The Webers are not bad on fuel consumption set up right. 18-20mpg on the road is about right with them as oppose to 12-15 with a single Holley.
I wouldn't think HP would be up with fuel injection. Torque might be flatter through the rpm range though. The FI is not going to give you more horse power potential at all.
I agree with the Morrison being outrageously beautiful but the hp per dollar ratio is not going to be a good one with it.
Might start to give you some of the FI type whine you hear from the Lamborghini's with the FI though?
I would think 5.7 Ford vs. 5.7 Lambo FI, hp would be comparable.
yes, i agree...but then we are back to the car itself...don't know, i have a perfect less 10k miles GT5S , my engine with Edelbrock carb and, i suppose, a comp cam is pulling that hard that it gives the same feeling in gear 3,4..5 as it was in 2...as it spins up the same, only the mph goes up 
i have "prof" coilovers and race tires...and still the feeling that there is enough power the car can handle....OK, for a straight pulling mayby yes, but then again, the curves are the more pleasure ! no, i'm very happy with the "stock" potential and don't need 500HP nor F1 sound.... 
it's already scary enough 
i have "prof" coilovers and race tires...and still the feeling that there is enough power the car can handle....OK, for a straight pulling mayby yes, but then again, the curves are the more pleasure ! no, i'm very happy with the "stock" potential and don't need 500HP nor F1 sound.... it's already scary enough
What I noticed going from the Holley to the injection, (combined with the 11:1 compression heads) was a much snappier throttle response.
A lot of this would be the bumping up of the compression.
Real easy to arc up the wheels & the rear to step out on gear changes as it is so “instant on”.
Almost like a sports bike snappy throttle.
Fuel consumption?, I just keep filling it up with 98, no idea how much it uses, seems reasonable though.
Sound: almost has a supercharger gear buzzing noise happening as the air rushes into the stacks.
Currently I have no real air cleaners, just fine stainless gauze within the stacks & stretch over “outerwear” mesh screens on top of the stacks.
On the Dyno it was 320 hp at the wheels, which would equate to approx 390 crank hp, (on a 36 degree C day which is not ideal).
With a dead flat torque curve.
So, to my mind what I like is the fantastic throttle response, the sound, the look & above all, the reliability that injection offers once set up.
Regards,
Tony.
A lot of this would be the bumping up of the compression.
Real easy to arc up the wheels & the rear to step out on gear changes as it is so “instant on”.
Almost like a sports bike snappy throttle.
Fuel consumption?, I just keep filling it up with 98, no idea how much it uses, seems reasonable though.
Sound: almost has a supercharger gear buzzing noise happening as the air rushes into the stacks.
Currently I have no real air cleaners, just fine stainless gauze within the stacks & stretch over “outerwear” mesh screens on top of the stacks.
On the Dyno it was 320 hp at the wheels, which would equate to approx 390 crank hp, (on a 36 degree C day which is not ideal).
With a dead flat torque curve.
So, to my mind what I like is the fantastic throttle response, the sound, the look & above all, the reliability that injection offers once set up.
Regards,
Tony.
You have a point there Tony, I also would like a snappier throttle respons plus it looks awsome , but a bit rich for my blood
#1154 greets You
#1154 greets You
What heads are you using. Small port 3v type heads will give you crisper response. So will a small vacuum carb like a Holley 1850.
The Edelbrocks are mechanical secondaries. They aren't necessarily the best idea with the stock 4v heads.
Cam timing and muffler changes will change the growl and sound of the engine too.
The FI Mustangs with the same equipment, i.e., headers, Flowmaster mufflers, agressive cam sound identical to the Holley equipped ones.
The biggest advantage to the FI is tuning with the computer and better cold weather startup and running. Other then that I see little advantage.
Well...lack of fire risk is an advantage to the EFI over carbs. There is no fuel held in them like the carbs have.
What catches fire though is the elements on the air cleaners. The paper elements are the most susceptible since they just become fuel sponges from the reversion pulses.
So +1 to the EFI on that count.
The Edelbrocks are mechanical secondaries. They aren't necessarily the best idea with the stock 4v heads.
Cam timing and muffler changes will change the growl and sound of the engine too.
The FI Mustangs with the same equipment, i.e., headers, Flowmaster mufflers, agressive cam sound identical to the Holley equipped ones.
