I have a '67 Dan Gurney Special with the 289 HiPo. I thought I had a standard Holley 4 Barrel 600 CFM - but when I gave the List Number to a shop for the rebuild kit, he said I had an after-market Holley. Does anyone know what the stock barb should have been - and how can I identify what model I do have?
dickmerc
My shop manual indicates that the 225 HP 289 in the 67 Cougar had an Autolite 4300 - 4v carb.:wave:
To identify the one you do have, there are some numbers on the air horn. Post those, and we can tell you what it is. There are a few guys here with the Big Holley book, and a few rat holed websites for exactly that kind of thing...
The 289 HiPo came with a manual-choke version of the 600 cfm Autolite 4100.
But, as others have stated, that engine wasn't available in Cougars. So if your car has a true 289 HiPo, then A) you're very lucky and B) someone swapped it in.
Chances are your Holley is a list number 1850. Holley sold a gazillion of these over the years, and they're a good, if basic, unit. Once set up, they work very well on 289/302 cubic inch engines.
But, as others have stated, that engine wasn't available in Cougars. So if your car has a true 289 HiPo, then A) you're very lucky and B) someone swapped it in.
Chances are your Holley is a list number 1850. Holley sold a gazillion of these over the years, and they're a good, if basic, unit. Once set up, they work very well on 289/302 cubic inch engines.
I have a 1967 289 A code, CA emission, with an Autolite 4300 (C7DF-AH). I don't mean to hijack the thread, but I was getting ready to ask the reverse question...would a Holley 0-8150C work on a 289 A code with the emission equipment removed?
A 600 Holley is good for almost every small block application. It MIGHT be a smidge too big for a 260, but other than that, it's juuuuuust right!
Ford used 600cfm Holleys on GT390s, and 'only' 735cfm on 428CJs. What was that question again?
The point I'm trying to make is the vast majority of people over-carb their engines. Case in point: Both of my Q-code 351C-4Vs ran better ET/mph with a 600 than when I tried a 780.
My current 393W runs almost the same with both a 670 Street Avenger and an old-school 780. The 670 gives better all-around drivability and throttle response. Now I'll be the first to admit, both are in 'out-of-the-box' tune and adjustment. No changes to jets, power valve, secondary spring, air bleed, squirter size, pump cam, etc from the 'factory' settings. To tune it properly, I'd need a full day of dyno time ($$$) and a boatload of parts ($$$).
The point I'm trying to make is the vast majority of people over-carb their engines. Case in point: Both of my Q-code 351C-4Vs ran better ET/mph with a 600 than when I tried a 780.
My current 393W runs almost the same with both a 670 Street Avenger and an old-school 780. The 670 gives better all-around drivability and throttle response. Now I'll be the first to admit, both are in 'out-of-the-box' tune and adjustment. No changes to jets, power valve, secondary spring, air bleed, squirter size, pump cam, etc from the 'factory' settings. To tune it properly, I'd need a full day of dyno time ($$$) and a boatload of parts ($$$).
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
