've seen enough of the new garbage... no amount of money is "cheap" for shiny/billet/polished/whatever impresses the paying masses into buying overpriced lumps of $hit... marketing's in charge, has been for a while... like a pet rock, because what does a pet rock do, they don't give a $hit whether they function right or not, only whether zillions of them sell! ... CNC has been around a long time now, and I find it appalling that certain corporations can't seem to find their a$$ with both hands, such as consistently adding holes where none belong, not sizing a pair of holes supposed to be the same size that always were in the past, done manually, or by machine but with a human with a brain in the head doing the doing... or even drill a frickin' hole that's actually round, or located where the f*ck it's supposed to be to connect with another hole for a circuit to FUNCTION... it's outright robbing folks) today... regarding publicly traded corporations, living large, doing nothing, off of their predecessors' coat tails, color me 1000% cynical.

    No two vehicle combinations are the same. There only quite vague suggestions, but their idiotic 1/2 idle manifold vacuum takes the cake for not usually even in the ballpark... Maybe kinda sorta, but not really. Monitor the manifold vacuum loafing along at level road highway speed in top gear. Then start slowly putting your foot down. You will know when it's wanting more fuel for the load when it's not getting it. Look at your vacuum gauge then, and add 0.5 or 1.0 to that number. Pretty sure the original was a 12.5 and 5.5 deal, so purely coincidentally a 10.5 probably wouldn't hurt... the catch 22 is the leaner primary jetting that goes with the original power valve. I've said it before, 2 stage power valves, a pointless dog and pony show with nothing to be gained except decreased fuel efficiency... with engineers/designers deluding and repeating the mantra snowball that the majority of driving and highway cruise is done on the main circuits of a carburetor... that's 99% FALSE... the other 1% cruising down the highway at 3000+rpm, sure, best concentrate on the main circuit, LOL... an engine will happily stand, with an efficiently tuned carburetor, specifically the idle/transition, upwards of 17+:1 air:fuel ratio with cruise and light acceleration, such as in the 12.5"Hg, and on upward in loading (downward in vacuum speak) using mostly the idle/transition circuit, but also past the point where the idle/transition overlaps a bit with but signs off and the primary main circuit takes over, meaning only THEN main jets and power valve enrichment are doing any fueling... jetting, and specifically power valve function is a moot point unless you're bookin' 'er good with your foot half or better to the floor.
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible 3.8L ---> BUILD THREAD
    1983 Mercury Cougar 3.8L LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird 5.0L ELAN
    1966 Ford Fairlane sedan 200-6
    1966 Ford Fairlane GT (390ci 4spd)
    1981 Mercury Marquis Brougham
    1980 Capri RS Turbo
    1971 Mustang Fastback
    1974 Pontiac Luxury LeMans

  9. #9

    Default

    Just like our beloved four eyed horseless carriages... carburetors... you want a good one, get an old one. Clean it if it's dirty, fix it if it's broken, and learn some tuning guidelines and a few simple skills to modify for perfection, and perfection is what you'll get... I can't think of anybody that'd be disappointed at damn near doubling their miles per gallon. There are far too many efficiently calibrated (or easy enough efficiently calibrated, or your neighbor Mike can handle that for you inexpensively, lol) good old fuel mixers out there to bother with being deceived and taken with newfangled nonsense whose function or not is a complete crap shoot even after forking over 1000+ dollars for some junk that blackens your plugs, dilutes your oil, pollutes with black clouds behind you, etc.
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible 3.8L ---> BUILD THREAD
    1983 Mercury Cougar 3.8L LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird 5.0L ELAN
    1966 Ford Fairlane sedan 200-6
    1966 Ford Fairlane GT (390ci 4spd)
    1981 Mercury Marquis Brougham
    1980 Capri RS Turbo
    1971 Mustang Fastback
    1974 Pontiac Luxury LeMans

  10. #10
    FEP Power Member 85stanggt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    Alright you guys are kinda losing me here...

    But I gathered a few things...
    Holley isn't what it used to be.
    The 4180c is a good carb.
    The PV stuff is hokey and not well done by Holley.

    One seems to be for the 2-stage and the other thinking single stage is just fine (correct me if I'm wrong).

