holley vs q-jet

which do you think is the best overall carb?

  • q-jet

    Votes: 126 55.8%
  • holley

    Votes: 71 31.4%
  • edelbrock

    Votes: 17 7.5%
  • demon/barry grant

    Votes: 9 4.0%
  • carter

    Votes: 3 1.3%

  • Total voters
    226
Sep 1, 2006
6,687
33
0
Tampa Bay Area
As everyone knows, I am a HUGE Quadrajet fan. The biggest problem most people have with them is a failure to understand how they work and to properly set them up. If all you do is go down the drag strip and your car sees no real street time, a Holley is fine. It is crude in every regard, but for dumping fuel and air into an engine at WOT it does not need sophistication. It will not hold it's tune and needs to constantly be recalibrated with every significant weather change and gets quite annoying. I was forced to drive my 1979 AMC Spirit with a AMC 360 and a Holley 3310 ( 750 vacuum) and it was a nightmare. Almost every day I had to mess with it for some reason or another. An unseen new fuel leak also got all over the intake manifold, and then a carb backfire proceeded to set the engine on fire. Quick work with a fire extinguisher (ALWAYS carry one in an old car!!!) kept the car from burning to the ground. On the other hand, I ran an Edelbrock Performer series ( Carter AFB) 600 on my 355 and it was set and forget. Reasonable fuel economy, good idle and good full throttle too. Now, a BAD Quadrajet is no fun at all, and most of the cores you find need a few repairs to work properly. Most have worn throttle shaft bores in the baseplate and for that reason will not hold a steady idle. I had one like that on my 355 and it was a pig. There is a whole story of what happened with my carb issues earlier this year that ended with me having to pull the heads due to stuff falling down the manifold, but I will spare you.

Anyhow, here's my assessment of the two carbs and their good/bad sides:

Quadrajet: Good- Holds a tune well, good fuel economy, better idle quality, air valve secondaries with adjustable spring that makes it a variable CFM carb, factory sizes of 600, 750 and 800 cfm-change size by cutting down a small stop with a Dremel, all Quadrajets use the same throttle blades, No vacuum diaphragm to blow since it is a purely mechanical system with the air valve being sucked open by the engine vacuum directly acting on it. Large number of applications allow for finite tuning much more accurately than the Holley, shorter than a Holley, vent tubes at the center and not the edges allowing for more options in air cleaners, uses stock throttle and TV cable linkages ( if you use the later carb), metering rods used in primaries allowing for both a stepped fuel curve and vacuum referenced metering, used by every one of the big 3 at some time or another( Ford used it for 1 year on the Lima V8 before switching to Motorcraft and Chrysler used it on the last of the 318 powered Diplomats, New Yorkers and Grand Fury's in the 80's)

Quadrajet: Bad- Idle feed passages must be matched to the size of the engine, so you need to find one off a similarly sized engine to yours, Throttle shaft bore wear, takes lots of time to tune and set up properly when on an engine that deviates far from stock, small float bowl capacity, limited number of tuning parts supported for purchase new, No longer available new ( Edelbrock discontinued them a few years back), air horn can warp if the carb is torqued down too tightly resulting in a minor leak, fuel filter threads on front of carb prone to stripping if you are not very careful, will not fit square flange specific manifolds

Holley: Good-widely supported in speed shops and catalogs, Simplicity- any idiot can make one run fairly well , lots of applications over the years, available anywhere from 390 cfm to 1150 cfm, Available in both square flange and spread bore designs, cheap to buy and plentiful used- can be as little as $20 for a 600cfm carb at a swap meet, large float bowl capacity

Holley: Bad- Crude part throttle and idle circuits, idle feed passages are typically sized for their original intended application and as such, may run too rich or lean in normal driving without modification ( I.E a #3310 750 vac. carb was originally intended for a 375 hp 396 and is always rich on smaller engines), Needs a large pump shot to cover up the lean spot that occurs during secondary transition, Most are square flange and have a weaker vacuum signal on the primaries than a spread bore requiring a higher idle speed to be able to run, goes out of tune quickly and is very sensitive to temperature changes, prone to fuel leaks due to side hung bowls and metering blocks. Tends to leak from gaskets and bolt holes, Power valves prone to rupture with engine backfires unless modified with a check valve, secondary operation via external diaphragm instead of air valve. Needs spring changes to tune it, but they are hard to change without a quick change kit, automatic choke is not always included, secondary metering plates on basic models are difficult to tune unless you spend more money for an upgrade or buy a selection of expensive plates, metering plates prone to warpage and will leak badly if it happens.