The biggest advantage to the FI is tuning with the computer and better cold weather startup and running. Other then that I see little advantage.
Well...lack of fire risk is an advantage to the EFI over carbs. There is no fuel held in them like the carbs have.
What catches fire though is the elements on the air cleaners. The paper elements are the most susceptible since they just become fuel sponges from the reversion pulses.
So +1 to the EFI on that count.
I have since quite some time a kit on the shelf (48 IDA), and it will take quite some more time before I get to install it. Probably until the point I go for a complete engine overhaul, so I can get all related tech aspecs as I really want them.
The Hall manifold is OK, but could be made better. Carbs and channels do mismatch a bit - not badly or such, but could be better - and needed some machining to make sure all bolts would fit. An aspect to reckon with is that Hall only sells the manifold - you'll have to sort out the linkage yourself. No prob you'd think, as linkage systems are offered all over, but as I found out, those often offered and currently in use by many, will work, but not make all butterflies work synchronous - and that does not only apply to the Hall manifold. For that matter I did cut off the pedestal, had a new one made, and will have it reweld where it should.
The Hall manifold is OK, but could be made better. Carbs and channels do mismatch a bit - not badly or such, but could be better - and needed some machining to make sure all bolts would fit. An aspect to reckon with is that Hall only sells the manifold - you'll have to sort out the linkage yourself. No prob you'd think, as linkage systems are offered all over, but as I found out, those often offered and currently in use by many, will work, but not make all butterflies work synchronous - and that does not only apply to the Hall manifold. For that matter I did cut off the pedestal, had a new one made, and will have it reweld where it should.
That set up is shown on Inglese's web page.
The Pantera manifold is designed for the Pantera throttle cable. The carburetors face out so that the throttle plates of the carbs give line of sight to the intake valve.
Both are correct for a racing manifold.
The linkage is really very simple for it. It works off of the center pilon and a short arm connects to the right side carbs under, and the left side carbs over with a longer arm and mount to the wheel on the center tower with an extended coupling nut. It's about 1-1/2" long (tall).
I don't know if Detomaso added the tower to the original Holman-Moody design or H-M designed it for the Pantera that way? I've never seen the original H-M version. Only the DT version, of which I'll bet there were maybe 50 made. They are VERY rare.
Since Weber carb shafts twist like there is no tomorrow, you can't load the carbs from anyplace but in the middle.
The bearings in the carbs neither will tolerate being end loaded without almost .100" of deflection. That means the left and right side would never open together as they should if you end load them.
You can eliminate the center mount and go to a Mustang side mount system simultaneously with reversing one side of the carbs.
This is something Inglese recommends to simplify the linkage issues.
Reversing the carbs on one side will loose you 30 horsepower by putting those throttle plates on the wrong side of the ports.
If you think Halls manifold is flimsy, you ain't seen nothin' till you see the Detomaso version.
I've owned two Hall manifolds and had zero issues with the production qualities. One with the big 4v port and one small port (A3).
The 4v version was on my Mustang and it made sense to convert it to the side mount linkage like the Cobras used and face the carbs the same way. It made life much simpler but even that likage design had an issue with twisting at wide open throttle. After running wot, the car would not return to 800rpm idle. The linkage had twisted.
The Pantera center pivot has much less issue with that. You will also discover that there really is no perfect linkage design for this set up.
The nicest one I saw was the 427 design with the carbs mounting 90 degrees from what we all have now since that made a simple pull design of the carbs so easy. The reason it was never run extensively has got to be the throttle tip in location and the line of sight to the valve location. After all. All of them were intended for maximum performance at racing levels. Not street-ability.
There is enough material in the flanges of the manifold to bore them out considerably and any manifold I've EVER used needed some type of gasket cleanup. That's no big deal at all.
There isn't quite enough material to bore them out to 58mm but certainly the 51.5mm Berg modified IDA's will fit.
Nice setup Kid. I like the low glitz them.
The Pantera manifold is designed for the Pantera throttle cable. The carburetors face out so that the throttle plates of the carbs give line of sight to the intake valve.
Both are correct for a racing manifold.
The linkage is really very simple for it. It works off of the center pilon and a short arm connects to the right side carbs under, and the left side carbs over with a longer arm and mount to the wheel on the center tower with an extended coupling nut. It's about 1-1/2" long (tall).
