The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network - View Single Post

j1970GMC · 03-09-2012, 12:20 PM

I think a 750 is too big. I have a David Vizard book that talks about a 750 on a small block, but it's really complicated, and he's building efficient, powerful engines. I didn't go that route because I'm not David Vizard.

I had an 750 Edelbrock 1411 on my 350. Ran like a pig but with a lean feeling spot when the secondaries opened. Jetted it with a calibration kit and no better. Talked to Edelbrock and they said that if I could make it work then I should call them to let them know how I did it (they were NOT rude, in fact they had excellent customer service). I switched to a Holley 670 Street Avenger I bought from a friend (which I think is actually more like a 600, per my conversation with the Holley tech) and it runs great.

I have an Edelbrock 1406 (600cfm) on my 327 and it runs great and still seems a little rich to me, although I have not tried to jet it yet so I could be wrong.

03-09-2012, 12:20 PM	#8
j1970GMC Registered User Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Northern CA Posts: 185	Re: Is a 750 carb too big for a 327? I think a 750 is too big. I have a David Vizard book that talks about a 750 on a small block, but it's really complicated, and he's building efficient, powerful engines. I didn't go that route because I'm not David Vizard. I had an 750 Edelbrock 1411 on my 350. Ran like a pig but with a lean feeling spot when the secondaries opened. Jetted it with a calibration kit and no better. Talked to Edelbrock and they said that if I could make it work then I should call them to let them know how I did it (they were NOT rude, in fact they had excellent customer service). I switched to a Holley 670 Street Avenger I bought from a friend (which I think is actually more like a 600, per my conversation with the Holley tech) and it runs great. I have an Edelbrock 1406 (600cfm) on my 327 and it runs great and still seems a little rich to me, although I have not tried to jet it yet so I could be wrong.