I will also note that there are actually 3 designs of Carburetors which were sold by Edelbrock (the Carter designs were actually manufactured by Italy's Webber for Edelbrock). The first one was the Performer series which is basically just a Carter AFB (stands for: Aluminum Four Barrel). This is an air valve carb, but the opening rate is fixed and not adjustable as it uses a counterweight instead of spring tension to modulate it. The Second was the Performer RPM carb which was a Quadrajet. It is discontinued, but the company still offers a limited number of tuning parts for it. The third is another Carter , the Carter AVS (stands for: Air Valve Secondary) which is marketed as the "Thunder Series AVS" by Edelbrock. Some consider the AVS to be better than the Quadrajet as it too is a spread bore carb with air valve secondaries and a vacuum referenced set of metering rods. Unlike the Quadrajet, however, the secondary metering is vacuum referenced with power pistons like the primaries and not mechanically determined by the air valve opening rate via a cam that rotates on the shaft. Carter also made another 4 barrel called the "Thermoquad"-so named because of the Phenolic resin "thermoplastic" main body designed to control fuel temperature. Unfortunately, the plastic warps and leaks and it was discontinued by Chrysler, the only manufacturer to adapt it. Carter's first 4 barrel was the "WCFB" (Will Carter Four Barrel) used by Chevy and Studebaker in the 50's ( maybe others too). It was the first production 4 barrel carb, but it weighed around 20 lbs! The Holley as we recognize it today saw it's first application by Ford on the "Thunderbird" 312 Y block at around the same time.

As for BG/Demon, they are based on the Holley modular concept but seem to be a nicer overall carb. The fuel metering is more accurate and the parts have a better quality feel to them. They also have variations such as removable sleeve models that can be easily re-sized, etc. I do not have any experience with them so I will withhold judgment or remarks about them.

I will also note that the best carburetor solution is probably the most difficult to tune and that is an individual runner setup with one barrel per cylinder. Companies like Webber, SU and Mikuni have all produced setups like this over the years, and some are available in the aftermarket. The only factory domestic V8 application I know of for the Webber were some Shelby cars in the 60's, and these were downdraft carbs. Ferrari, Porsche and Lamborghini also used downdraft Webbers. Webber also made side draft carbs, but for some reason I can't remember any applications right now. SU was a major supplier to British makes like Triumph, MG and Austin-Healey. Mikunis are what you will see when you open the hood of an original Datsun 240z or PL510 SSS ( Super Sport Sedan- Japan only model). The SU and Mikuni carbs were only used in side draft applications. Oddly, when British Leyland made the Rover P6 and SD1 with the old Buick 215 V8, it used dual side draft SU's feeding into an adapter on top of the manifold!
 

megaladon6

Comic Book Super Hero
May 29, 2006
4,006
15
0
Danbury, CT
in case anyone needs it here's the carb CFM formula:

cfm=( (cid) x (rpm) / 3456) x VE%

so (350 x 600 / 3456) x 90%VE=547cfm
 
Sep 1, 2006
6,687
33
0
Tampa Bay Area
The sad thing is, most of our engines will not even approach 90% VE. It's more like 75% which is why a larger carb usually performs better than a smaller one on the dyno. It is also worse for low end torque due to the lower amount of vacuum at part throttle which causes lesser quality metering. Makes my Quadrajet case again. By using a small (200 cfm give or take 50 cfm) primary side, it has a stronger signal at part throttle and thus a better signal to the booster venturis which equals better atomization. Better atomization equals more complete combustion and more power from a given volume of fuel passed through the engine. If you ever drive a car with a Quadrajet 750 and then swap it to a Holley 750 square flange, you will notice less responsiveness in day to day driving. I honestly can't use more than 1/8 to 1/4 throttle off the line with mine or it just burns the tires.
 

megaladon6

Comic Book Super Hero
May 29, 2006
4,006
15
0
Danbury, CT
a stock engine may only approach 75% (actually i've read that stock engines usually get 85-90%, but that may be factory HP ones like the H.O. chevy's) but performance engines do quite a bit better and can hit 110% w/out mechanical induction. my 383 at 6k rpm works out to 665cfm at 100%ve.. my 650 holley has great off the line response and may be acting too small!
 