    What I can say is that I do think the PV in my current running 4180 that I rebuild in 2007 is wrong. I used whatever came in the 3-1346 kit, and my car has a very noticeable flat spot on heavy acceleration that goes away when the secondaries open up. The car pulls like a freight train at that point, but feels like a dog before it. It drives great around town and tip in feels nice. But the zone where it struggles sounds like it corresponds to the range the PV would take effect, and the car pings like crazy under that heavier acceleration. I always thought it was a lean secondary issue or a vacuum leak, but now I'm realizing it is probably a power valve problem not giving the car what it wants. So I can ditch the secondary metering block and oversized jets I put in a get the right PV. That may also explain why my gas mileage isn't that great.

    So, should I just reuse the PV that was in the carb? Maybe I'm asking for trouble -- it'll blow or it'll already be blown, since I don't know the history of it (can I test it out of the carb?). But that seems like the easiest route. I can hook up a vacuum line and drive around to see how things look to pick a 1-stage, but I'll be doing that on my current carb which has the wrong PV and is overjetted in the secondaries.

    Here's what I don't understand from what is written...
    You say that the majority of driving and highway cruising is NOT done on the main jets, so the PV isn't that big of a deal. Instead, the idle transition is what to focus on for efficiency. That'll explain some of my poorer fuel economy. But then why would they worry about jetting the primaries so lean? It would stand to reason if the main jets aren't doing that much at cruise, then why care about getting the jetting as lean as possible?

    Ok, back to my original question: go with a 2-stage or do a single-stage? (You did answer my question about which single stage to use -- put a vacuum gauge on to find out).
    1985 Mustang GT Convertible
    Stock and original @ 213k, except for dynomax ultraflos.

  11. #11

    Default

    Apologies if I ranted out some there. I'm dealing with these things every day now, and I'm seeing what I'm seeing, and hearing peoples' troubles, and it all links back to what I was saying above. As to why corporations do what they do... they're not doing what they do for the betterment of humanity and you and me. Job one is about dollars, not just about making a living, but making a killing. We're on our own if we want to accomplish something, like have the thing we have work correctly or to the best of it's ability... and that's fine, because we're equipped with all that's necessary to easily do better than they do, hot rodding 101.

    You're on the right track. Trust your senses about how the car acts and what it wants to work well. Annular boosters in general can use a smaller jet to accomplish what a down leg or straight leg booster can, especially way up top, wide open throttle and red line, because they are more sensitive to airflow and will deliver more fuel with the airflow signal. I don't know how much more sensitive to airflow than other booster designs the 4180's annular primary boosters are, but I happen to like their design... they won't be restricting flow as much as others do, they are big around and slender and not really much of a restriction in the venturi... Mike likes unhindered airflow very much, and so do engines.

    Why would "they"? ... for a thinking, feeling, intelligent human being, there is no comprehending why. I think all sorts of things done at the time (and today) were experiments, pushed and fueled (pun intended) by one corporation (government) and it's agenda twisting the arms of other corporations (auto makers) behind their backs, telling them what to do, or else... and "they" abandoned all the sound research and findings and rules established over 100 years ago as to what is at or near perfection for provision of the amounts to administer of air:fuel for most efficient and powerful internal combustion... 'nuff said.

    All stock, or mild? I would imagine your troubles when at part throttle to heavier throttle would be over if you upped the primary jet to #64 (#61 primary jets is lean in other similar sized carburetors, and I'd like to say that I don't think the 4180's annular boosters are shining so much at lower air flows as some might think they do, hence the lean protest/sluggishness at part throttle to heavier throttle application), and installed an 8.5 PV. Reusing an older PV might not be a good idea, because even if still sealing manifold vacuum from pulling fuel through straight into the intake manifold, where it's not supposed to go, the diaphragms can get stiff over time, affecting the spring rate, especially with what we have now "they" call gasoline. Power valve number really is kind of arbitrary, but solely about full enrichment later with more/full load and wide(r) open throttle. Even if you installed a number PV that's the same as idle vacuum, it would make no difference, because if the main circuit is not flowing there is no affect on the idle/transition circuit. As you have correctly observed and stated/asked about, the only place the primary jetting and PV are of relevance is when you start putting your foot into the throttle harder. Point blank, getting the heavy load and WOT fuel mixture right, or close, or compromised and safe rich (the corporate choice), is easy, the numbers of those components, like jets and power valves, are stamped right on them and basically not super important when discussing maximum fuel efficiency and happy engine function in most "normal" driving... that's the department of the idle and transition circuit, where truly surprising levels of function and fuel efficiency can be had, and we can get fully into that deeper if you wish with your thread.

