Author Topic: Mechanical vs. Vacuum secondaries  (Read 981 times)

Offline Mikey340

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
Mechanical vs. Vacuum secondaries
« on: April 03, 2014 - 09:30:26 PM »
What are everyone's thoughts on mechanical secondaries versus vacuum secondaries on carburetors?

Thanks,
Mike




Offline CudamanTom

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2670
Re: Mechanical vs. Vacuum secondaries
« Reply #1 on: April 03, 2014 - 09:41:26 PM »
Depends.
Are you running 4 speed or automatic?
4 speed - mechanical
Automatic - Vacuum
1971 Cuda Vert 440-833 - (clone)
1971 Cuda 440-727 - (clone)


Because I like it fast!!!

Offline Chryco Psycho

  • Administrator
  • C-C.com Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 36620
  • 70 Challenger R/T SE 70 tube Chassis Cuda now sold
Re: Mechanical vs. Vacuum secondaries
« Reply #2 on: April 03, 2014 - 10:01:00 PM »
Vacuum = lame
Mechanical - far better
 EFI = best

Challenger - You`ll wish You Hadn`t

Offline cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Mechanical vs. Vacuum secondaries
« Reply #3 on: April 03, 2014 - 11:08:29 PM »
from Holley.com:

QUESTION How do I know if a vacuum or mechanical carburetor is best for me?
ANSWER For street cars the vacuum secondary carburetor works best on midweight or heavyweight cars with an automatic transmission. They are more forgiving than a Double Pumper is because they work by sensing engine load. The mechanical secondary carburetor is best on a lighter car with radical camshaft and a lower gear and manual transmission or on a car that is going to be used for racing purposes. Here are some additional resources for you to see on Holley TV. Overview Of 4150 Vacuum Secondary Carbs Click Here To View. Overview of 4150 Mechanical Secondary Carbs Click Here To View.
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000

Offline Strawdawg

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2209
    • Vortex Buicks
Re: Mechanical vs. Vacuum secondaries
« Reply #4 on: April 03, 2014 - 11:16:12 PM »
LOL!!   :droolingbounce:

I would say:

Vacuum-Easy
                   Requires very little knowledge.  Good for the inexperienced, particularly on predominately street driven cars with automatic tranny and high geared rear end.  Out of the box, will give better gas mileage in many cases.

Mechanical-More difficult unless one takes the time to learn how carbs work and devotes time to tuning the various circuits.  Faster and better suited for higher performance cars with manual trannies, lower gears, and/or higher stall converters that properly match the engine's characteristics.  CFM should be at least twice the cubic inches for max performance.  Oh, yeah...more fun and who gives a damn about gas mileage!

EFI-Leaps and bounds beyond the others-The only way to fly if you can afford it.  Throttlebody injection for a mild street combo.  Port if you are serious about extracting the most performance, the best drivability, and the best gas mileage.  Throttlebody is largely self tuning these days.  Port self tuning is also available but best performance comes to those that are willing to learn how to manipulate the fuel spark tables, or those who have a smart friend or an experienced tuner...

Offline cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Mechanical vs. Vacuum secondaries
« Reply #5 on: April 03, 2014 - 11:37:09 PM »
Depends.
Are you running 4 speed or automatic?
4 speed - mechanical
Automatic - Vacuum

Automatic? Mechanical, if have high stall converter.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2014 - 12:11:37 AM by cudabob496 »
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000

Offline HP_Cuda

  • Hit the skinny little pedal on the right!
  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 5268
  • Mopar or No Car!
Re: Mechanical vs. Vacuum secondaries
« Reply #6 on: April 03, 2014 - 11:39:21 PM »

It depends on how much gas per mile and how much dough you want to throw at it.

 :bigsmile:
1970 Cuda Clone 440 4 speed - sublime green
1970 Cuda 383 4 speed - yellow - SOLD

Offline Oldschool

  • Administrator
  • Permanent Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 13195
  • Member Since 9-05-06
Re: Mechanical vs. Vacuum secondaries
« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2014 - 12:01:57 PM »
Also depends on the intended use of the car. If you want the most performance and are willing to take the time to learn and adjust it for what the car wants - then mechanical is the way to go. If you just want more or less a daily driver type ride and just want to take the carb out of the box and bolt it on - vacuum secondary is the best route..  0.02
Ken  --  In Georgia

MOPAR-------"Built To Run------Here To Stay"

Offline HP_Cuda

  • Hit the skinny little pedal on the right!
  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 5268
  • Mopar or No Car!
Re: Mechanical vs. Vacuum secondaries
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2014 - 03:12:47 PM »
Also depends on the intended use of the car. If you want the most performance and are willing to take the time to learn and adjust it for what the car wants - then mechanical is the way to go. If you just want more or less a daily driver type ride and just want to take the carb out of the box and bolt it on - vacuum secondary is the best route..  0.02
:iagree:
1970 Cuda Clone 440 4 speed - sublime green
1970 Cuda 383 4 speed - yellow - SOLD