Sep 1, 2006
6,687
33
0
Tampa Bay Area
Well, the way to tell if the carb is too small is to check the vacuum when it is loaded at WOT. It should be zero, anything more represents a restriction to ultimate top end power. However, this does not necessarily mean you need an upgrade as the trade off on the low end for top end power may make it slower accelerating overall, or less fun to drive. Also, Holley double pumper carbs are much more sensitive to sizing than the vacuum models as they can't be smaller if the load does not require them. DP's flow what they flow for that amount of throttle regardless of actual demand.

As for VE's, it all depends on the engine in question. Some stock engines like the little VTEC Honda twin cam engines probably see more than 100% VE (90ci engine with 160hp would almost have to) as likely did some of the better stock engines from the musclecar era. However, most stock 350's and definitely 305's did not. These engines are found predominantly in 70's and 80's smog era crap with low compression and very lame cams coupled with 2 bbl carbs and crappy heads. I may like the Q-Jet, but only because it, like the engines it came on, can be made to be better than factory with a little work. I think there was even a 350 that made 130hp form the factory in 1976. 130!!! Many of our cars with 350 swaps still retain some or all of these early smog control smothered parts as upgrading them is not cheap even when it is cheap.
 

megaladon6

Comic Book Super Hero
May 29, 2006
4,006
15
0
Danbury, CT
so you buy a DP holley w/vacuum secondaries. :)
 

megaladon6

Comic Book Super Hero
May 29, 2006
4,006
15
0
Danbury, CT
some post from another thread that apply here.

Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 10:07 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would not mess with a Holley. They are the most worthless carb on the planet besides the Motorcraft VV. The best way to tune one is to smash it to pieces with a large sledgehammer so it doesn't ruin anyone else's life. I have never had one run well, they do not keep in tune, can't cold start, idle rich, have bad part throttle performance,etc. I HATE HOLLEYS!!!!!! Quadrajets on the other hand keep their tune, cold start well and are near optimal on anything running slower than the 10's when properly calibrated. It just takes a lot of time to set it up initially and you have to be more intelligent than some idiot who lives in a trailer park drinking cheap beer while changing engines using an old swing set. I equate the Holley 4 barrel with the Toyota Prius in terms of automotive things I hate the most. Both need to die. In fact, if you put the original designer of the Holley in a Prius and then set them both on fire, I would really enjoy seeing it. Justice served.

BTW, I own 4 Holleys: a 600, 650DP, and 2 750 vac sec carbs, so I speak from personal experience. None are on a running car, nor would I ever put one on one of my cars again. Worthless Garbage!
_________________
1985 Cutlass Supreme Brougham:
355 Chevy- 9.5:1 compression, Comp XE 262 cam, World S/R Torquer heads with 2.02's, Edelbrock Performer, 800CFM Q jet, Camaro ram air system,Edelbrock headers, Comp Magnum roller tip rockers
TH 200 4R, 3.23 rear, aluminum hood, IROC steering box, poly bushings, Eibach springs, etc
1998 Nissan Frontier: KA24DE/5speed, stock, one owner with 269,000 miles
http://www.myspace.com/junkyardengineer

Back to top


455OLDSMAN
Greasemonkey


Joined: 08 Nov 2007
Posts: 70

Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:41 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sounds like you should get rid of them to someone who knows how to tune them properly and buy more quadrajets since your good with those. I will be honest ive never messed with a quadrajet. Ive always just swapped it out for a holley when i went performance and havent had a problem.

Back to top


85 Cutlass Brougham
Royal Smart Person


Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 1072
Location: Tampa Bay Area
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:40 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If I knew someone around here who wanted to buy one off me, I would gladly sell them ( I won't ship stuff, too much of a PITA). I have one sitting on my AMC 360 right now, but plan on using an Edelbrock 600 when I swap the engine out. I have never had any problems with the Edelbrocks or Quadrajets that I could not easily sort out with a little bit of math or experimentation. The 360 always ran rich no matter what I did with jetting ( I could put the small wire in the idle feed passage to fix it, but don't want to) and it never got better than 12mpg. I understand Holleys very well and know their theory of operation, but they never work anywhere near as well as a Quadrajet in anything but a WOT situation. I keep lots of carbs on the shelf because I like to experiment a lot, and that way I always have a working part in an emergency.
_________________
1985 Cutlass Supreme Brougham:
355 Chevy- 9.5:1 compression, Comp XE 262 cam, World S/R Torquer heads with 2.02's, Edelbrock Performer, 800CFM Q jet, Camaro ram air system,Edelbrock headers, Comp Magnum roller tip rockers
TH 200 4R, 3.23 rear, aluminum hood, IROC steering box, poly bushings, Eibach springs, etc
1998 Nissan Frontier: KA24DE/5speed, stock, one owner with 269,000 miles
http://www.myspace.com/junkyardengineer