    The two-stage is "robbing from Peter to pay Paul", and IMHO, just another thing among other super secret and scientifically calibrated sensitive equipment that simply ends up getting in the way of basic, good, best function.
    Last edited by Walking-Tall; 03-13-2018 at 01:26 AM.
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible 3.8L ---> BUILD THREAD
    1983 Mercury Cougar 3.8L LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird 5.0L ELAN
    1966 Ford Fairlane sedan 200-6
    1966 Ford Fairlane GT (390ci 4spd)
    1981 Mercury Marquis Brougham
    1980 Capri RS Turbo
    1971 Mustang Fastback
    1974 Pontiac Luxury LeMans

  12. #12
    FEP Power Member 85stanggt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    Ok interesting material. I have the close-tolerance 62 jets in there now (factory). I had put 64 jets in there, but didn't notice that much of a difference. Maybe a a hair more response when stabbing the throttle.

    i just looked up the pictures from my previous rebuild in my college dorm back in '07. It appears that the PV that was in my kit looks the same as the one that came out of the carb (2-stage maybe?). Not like the single stage PVs that have the spring on the end of it now. Of course, the pictures aren't good enough for me to see any stampings on it.

    I'll get a vacuum gauge and take some measurements and buy the right single stage PV. I would like to keep my 62 jets for economy if possible (car runs great now), so maybe getting the right PV would help under heavy throttle.

    What I'd like to learn is techniques for adjusting the idle mixture on these carbs. With 4 corners to adjust, how do you do them all evenly without going to far one way or the other?

    I set my current idle mix using a vacuum gauge to get the highest manifold vacuum. Then probably went a slight turn rich as everywhere says to do (maybe but don't remember). I took a road trip from FL to MA with my dad and was getting 25-26 mpg in the car. I was managing 17-18 with a mix of around town and highway. Unfortunately, now I'm pulling 13-15 with a mix of highway and around town. Highway only may be up to 22-23.

    I've probably readjusted the mix a few times since the rebuild to OCD smooth things out. I'm not sure how much that plays a role, vs the secondary metering block mod with larger jets (79 or 80) in there, vs it's been 11 years since the carb was gone through with a lot of sitting in between.
    1985 Mustang GT Convertible
    Stock and original @ 213k, except for dynomax ultraflos.

  13. #13

    Default

    Hi 85,

    In my minimal experience, I've found that adjusting the 4180c isn't all that hard once you know what you are after. Get the vacuum gauge. You set the idle mixture for maximum vacuum. On mine, I can get it to near 20.5 in Hg if I fuss long enough. Idle screws are all set the same. A ball end 7/64 hex key should make adjustment possible. I just pull the carb when I'm into this. Takes about 5 minutes when you are in practice. This is at about 1000' above sea level. A better way to set the idle mixture is with propane enrichment. JA Cook has several posts about this.

    My carb orginally came with #61 jets. There was an off-idle stumble that became more pronounced as gas quality went away. I cured that by going to #63 jets. A much better ride.

    If it's falling on it's face when you jab the pedal, that's the accelerator pump not putting out enough. My carb came with a #28 squirter and i upped it to a #31. No more hesitation.

    My only problem now is that there seems to be a flat spot at wide open throttle after passing about 3000 rpm. I haven't figured out if that's the secondaries not keeping up or the power valve opening at the wrong time. I think i have a 10.5 pv installed now. I'll be trying different secondary vacuum springs first as I put the quick change kit on the carb.
    W

    As always, "It ain't what you don't know that gets you, it's what you think you know that just ain't so."

  14. #14
    FEP Power Member 85stanggt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    Mine is a flat spot at WOT. It's flat from 2500-3000 rpm then wakes up and pulls great.

    What you say is basically how I adjusted my idle, but I remember better vacuum with the secondaries being in more than the primaries.
    1985 Mustang GT Convertible
    Stock and original @ 213k, except for dynomax ultraflos.

  15. #15

    Default

    Regarding what size primary jets, they don't mean much about economy, because they are not in the picture when loafing along at economy kinds of speeds and loads... if and when you have a chance, and if you're able to measure the power valve channel restriction holes that are below/under where the power valve is installed, that would be good, and seeing what size the primary main air bleed (inners) sizes are... the PVCR's should be in the neighborhood of 0.046", and it's them and the primary jets that do the proper upper rpm and upper/full load fueling when into the main circuit (let's say beyond about 1/4 throttle and about 2500rpm). Prior to that, all fueling is being done with the primary idle/transition circuit.