I don't know if Detomaso added the tower to the original Holman-Moody design or H-M designed it for the Pantera that way? I've never seen the original H-M version. Only the DT version, of which I'll bet there were maybe 50 made. They are VERY rare.
Since Weber carb shafts twist like there is no tomorrow, you can't load the carbs from anyplace but in the middle.
The bearings in the carbs neither will tolerate being end loaded without almost .100" of deflection. That means the left and right side would never open together as they should if you end load them.
You can eliminate the center mount and go to a Mustang side mount system simultaneously with reversing one side of the carbs.
This is something Inglese recommends to simplify the linkage issues.
Reversing the carbs on one side will loose you 30 horsepower by putting those throttle plates on the wrong side of the ports.
If you think Halls manifold is flimsy, you ain't seen nothin' till you see the Detomaso version.
I've owned two Hall manifolds and had zero issues with the production qualities. One with the big 4v port and one small port (A3).
The 4v version was on my Mustang and it made sense to convert it to the side mount linkage like the Cobras used and face the carbs the same way. It made life much simpler but even that likage design had an issue with twisting at wide open throttle. After running wot, the car would not return to 800rpm idle. The linkage had twisted.
The Pantera center pivot has much less issue with that. You will also discover that there really is no perfect linkage design for this set up.
The nicest one I saw was the 427 design with the carbs mounting 90 degrees from what we all have now since that made a simple pull design of the carbs so easy. The reason it was never run extensively has got to be the throttle tip in location and the line of sight to the valve location. After all. All of them were intended for maximum performance at racing levels. Not street-ability.
There is enough material in the flanges of the manifold to bore them out considerably and any manifold I've EVER used needed some type of gasket cleanup. That's no big deal at all.
There isn't quite enough material to bore them out to 58mm but certainly the 51.5mm Berg modified IDA's will fit.
Nice setup Kid. I like the low glitz them.
quote:
That set up is shown on Inglese's web page.
Indeed, he put it together for me - the cat is shown under "customer cars"
quote:
The linkage is really very simple for it. It works off of the center pilon and a short arm connects to the right side carbs under, and the left side carbs over with a longer arm and mount to the wheel on the center tower with an extended coupling nut. It's about 1-1/2" long (tall).
True, it worked this way originally, until I did spot "some things". I shared my findings, and the design of the linkage system offered by him got changed. Note that the same mistake is made by most who have a similar system in use - it simply is a technically incorrect set-up.
quote:
I like the low glitz them
My English is reasonably, but this kind of "slang"(?) language baffles me... Explain that to me please
quote:Originally posted by Kid:quote:
That set up is shown on Inglese's web page.
Indeed, he put it together for me - the cat is shown under "customer cars"quote:
The linkage is really very simple for it. It works off of the center pilon and a short arm connects to the right side carbs under, and the left side carbs over with a longer arm and mount to the wheel on the center tower with an extended coupling nut. It's about 1-1/2" long (tall).
True, it worked this way originally, until I did spot "some things". I shared my findings, and the design of the linkage system offered by him got changed. Note that the same mistake is made by most who have a similar system in use - it simply is a technically incorrect set-up.quote:
I like the low glitz them
My English is reasonably, but this kind of "slang"(?) language baffles me... Explain that to me please
Your English is very excellent. Glitz would be something that you would have to wear sunglasses to see without the reflection of the light blinding your eyes.
I think the linkage is all going to be a compromise. Just depends where?
Inglese has a lot of experience. I don't argue with him.
We call him JimIn around here. Explanation? He had gotten custom license plates for his car but at the time there were only six characters that you could add to the license plate.
Obviously he wanted to get Jim Inglese but just shortened it. Maybe he meant that he was Jimin down the street?
quote:Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
That set up is shown on Inglese's web page.
I couldn't find this on their website. Can you shoot a link of your linkage?
I am putting Webers on my Mangusta, and the linkage is tricky
This is "glitz":
Attachments
Images (1)
Bring them to Jimin. He'll figure them out...eventually.
Those are IDF's. The spacing between them requires a different solution then on the IDA's.
Those are IDF's. The spacing between them requires a different solution then on the IDA's.
quote:Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
Bring them to Jimin. He'll figure them out...eventually.
Those are IDF's. The spacing between them requires a different solution then on the IDA's.
I know I can't buy an off the shelf solution (just look at that jackshaft!)