Back to top


79LT1Monte
Apprentice


Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 35
Location: St Louis, Missouri
Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:19 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your combo sounds good but I wouldn't run stamped rockers or a carb period. No matter what carb you run Holley or Q-Jet they are both going to need adjusting and tuning constantly. Save yourself the hassle and step into this century with a fuel injection swap. There are plenty of ways to get it done from cheap to bank breaking, but it's worth the time to at least look into it. Sorry guys don't mean to bash your carb argument but if you ask me there all junk!
_________________
79 Monte Carlo 96 350 LT1 4L60E 3:73 w/auburn

Back to top


85 Cutlass Brougham
Royal Smart Person


Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 1072
Location: Tampa Bay Area
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:37 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While I would tend to agree that EFI>Carb, the cost factor is why I run the carb. That and the simplicity of it. My whole fuel system from manifold to fuel pump to carb to lines and hoses, air filter, etc. set me back less than $200. That is hard to beat with EFI-especially in an engine that deviates from the flow rating of the stock injectors. I considered running a TPI intake and injectors I found on a 305 F body with a Megasquirt standalone EMS, but I could not make the numbers work for a car that sees only occasional use, which to me is less than 15k miles a year ( I drive 50k a year). A Quadrajet is the next best thing to EFI for precision and fuel economy blended with good acceleration and throttle response. My car would be better with EFI for a number of reasons such as the fuel slosh problem I have when driving fast around corners, but I can't justify the expense. For the cost of the EFI conversion, I could rid my G body of some of it's other useless parts that offend me much more. Things like the automatic transmission, 7.5 rear or seats that offer no support while cornering. I could even add a 150 shot of Nitrous or start gathering the parts to install an IRS in place of the less than ideal live rear axle that bounces around on bumpy corners.
_________________
1985 Cutlass Supreme Brougham:
355 Chevy- 9.5:1 compression, Comp XE 262 cam, World S/R Torquer heads with 2.02's, Edelbrock Performer, 800CFM Q jet, Camaro ram air system,Edelbrock headers, Comp Magnum roller tip rockers
TH 200 4R, 3.23 rear, aluminum hood, IROC steering box, poly bushings, Eibach springs, etc
1998 Nissan Frontier: KA24DE/5speed, stock, one owner with 269,000 miles
http://www.myspace.com/junkyardengineer

Back to top


coolchrisp
n00b


Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Posts: 22
Location: Grosse Ile, MI / Lima, OH
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 1:32 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quadrajets are trash my man. Good for stock to mild build. Other then that you cant get it right, and if you do it wont stay that way long. i would go with a holley/demon for your app. it will be MUCH more user friendly for you out of the box, with minor adjustments.

Back to top


85 Cutlass Brougham
Royal Smart Person


Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 1072
Location: Tampa Bay Area
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 3:00 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quadrajet is WAY easier to make work right than a Holley. I would never have another Holley. Worthless crap that needs to be beaten to death. Horrible idle and part throttle circuits. You just don't know what you are doing with a Quadrajet and that is why you dislike them. I am willing to take a few months to get it right if that is what it takes. I like carbs I never have to touch after I get them set up and there is no Holley I can get 50k miles out of without any changes. I can and have done that with a Quadrajet in the past. I try to keep my cars low maintenance and do not want to constantly have to mess with them to keep them running. I also hate any and all chrome under the hood of anything I drive. Too much work to make it look right so my engine is a sea of black and is very hard to distinguish from stock so I never have to detail it.
_________________
1985 Cutlass Supreme Brougham:
355 Chevy- 9.5:1 compression, Comp XE 262 cam, World S/R Torquer heads with 2.02's, Edelbrock Performer, 800CFM Q jet, Camaro ram air system,Edelbrock headers, Comp Magnum roller tip rockers
TH 200 4R, 3.23 rear, aluminum hood, IROC steering box, poly bushings, Eibach springs, etc
1998 Nissan Frontier: KA24DE/5speed, stock, one owner with 269,000 miles
http://www.myspace.com/junkyardengineer

Back to top


83cut350chev
Master Mechanic


Joined: 02 Jan 2007
Posts: 106
Location: Churchville, PA
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 10:54 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

yeah,EFI systems are a little out of my price range right now, and i like more old school technology so the carbs right up my alley lol i was actually looking into an edelbrock 750? ive heard lots of good about edelbrocks aftermarket stuff.