    Being that it's on a mild engine, and "4-corner idle" really isn't necessary to smooth and even out distribution at idle like something wilder, the secondary mixture screws can be set to an arbitrary and minimal amount, like about a 1/2 turn out from seated. A whole bunch or specific amounts of secondary idle fuel isn't necessary for idle. Doing so replicates the tiny (about 0.022-0.025", ideally) secondary constant idle feed holes that are in the rear bores below the secondary throttle plates, directly below the secondary transfer slots in other "2-corner idle" carburetors, and then idle quality can be set real nice with the primary idle mixture screws, just like on any other.

    I hope number 79 or 80 secondary jets is a typo. These 4180 carburetors, with the same venturi sizes of any other 600 Holley, needs about a number 73 secondary jet. Again though, unless somebody's drilled the secondary main air bleeds too big, such big jets aren't necessary.

    The flat spot you last mentioned above sounds like lean when on primary still, and then compensating rich when the secondaries open...
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible 3.8L ---> BUILD THREAD
    1983 Mercury Cougar 3.8L LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird 5.0L ELAN
    1966 Ford Fairlane sedan 200-6
    1966 Ford Fairlane GT (390ci 4spd)
    1981 Mercury Marquis Brougham
    1980 Capri RS Turbo
    1971 Mustang Fastback
    1974 Pontiac Luxury LeMans

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WilliamCapri View Post
    ...

    My only problem now is that there seems to be a flat spot at wide open throttle after passing about 3000 rpm. I haven't figured out if that's the secondaries not keeping up or the power valve opening at the wrong time. I think i have a 10.5 pv installed now. I'll be trying different secondary vacuum springs first as I put the quick change kit on the carb.
    9 times out of 10, that sort of behavior is due to a secondary idle air bleed that's too big. There's no accelerator pump out back of these, and so the secondary transfer slot needs to be briefly rich enough for when the secondaries first open. With the secondary idle/transition circuit optimized, there's really no such thing as too quick of a secondary opening with one of the weaker springs installed...
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible 3.8L ---> BUILD THREAD
    1983 Mercury Cougar 3.8L LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird 5.0L ELAN
    1966 Ford Fairlane sedan 200-6
    1966 Ford Fairlane GT (390ci 4spd)
    1981 Mercury Marquis Brougham
    1980 Capri RS Turbo
    1971 Mustang Fastback
    1974 Pontiac Luxury LeMans

  17. #17
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    2,914

    Default

    Ford's base specs for four conrner idle and everything else, if polcied and looked after, will work better than any other adjustment.


    Use the propane method Jack A Cooke uses to adjust the fuel biases. Works the best!

    Quote Originally Posted by JACook View Post
    The propane enrichment can be done without any special tools, but I will say the tool makes things
    a little easier. All you need is a way to repeatably supply a low flow of propane. When I first started
    using the propane enrichment method, I modified a regular propane torch by removing the torch bit,
    and attaching a hose.

    I have altered the factory method just a bit though. Rather than inject the propane into the air cleaner,
    I prefer to aim the hose down each individual throat, to make sure I'm getting the same reaction from
    all of them. Then I work with progressively lower propane flow rates to fine tune the mixture setting,
    while watching both engine RPM and manifold vacuum.

    It takes a bit of practice to find the balance, but once you know what feels right, it's much quicker and
    more accurate than just using the vacuum gauge.


    Quote Originally Posted by Saturn V View Post
    As suggested by JACook, I dipped the power valve gasket in fuel before installing the power valve. The little gasket bubbled for about 30 seconds.
    I thought I took a pic of the new power valve to look-up the numbers, but I guess I didn’t get a good pic. The markings were different from the previous power valve, but it still appears to be the two-stage type. I think I recall seeing C 5? I need to look that up later.


    Read the whole posts when someone gives you a tip. It'll always help you in the long run. More info won't ever hurt you. Kick it away if it doesn't help you any.

  18. #18
    FEP Power Member 85stanggt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    How do you adjust the idle mix with the air cleaner on there??

    It does sound like my main circuit is lean. And no, the 78 isn't a typo...I put that in to try to reduce the horrible pinging I was getting on hard acceleration. Everyone on here kept pointing to the secondaries, which were probably fine, as being the culprit. But even with different secondary springs and different jets, not much changed. So it's either the PV, the PVCR, main jets, or a combination.

    Where do I measure the PVCR? Is it in the base plate or the main body? My base plate may be from an '83 4180 since an mounting ear was broken off the E5ZE carb I previously rebuild.

    And how do you measure those tiny air bleeds?

