Normally there should be the Rochester q-jet on the 401 (63 Riv), but as i compared pictures with other rochesters, it seems that this is not the original one, or is it? In Addition the flaps are missing, as the engine was running on lpg when i bought it. The question is what carb this is and should i replace it? As i read in this forum, most of you go for an edelbrock 650 or 750. What would be the better choice? and how much difference in power is between the 750 Performer and the 650 Thunder series? And does an edelbrock carb will fit right on the original manifold? greeting Alex
The Roch qjet didn't get going until 1965 and used on the 1966 Buick 425 and midyear option on Sky GS. Yours is a Carter AFB and very commonly found in the early '60s. Someimes the Roch 4GC was used instead-
I agree with Dan, definitly a carter afb[ alluminum four barrell] not a qjet, and not a wcfb rochester. [white cast four barrell] rated at 550 cfm. [usually] the qjet was 750 cfm, and the wcfb was about 450-500 cfm.
WCFB stands for William Carter Four Barrel. Most '63/401 Rivs. came with the Rochester 4GC. Since you have an AFB with what appears to be the original carb. because of the DynaFlow trans. hook-up for the linkage you may have a 425. 425's were offered in later '63, not sure when exactly, but was a pretty rare option in a '63 Riv. Check the engine code on the right front, passenger side, of the block. A 401 would be JT, a 425 would be JW.
so it is right, that most of the 63 Rivs had a Rochester and not the carter on? As you can see the carb looks already pretty doggy, and the engine just has no real power, therefore i want to change the carb. I already changed the whole ignition system, (new f***ing expensive Msd Distributor, coil and wires) and it helped nothing to improve the power What would you suggest? 600,650 or 750 Edelbrock or an rebuild carter? thanks for your help!!
Most likely, the easiest performance carb for you to go to will be the E-brock's. they will fit your intake without adaptors and then the air cleaner will also fit, leaving only the mechanics of the throttle linkage hook up to do. Nail heads like big carbs. Personally, I would put a 750- 800 cfm on it.
The throat of the newer Edelbrocks are larger than the original AFB's. You will need an adapter to use your original air cleaner. Get that carb. rebuilt by myself or someone else. Stock it's 625 CFM's & can be smoothed to flow more. I would have just re-curved the original distributor & mot spent the $$$$$. The MSD needs to be curved to your set-up. For a little more $$$$$ you can purchase a set of my "Adjustable Roller Tip Rocker Arms". These have been proven more than once to add about 50HP to a stock engine for a noticeable seat of your pants performance improvement. It takes that much HP to make a noticeable performance feel in a 4500lb. car.
AAAdoggies, I dang shure stepped in it that time, and every time I do Tom catches me!!!!! I think God is trying to keep me humble and he is using Tom to do it. Tom is right, I forgot about having to change the floor of my stock air cleaner to make it work with my Holley. Add to that the fact that I had noticed that I would have to do the same for my 64 Riv. to use a holley. Oh well some days you get the bear and some days the bear gets you.
hey tom thanks for the offer I already read about your Rocker arms. They seem to be pretty good. However i think i have to wait some more months till i get the money, because i have to fix the carb first. Its 499$ Thats right? ,but i will defently get them sooner or later. But before i think i will go for an 750 Edelbrock, as i think it will get me a little more power than an rebuilt carter. Am i right? @Tom can you tell me what do you mean by "the MSD have to be curved"??? Thanks a lot for your help guys Alex
As I know it William Carter is the maker/inventor of the 1st. four barrel carbs. Hence, WCFB 1st. four barrel carb. was a WCFB used on the 1st. production car to use a four barrel from the factory, '52 Buick Roadmaster. Also AFB=Aluminum Four Barrel. Doc, I'm am definitely not here to step on your toes. We all make "Clerical" errors from time-time & as we get up in the years memory's start to fade. Like trying to remember how I installed '63 Riv. brakes & drums all around on my '55 Special or swapping front aluminum drums & shoes to the rear of my Riv. I did this stuff sooooo many years ago it's hard to remember, so sometimes memory needs a refreshing. Alex, the Edelbrock (produced by Webber) is just a copy of the AFB you already have. Why you think it was copied???? Very universal in many applications. The hard part is adapting the DynaFlow linkage. Without it the trans. won't do what it's supposed to do & you,ll be very disappointed overall. Just my thoughts. You'd be better off getting your carb. redone by someone you trust. Usually can't go wrong with original. Send the manifold out for mods also, you will be surprised on how much this produces in seat of your pants results. It takes alot of HP to make a noticeable seat of the pants performance improvement in a vehicle that's approaching 4500lbs. Read the instructions you got with the MSD. For the $350.00 +or- you spent on the dist. could have been money used for something else that would be of use. Like the original sent to Dave Ray. The MSD uses components that require use of replacement MSD components. Dave uses components that are & will be readily available, in case anything happens, from any auto parts stores. No "Specialty" parts. With the DynaFlow trans. in there performance will not be one of it's stellar attributes, especially in "D" drive range. Although a properly working DynaFlow has more torque multiplication in "Low" than a TH400 in 1st. gear. NEVER shift the trans. from low-drive with the pedal-the metal or from drive to low with the pedal floored, the ole dyny will have a short life.
Tom, I understand. I can remember things that happened when I was 5 but I cant tell you what I had for breakfast yesterday. When I was going thru Ford school they called the wcfb carb a white cast four barrel for some reason. and some were used on ford trucks and mercs. probably a ''contract'' thing because along at that time the factories would ''brother in law'' on a lot of stuff. I remember the ford-o-matic trans was also the rambler flash-o-matic. And dont even mention Jeep. Just what ever pile of parts that was laying around that day was what they were built from. And ,Yes Tom, I do regard You as a good friend. A friend is some one who knows your short comings and likes you anyway.
Tom, Seem to me that there is little rhyme or reason to Buick using the AFB or the old Rochester 4 barrel. I have 2 63 Riviera's in the garage with 401's, one with an AFB and one with a Rochester. I also have a 62 401 from a 225 on a stand that has an AFB on it, too. The more 63's that I see, the more questions I have about why one got an AFB and one got a Rochester. I totally agree that when dealing with a Dynaflow car, you are much better off to fix what you have for a carb rather than trying to adapt a late model replacement to work with the dynaflow! Take Care, Tim
Definitely stick with the stock carb. You will never get all the bugs worked out of one of the newer carb--you will have to: 1. tewak the jetting 2. change to a differnet air cleaner 3. rig the dynaflow linkage 4. do away with the factory stove choke and convert to an electric choke (not as good) 5. change around the fuel line connection because it is in a differnet place on the new Edelbrocks. In the end, you probably won't notice any performance difference because the Dynaflow is where you are losing the performance from that engine--they were made to drive smooth, not to be high performance. That is why in '64 they replaced it with the Turbo 400 trans.
Terribly sorry for You Doc. If you ever want to talk about it, I'm here for you bud...:laugh: Oh yeah, GREAT INFO!!!!!!:TU:
Where do you guys stand with a factory dual intake for the 425 '66 Rivvy). I have a stock intake and carb, but it's unknown to me.... Good luck Alex...:beer