Back to top


beeterolds
Apprentice


Joined: 15 Dec 2007
Posts: 46

Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 11:18 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

coolchrisp wrote:
Quadrajets are trash my man. Good for stock to mild build. Other then that you cant get it right, and if you do it wont stay that way long. i would go with a holley/demon for your app. it will be MUCH more user friendly for you out of the box, with minor adjustments.


For all out racing Holleys/Demons are what to use, dont trash talk Q-jets if you dont know how to tune them!!i know of several guys running 11s-12s with Q-jets...The only good Holley that i know of is a double pumper nothing else!! Every car ive owned has been reliable, low emissions, and great mileage thanks to a properly tuned 750cfm Q-jet...

my 403 Olds pushed my cutlass into the low 13s while banging out 18mpg in the city and passing NE Super stringent emissions inspections... DO NOT KNOCK THE Q-JET!
_________________


Back to top


Vern
Greasemonkey


Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 92
Location: Dayton, OH
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 11:22 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

85 Cut your initial post for 83Cut was outstanding. I can't verify it as I don't have the experience with these components but that kind of info is what makes these boards invaluable and our hobby better.

I have a FI GN & love FI especially for a tubo application. That said knowing what can be done with a well done Q-jet I can't see the expense of converting to an EFI on a naturally aspirated application as worthwhile. I applaud those that have done it just not worth it to me.

If I had a drag car big or small block I'd run a holley. If I had a strung out small block street strip car I'd run a holley. Anything short of that and both carbs being equally well set up the Q-jet hands down. The holley is easier to understand and tune but you are going to have to do it alot more often. The Q-jet will idle nicer, stay on tune MUCH longer, stay on tune through abrupt weather changes much better, provide better mileage, have almost FI like part throttle response and operation.

I sent my 800cfm electric choke Q-jet that I got off my junkyard Cadillac motor to The Carb Shop in Ontario CA for a stage II rebuild. (like JET provides only cheaper with better quality control & ACCOUNTABILITY if there is a problem) I gave them my motor & car specs. It came back just a tad rich (which is safe) has performed flawlessly for 9,000 miles ran a 3840 car through the 1/4 at 110 without missing a beat. Starts idles part throttle driveability mileage WOT no adjustments no repairs winter or summer. That would have never happened with a holley.
_________________
87 Olds 442, 10-1 509ci Cadillac, 800cfm Q-jet, Ebrock intake, Street ported heads, 230@50 518 lift cam, Headers, 200-4R w 2800 stall lock up converter, Electric fans, Electric in-tank fuel pump, AC, Functional Hurst type cowl & rear spoiler, 36mm hollow sway bar, Factory oil pressure & tach work, 17.0 mpg hwy
87 Buick Grand National, TE-60 turbo, Stretch intercooler, 42.5lb injectors, 3" downpipe, 3000 stall lock up converter, Meth/water injection, 22mpg, original owner, Both 2 run high 11s on pumpgas

Back to top
 

455OLDSMAN

Apprentice
Nov 8, 2007
79
0
0
I think the carbs are all too different to say which one is better. For all out drag racing a holley is gonna win. Go to the drag races and look under the hood. Most always your gonna find a holley or a BG. I think if the quadrajet was so great in any one aspect it would be used more often. The only thing it has over a holley is that it does all things expected from a carb decently well but NOT perfectly.
 

megaladon6

Comic Book Super Hero
May 29, 2006
4,006
15
0
Danbury, CT
mostly from reading everyone's input, i finally voted for the q-jet. the holleys are very easy to tune and seem to have the best power, though not by much. however for full range performance it looks like the q takes it. of course i'm gonna stick with my holley until i get EFI, nothing beatd multi port!

and thank you to GP403 for making this a sticky. now we don't have to have this arguement every week, we can just refer people to this thread.
 

jerry455

Apprentice
Jul 9, 2006
64
7
8
sterling hts mi
q jet

i have a zz3 700 r4 3.73 posi in my 86 gp. it runs 13.50 @102 mph through the exhaust on street tires. i drive 180 mile round trip to milan drag way , make 20 or so runs and still get 17 mpg while driving 75 mph. i still have the stock eletronic q jet , distributor and computer. it has the camaro h.o. zz3 prom and computer and all emissions except cat conv. and passes emissions for the stock 305 motor.
 

GBodyForum is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com. Amazon, the Amazon logo, AmazonSupply, and the AmazonSupply logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.

Please support GBodyForum Sponsors

Classic Truck Consoles Dixie Restoration Depot UMI Performance

Contact [email protected] for info on becoming a sponsor