    As a side note, the ultrasonic is incredible. And I just have some generic one off Amazon. As soon as I turn the knob to on, I can immediately see a cloud of dirt start migrating off the parts into the solution. I took a picture and will have to post it up. Pretty cool. I'd say this machine is a must have if doing carburetors in order to get everything super clean even down into small passages. Follow with compressed air and wow.
    Last edited by 85stanggt; 03-14-2018 at 10:39 AM.
    1985 Mustang GT Convertible
    Stock and original @ 213k, except for dynomax ultraflos.

  19. #19

    Default

    Best set for actual running conditions, with the slight/whatever restriction there is with the air cleaner in place... but if next to impossible to reach the little buggers with the air cleaner in place (I imagine the front ones should be easier to get to than the rear ones, and so setting the rears to only provide a small amount of idle fuel to go along with how very little the secondary throttle plates should be open at idle... about 1/4 turn open from fully closed in their bores, just so that they don't stick in the bores at idle...), it's not a huge deal if it's not in place... the idle mixture will probably be a little bit richer with the air cleaner in place.

    78 is whopper big out back of a 600 size Holley. 73 is usual. You're right, the secondaries aren't in play until much later, when they open.


    4180 PVCR's (power valve channel restrictions) are here:




    Down deep in the larger holes you see. Sorry, couldn't quite get a better picture of the tiny restriction size down in there, but that's where they are, and they should measure in the neighborhood of 0.040-0.050"...




    ... and I'm wondering about their size because they might be different than the norm because of the annular boosters... ditto with the primary jet size. I didn't get opportunity to fully open up the block of the E4Z 4180 I had here, to measure the primary idle feed restrictions (ideally about 0.026" with 1-9/16" primary throttle bores and on something stock or mild) that they hide directly behind the primary jets in these on the way to the idle wells, or measure PVCR's or air bleeds... The E5Z that the above block belongs to will get fully opened up and everything measured and mapped out. Regardless, primary jet size is what can differ some in this combination of vehicle or that one, and can be minimized to be as lean as the car will stand in that small window of low load and/or light acceleration running that is above the primary transition, but/and also above the manifold vacuum (load) point where the power valve opens for heavier load levels and WOT... and then PVCR size gets adjusted accordingly so that proper full load air:fuel mixture (approx. 12.5:1) is kept/established/reestablished with the new sized primary jets if changed.

    For measuring (and creating with hex drive cup point brass set screws) feed restrictions and air bleeds and such, I have #61-80 & #1-60 drill bit indexes for gauging/measuring or creating them, and dial calipers to measure the bits' actual diameters size as well.

    Please share with us what machine you got. I'd love to get one... soaking and scrubbing some of these quite filthy things, with harsh or mild chemicals is getting old, lol....
    Last edited by Walking-Tall; 03-14-2018 at 11:58 PM.
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible 3.8L ---> BUILD THREAD
    1983 Mercury Cougar 3.8L LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird 5.0L ELAN
    1966 Ford Fairlane sedan 200-6
    1966 Ford Fairlane GT (390ci 4spd)
    1981 Mercury Marquis Brougham
    1980 Capri RS Turbo
    1971 Mustang Fastback
    1974 Pontiac Luxury LeMans

  20. #20
    FEP Power Member 85stanggt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    I saw those feed restrictions in there when I was cleaning the carb. I bought these jet cleaning needles, which I should be able to use to roughly measure the feed restrictions: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

    Here is the ultrasonic I bought: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

    It is a little too small to fit the full carb body and throttle body in, but I can do it on its side and get the whole thing done in 2 cycles. I wasn't looking to spend a fortune on the ultrasonic, so that's why I opted for the smaller one. Plus, it has a pretty small footprint for counter space and storage. I wanted one with a heating element also, to heat the liquid while it cleans. It helps break the dirt up. I read tons of reviews of other units and settled on this one. So far, very happy with my purchase.

    Here are some pictures of the parts. The first is the carb body with the front half in the ultrasonic for a 20 minute cycle. You can clearly see where the liquid went to. That was 20 minutes at about 55*C without me scrubbing a thing.



    Here is the secondary fuel bowl dirty. I took this picture, because as soon as I turned on the ultrasonic, you can see clouds of dirt immediately disperse off the surface. Hopefully you can see and appreciate that in the picture. (Look at the area of the fuel bowl just below the bowl vent and near the sight plug...you can see the dirt clouds in the liquid. That's literally right after I turned it on.)