I have made a great linkage, but once installed in the car, the throttle cable does not route very well. I am looking at pictures of all solutions, and would be very interested to see yours.
Thanks!
I'll see what I can post tomorrow. The routing of the throttle cable has to go under the distributor in able to get to the center pedestal.
That part is tight, yes.
You need to make a new bracket to hold the cable centered so it doesn't bind running to the pedestal.
My pictures will not show that since the setup is out of the car on the bench getting the bearings replaced. All it will show is the linkage and that is tough to photograph because of where it is located.
Send the setup here if you want. I'll do the linkage for free. I work for food these days.
That part is tight, yes.
You need to make a new bracket to hold the cable centered so it doesn't bind running to the pedestal.
My pictures will not show that since the setup is out of the car on the bench getting the bearings replaced. All it will show is the linkage and that is tough to photograph because of where it is located.
Send the setup here if you want. I'll do the linkage for free. I work for food these days.
quote:Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
I'll see what I can post tomorrow. The routing of the throttle cable has to go under the distributor in able to get to the center pedestal.
That part is tight, yes.
You need to make a new bracket to hold the cable centered so it doesn't bind running to the pedestal.
My pictures will not show that since the setup is out of the car on the bench getting the bearings replaced. All it will show is the linkage and that is tough to photograph because of where it is located.
Send the setup here if you want. I'll do the linkage for free. I work for food these days.
Remember I have a 347 (302 windsor) and everything looked great until I pushed the distributor all the way down, and the low deck just pinched everything more than a 351. I will send you some pics of what I have, I truly appreciate your input.
quote:Originally posted by JMM3:quote:Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
I'll see what I can post tomorrow. The routing of the throttle cable has to go under the distributor in able to get to the center pedestal.
That part is tight, yes.
You need to make a new bracket to hold the cable centered so it doesn't bind running to the pedestal.
My pictures will not show that since the setup is out of the car on the bench getting the bearings replaced. All it will show is the linkage and that is tough to photograph because of where it is located.
Send the setup here if you want. I'll do the linkage for free. I work for food these days.
Remember I have a 347 (302 windsor) and everything looked great until I pushed the distributor all the way down, and the low deck just pinched everything more than a 351. I will send you some pics of what I have, I truly appreciate your input.
First of all, I am not just limited to the scope of a Pantera. I also have a 68 Shelby GT350. That has the identical engine as your Magusta does. It also is a 347. It does not have the albatross of a cable throttle in it however.
I ran these same IDA's in it at one time with a Boss 351. It now runs the 67 Mustang Trans-Am set up of the high rise 2x4 intake with two 4160 Holleys. (On the original 302 block and heads with a 347 hidden within). It is a much simpler animal that way.
If you can't lower the water, raise the bridge.
I know exactly what the problem is there with the throttle cable and the distributor clearances. In your case it may by necessary to extend the length of the distributor enough to raise it so the throttle cable can run under without it kinking.
You could consider running an offset distributor just to get room for the throttle cable. I don't know if that is possible even in the Pantera because the distributor is so close to the window. Maybe you can do that in the goose since the deck height of the engine is 8.2" instead of 9.2", and sits the engine lower in the chassis?
As the Southern Evangelist 'Preacher' MIGHT say..."Brothers and Sisters, I feel your pain".
Attachments
Images (1)
quote:Originally posted by JMM3:
I am putting Webers on my Mangusta, and the linkage is tricky
This is "glitz":
Gorgeous Jay
If the distributor is a problem, install a distributorless ignition.
quote:Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
Inglese has a lot of experience. I don't argue with him.
I have no doubt he has a lot of experience, but it is good practice to question things now and then. If not, people would still be making fire with a couple of stones...
quote:What heads are you using. Small port 3v type heads will give you crisper response. So will a small vacuum carb like a Holley 1850.
The Edelbrocks are mechanical secondaries. They aren't necessarily the best idea with the stock 4v heads.
Cam timing and muffler changes will change the growl and sound of the engine too.
The FI Mustangs with the same equipment, i.e., headers, Flowmaster mufflers, agressive cam sound identical to the Holley equipped ones.
The biggest advantage to the FI is tuning with the computer and better cold weather startup and running. Other then that I see little advantage.
Heads are CHI 3V that expand up to the 4V profile to match the IR manifold.
I see FI as far superior in many ways to a carbie.
I had the advantage of having the car tuned by a friend who spent the time on the Dyno setting up ignition & fuel curves at 200 rpm increments at low revs & 500 rpm increments at higher rpm.
So it’s very finely tuned to stay in the 14:1 Air/Fuel ratio & the ignition set accordingly.
What car is still sold off the showroom floor with a carbie?
Sure there are as many economic & production related reasons why car manufacturers all fit injection.
But injection is so much more efficient, not only can it be tuned much more precisely right through the rev range to optimize the engines characteristics, but also more reliable.
Set up correctly it has to produce more power compared to a carbie.
How could it not do so when you have almost infinite adjustment of nearly all the parameters.
It’s simply a more precise & finely tuned tool.
regards,
Tony.
"I have no doubt he has a lot of experience, but it is good practice to question things now and then. If not, people would still be making fire with a couple of stones..."
No, no. I make fire with my Webers at start up. There is a difference.
@ Tony
It's a beautiful set up for sure. I expected you to say 3v heads. That makes a lot of sense from what you are describing.
In the US, carbs gave way to FI for emissions compliance more then any other reason. More precise fleet fuel economy ratings are also involved.
I'm sure you could write a book on the setup now?
No, no. I make fire with my Webers at start up. There is a difference.
@ Tony
It's a beautiful set up for sure. I expected you to say 3v heads. That makes a lot of sense from what you are describing.
In the US, carbs gave way to FI for emissions compliance more then any other reason. More precise fleet fuel economy ratings are also involved.
I'm sure you could write a book on the setup now?
quote:JMM3
OK, you asked to see mine, so this is them.
The long 3/8 hex was added just for the pictures to show you the orientation that normally the throttle cable occupies.
It is very close under the distributor on my Cleveland too, but it clears. I think that the offset distributor MIGHT work for you though.
You could also relocate the spot on the firewall where the cable comes through to align over the top of the drivers valve cover and go to the side mount bracket that Inglese makes.
Attachments
Images (1)
drivers side
Attachments
Images (1)
more
Attachments
Images (1)
top view
Attachments
Images (1)
say when you've seen enough
Attachments
Images (1)
from the back
Attachments
Images (1)
from the front looking back
Attachments
Images (1)
center pivot
Attachments
Images (1)
driver side adjustment
Attachments
Images (1)
top front birdseye view
Attachments
Images (1)
What has been seen...can not be unseen!
Attachments
Images (1)
As you see, the spacing of IDA's vs IDF are different enough.
There is another linkage for them and it will tend to twist on the tang more then the IDA does.
The true test of the linkage is to run the car at WOT and see if the engine returns to it's 800rpm idle.
In my case it is 650 and with the non-Weber cam in there, the engine sounds like a marching band. Boom, boom, bad-bad boom boom, etc, etc, etc!
There is another linkage for them and it will tend to twist on the tang more then the IDA does.
The true test of the linkage is to run the car at WOT and see if the engine returns to it's 800rpm idle.
In my case it is 650 and with the non-Weber cam in there, the engine sounds like a marching band. Boom, boom, bad-bad boom boom, etc, etc, etc!
quote:Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
What has been seen...can not be unseen!
Thanks for the pics. I went and worked on it last night, and will be working on it this weekend to. Those pics will be very helpful.
Jay
Jay
Good luck on it. If you need help, PM me. Maybe I can offer some suggestions in what to try?
The linkage on multiple Weber carbs is anything but childs play.
I've tried a lot of combinations and discovered many pitfalls.
You want your linkage as simple as possible and as easy as possible to service on the car.
The Pantera is not an easy car to have to do work on while on the car. I can only imagine the Mangusta is even more difficult. As a result on the Pantera it is better to do the linkage a certain way. What works on the bench could be an issue on the car itself.
The linkage also has the tendency of burning up the throttle bearings in the carbs because of all these 90 degree angle loading s and the quality of the factory bearings not being the best.
Even how you mount the carbs to the manifold is important. Using studs makes it difficult to get the carb off without dismantling the linkage. It's like having cylinder heads using studs rather then bolts.
It works fine in the shop but you may find that pulling off the head with studs in the car is impossible or close to it.
If you look at my setup, every carb kicks down within a matter of minutes. Even the fuel lines (which are 304 stainless steel tubing) are built in such a way that they are self supporting and need no individual clamps and are smooth so that you don't get cut up on the abrasiveness of the braided hoses.
The air cleaners have no clamps. The collars are Krazy glued to the velocity stacks. It is easier to remove the entire stack then to unclamp an air cleaner from it, and just replace the assembly with a bare stack when needed or desired.
The nuts that hold the carb tops on are stainless flanged nuts to make it faster to disassemble the carbs.
Just about everything in the assembly is there for a reason.
Ideally it would be better to have the curb idle screw (one) accessible from the outside rather then the inside but that is really a by product of the linkage arms available AND the orientation of the carbs themselves with the fuel lines on the outside of the carbs.
Inglese has a kit he makes that would point the carbs all in the same direction. This is for linkage simplification but 1) you loose hp (that you feel) and throttle response because 2 of the carbs are facing the wrong way in relation to line of sight to the intake valve and 2) it doesn't work well with center location throttle rods or cables. The throttle wheel mounts outside over the valve cover.
The linkage on multiple Weber carbs is anything but childs play.
I've tried a lot of combinations and discovered many pitfalls.
You want your linkage as simple as possible and as easy as possible to service on the car.
The Pantera is not an easy car to have to do work on while on the car. I can only imagine the Mangusta is even more difficult. As a result on the Pantera it is better to do the linkage a certain way. What works on the bench could be an issue on the car itself.
The linkage also has the tendency of burning up the throttle bearings in the carbs because of all these 90 degree angle loading s and the quality of the factory bearings not being the best.
Even how you mount the carbs to the manifold is important. Using studs makes it difficult to get the carb off without dismantling the linkage. It's like having cylinder heads using studs rather then bolts.
It works fine in the shop but you may find that pulling off the head with studs in the car is impossible or close to it.
If you look at my setup, every carb kicks down within a matter of minutes. Even the fuel lines (which are 304 stainless steel tubing) are built in such a way that they are self supporting and need no individual clamps and are smooth so that you don't get cut up on the abrasiveness of the braided hoses.
The air cleaners have no clamps. The collars are Krazy glued to the velocity stacks. It is easier to remove the entire stack then to unclamp an air cleaner from it, and just replace the assembly with a bare stack when needed or desired.
The nuts that hold the carb tops on are stainless flanged nuts to make it faster to disassemble the carbs.
Just about everything in the assembly is there for a reason.
Ideally it would be better to have the curb idle screw (one) accessible from the outside rather then the inside but that is really a by product of the linkage arms available AND the orientation of the carbs themselves with the fuel lines on the outside of the carbs.
Inglese has a kit he makes that would point the carbs all in the same direction. This is for linkage simplification but 1) you loose hp (that you feel) and throttle response because 2 of the carbs are facing the wrong way in relation to line of sight to the intake valve and 2) it doesn't work well with center location throttle rods or cables. The throttle wheel mounts outside over the valve cover.
Here is one more picture you may find helpful. This is the bracket I needed to make to hold the throttle cable in the right location to clear the distributor.
It isn't fancy but it works. Like they say, necessity is the mother of invention.
Oops! This bracket is upside down in this picture. It won't fit under the distributor this way.
It isn't fancy but it works. Like they say, necessity is the mother of invention.
Oops! This bracket is upside down in this picture. It won't fit under the distributor this way.
Attachments
Images (1)
So true of that bracket! (I would probably have done the same- who's going to see it anyway?)
This looks like one of my cats. We call him, "The Shadow" because he sees everything, hears everything, but everything can't be beautiful. "Only the 'Shadow' knows!"
It winds up under the distributor. It was probably version three or four so patience was a little thin by then.
You can keep a secret right?
It winds up under the distributor. It was probably version three or four so patience was a little thin by then.
You can keep a secret right?
I made a cable pulley for my throttle which worked well on the engine stand.
I am going to change the spring return a little though. I picked up a recoil spring for a weed eater starter which I am going to mount under the pulley instead of using a linear spring.
I am going to change the spring return a little though. I picked up a recoil spring for a weed eater starter which I am going to mount under the pulley instead of using a linear spring.
To Pantera Doug.......thank you very much for the helpful pictures and everyone who helped in this forum.....Russ Hook
That's what it's all about Russ. Glad it helped. Webers ain't easy at all.
Anyone running them definitely needs help.
Anyone running them definitely needs help.