    And here's the bowl after one 20 minute cycle (number stamping only mildly affected):

    1985 Mustang GT Convertible
    Stock and original @ 213k, except for dynomax ultraflos.

  21. #21

    Default

    Very nice results! Keep up the good work! I gotta get me something like that
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible 3.8L ---> BUILD THREAD
    1983 Mercury Cougar 3.8L LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird 5.0L ELAN
    1966 Ford Fairlane sedan 200-6
    1966 Ford Fairlane GT (390ci 4spd)
    1981 Mercury Marquis Brougham
    1980 Capri RS Turbo
    1971 Mustang Fastback
    1974 Pontiac Luxury LeMans

  22. #22

    Default

    Looks good. What did you use for a cleaning fluid?
    Mike
    85 GT - owned since 87

  23. #23
    FEP Power Member 85stanggt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    I used Simple Green Pro HD. It is purple. I bought that because it is said to be save on all metals. Not sure it's the best thing for the job. It smells kinda weird, but it's cheaper than the chem-dip. It seemed to work decently well.

    On the note of the power valves, I hooked up a vacuum gauge and took the car for a drive. I'm not exactly sure at what point the power valve should kick in. It idles at 20.5-21". Light acceleration got me to about 10". Heavier throttle got down to 6-7". And heavy throttle over 1/2 dipped it below 5". I didn't know how much throttle should be the metric.

    One thing I did do, was put the car in 5th which at lower speeds got the RPMs pretty low. I gave some throttle to accelerate and felt the stumbling/lugging of the engine that goes away with heavy throttle. I assume that is basically the zone I'm looking for? At heavier throttle, the PV may open more, whereas lighter the car is not getting enough fuel? Anyway, that was around 6-7" of vacuum. So what would you say is the best vacuum point to have the PV open? 10, 6.5, or the 4.5 that came with the kit?
    1985 Mustang GT Convertible
    Stock and original @ 213k, except for dynomax ultraflos.

  24. #24

    Default

    The power valve should open with more than normal or "light acceleration" loading. The primary idle/transition circuit takes care of everything prior to that. Yes, checking in top gear puts the most load on the engine it's going to see, so, primary jetting and power valve opening point wise, when dialed for that condition, there absolutely won't be any protesting by the engine when there's lesser loading and/or higher rpm happening in the lower gears. Everything you're describing sounds to me like a great case for an 8.5"Hg power valve. 10 might open a bit too soon unnecessarily with your normal/light acceleration, wasting fuel. An 8.5 puts you somewhere in the middle, not too soon when the throttle application is normal/light enough to not require any additional enrichment of the main circuit (or maybe not even yet the main circuit... as I said above, more on the idle/transition tuning later if you'd like to venture where a bit of effort can be quite rewarding... and there's no doubt in my mind that Ford went nowhere near optimizing the transition for best efficiency... they don't, they won't, they can't, it would take them far too many resources ($) to dial in each and every vehicle, because as same as they may seem, no two are, and that's basically impossible to do when we're talking about hundreds of thousands of vehicles and drivers... hence all the factory compromises (to this day) that exist in factory "tune"...), therefore only being fueled briefly by the primary jets when you "go there", normally/lightly accelerating (this is how fuel mileage is maximized when even lightly accelerating and at a level where the main circuit is in play) but a bit sooner in anticipation of the heavier loading with increased throttle.
    Last edited by Walking-Tall; 03-20-2018 at 12:51 AM.
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible 3.8L ---> BUILD THREAD
    1983 Mercury Cougar 3.8L LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird 5.0L ELAN
    1966 Ford Fairlane sedan 200-6
    1966 Ford Fairlane GT (390ci 4spd)
    1981 Mercury Marquis Brougham
    1980 Capri RS Turbo
    1971 Mustang Fastback
    1974 Pontiac Luxury LeMans

  25. #25
    FEP Power Member 85stanggt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    Oh interesting. So you'd go with an 8.5. That's kinda right between the 10.5 that would be half my idle vacuum and the 6-7" that I can tell the car wanted more.
    I was thinking 6.5 because it was right in between the 6-7" zone where I could tell the car seemed to want more. If you don't think the 8.5 would guzzle fuel, I'll go with that.

    Let me ask this...if you set the secondary idle mix screws to an arbitrary and minimal amount (like 1/2 turn), how does that not create a lean stumble when the secondaries go to open. Doesn't it need a similar mix to the primaries to have a good transition from idle circuit, to transition, to main metering?
    1985 Mustang GT Convertible
    Stock and original @ 213k, except for dynomax ultraflos.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •