Holley 2 Barrel carburetor, 2300 version not Weber / Holley version on a 1987 2.0?

[apache07x]

Lostforawhile I have heard different reasons for there being 2 vacuum ports on the distributor and not sure which is correct? I am assuming your correct in stating that one just retards timing on start-up and doesn't really need to be hooked up full time. With that assumption can you please tell me which port on the distributor is supposed to be hooked up to vacuum all of the time? Toward front of motor or rear? No one can seem to say which needs to be hooked up to vacuum full time? The hesitation at 3500 rpms or so does feel timing related more-so than fuel and if the dizzy is hooked up wrong well there I go. I would really appreciate if you could tell me which one is the correct one to have hooked up?

Roodoo as far as running out of fuel like with a Weber this one doesn't do it. I have a center hung fuel bowl which is the same setup I run on my Ford Mustang 4 cylinder I use on the circle track which obviously gets a lot more jostling around than our street machines.

I think with the TV cable I'm not having to accelerate as hard as I did with the OEM carburetor or the Weber and that's why I'm not having problems? With the Weber and OEM carburetors I was at 1/3 to 1/2 throttle at 60. I don't even give this Holley half throttle to get going unless I'm hot dogging it and cruising at 60 I'm at about an 1/8 of throttle. There is the difference probably? I used to get the kicking in and out on the converter with the OEM all of the time. The Weber well I didn't keep that **** on there long enough to notice but it probably would have too.

I feel the Holley 2300 series is a far superior carburetor. I know some people will say otherwise but that's my opinion and I've had both, just on this Honda as a matter of fact, and there is zero comparison. The Holley runs a lot better. The Weber did have good acceleration from a stop and that's all I can give it. However, overall running down the road the Weber was worse running than the OEM carburetor. Seriously!!!! Maybe I got a bad one but if that's the case every one I've ever got has been a bad one.

I know people will think I changed a lot of stuff to get the Holley running right but I didn't. I made an adapter plate took the carburetor off of my race car and bolted it to this Honda and it ran perfect. As a matter of fact on a dead stop it would squeal the front tires. The 350 cfm street carburetor I have on it now won't do that but I'm not complaining this carburetor runs, drives, idles and accelerates very well.....but it's no 500 cfm race carburetor . However, I'll take the 350's fuel economy over the 500's sheer power any day. Plus I am still tuning on this 350 when I got time to so I'm not done. My race carburetor on the other hand well I've had lot's of time at the race track to get it dialed in to be very responsive to foot input plus that's what it's made to do. The 350 is supposed to be a good running street carburetor and that is exactly what it does.


I remember someone saying I would get awful mileage and no drive-ability out of this Holley. I'm not picking at you by any means but not only have I gotten good mileage but I've exceeded, by far I may add, the mileage I got with the Weber. I'm getting better mileage with this Holley in town than I did with the Weber on the highway for the 3 or 4 god awful weeks I had it on there. Drive-ability well like I said earlier in my rant ZERO comparison. The Holley is far superior, in my humble opinion, in every way.

Thanks for your comments and suggestions guys hope one of you can tell me which vacuum port on the dizzy is the right one to have hooked up?

[lostforawhile]

i can't remember off the top of my head, it's probably in a sticky in the carb section , anyone?

[cygnus x-1]

The Holley runs a lot better. The Weber did have good acceleration from a stop and that's all I can give it. However, overall running down the road the Weber was worse running than the OEM carburetor. Seriously!!!! Maybe I got a bad one but if that's the case every one I've ever got has been a bad one.

Which Weber(s) are you comparing to? When I was running a DGAS 38 the driveability was absolutely fantastic. Mileage was around 25ish with fairly aggressive driving, which is how I tended to drive it most of the time. It took a fair amount of tuning with a WBO2 to get it that way though.

Thanks for your comments and suggestions guys hope one of you can tell me which vacuum port on the dizzy is the right one to have hooked up?

One port is for normal vac advance and the other is for cold start advance. You can use both or just the normal advance and plug the cold port. To find which one is which you can try each one with the engine idling and see how the timing is affected.


C|

[apache07x]

Which Weber(s) are you comparing to? When I was running a DGAS 38 the driveability was absolutely fantastic. Mileage was around 25ish with fairly aggressive driving, which is how I tended to drive it most of the time. It took a fair amount of tuning with a WBO2 to get it that way though.




One port is for normal vac advance and the other is for cold start advance. You can use both or just the normal advance and plug the cold port. To find which one is which you can try each one with the engine idling and see how the timing is affected.


C|

I was running the Weber 32/36 DGEV brand new out of the box. The one that is the same as the Holley 5200 that came on the Mustang and Pinto 4 and 6 cylinders. While it was the first actual Weber I dealt with I've worked on plenty of Pintos, Mustangs, Aries and other dodges that had the 5200 on them and they have all been horrible. I think their junk and no one is going to convince me different. Not even the president of Weber of America who I've sent numerous emails back and forth with trying to figure out what was wrong with the one I had. I finally sent it back. Millage was horrible, surged at highway speeds just would not run for me at all I'd fix one symptom and something else would falter. IDK maybe I'm just a Holley man and I know how to work on them and the Weber wasn't going to make me happy no matter what. But I did have a very bad experience with Weber and it's left a horrible taste in my mouth. I can't even say Weber in my house or my fiance goes to swinging lol. Not really but almost.



Thank you and I believe I got it figured out on the advance. Seems to be the one closest to the distributor or the rear one looking from the front of the engine and it likes full vacuum on it more than the timed vacuum coming from the carburetor. Either manifold or timed carburetor vacuum works but the manifold vacuum works the best on mine. It works well with both hooked up too I guess its a matter of personal preference. Bottom end seems to work better with both hooked up but with just the rear one hooked up the hesitation is gone in the 3500 to 4500 range. I'm assuming the motor likes the extra timing on take off but not in the middle RPM range. I think I will run both I like the better take off myself. Wish there was a way to drop the timed vacuum off of the carburetor in the higher RPMs so I could have my cake and eat it too!

[2oodoor]

Ive run several different Webers and never had any problems other than having to tweak the air mixture a small turn to get best idle during weather temp changes, about fifteen second job.

I am very pleased to hear your succussfull results with your Holley, seriously.
I was catching up on reading this thread and was going to say just tee off the and use both fittings on the advance "lol" may the strong survive.

I love my 38 weber which is the same one cygnus is talking about, I bought his.
I hope you continue to post your results. Your old school too but using a wideband would be fun tuning your 350.

[lostforawhile]

Which Weber(s) are you comparing to? When I was running a DGAS 38 the driveability was absolutely fantastic. Mileage was around 25ish with fairly aggressive driving, which is how I tended to drive it most of the time. It took a fair amount of tuning with a WBO2 to get it that way though.




One port is for normal vac advance and the other is for cold start advance. You can use both or just the normal advance and plug the cold port. To find which one is which you can try each one with the engine idling and see how the timing is affected.


C|

one is for advance and one retards the timing on startup, i just can't remember which is which, you don't want both hooked up. if you have an MSD box with timing controls, many of the boxes do the same thing it just makes it easier to get the engine to start initially

[cygnus x-1]

one is for advance and one retards the timing on startup, i just can't remember which is which, you don't want both hooked up. if you have an MSD box with timing controls, many of the boxes do the same thing it just makes it easier to get the engine to start initially

Hmm, my service manual says it advances the timing. I've also verified it by looking at how the plunger moves when vacuum is applied. But this is for a Prelude (A18A1) so I suppose it could be different on the A20.


Anyway you want manifold vacuum and not timed vacuum. The amount of advance applied is inversely proportional to manifold pressure. At idle and low throttle the timing is advanced to improve fuel mileage and driveability. As the throttle is opened more the manifold pressure drops thereby lowering the extra advance. At full throttle there is NO advance applied. Keep in mind this is completely independent of the mechanical (centrifugal) advance which is RPM dependent, and increases with RPM.

I can tell you from my own experience that these engines LOVE off idle and low throttle advance. Mid and high throttle timing seems to not be so critical. One other thing you might check is if the diaphragms leak. Every one that I have ever seen leaks at least a little bit. If it leaks bad it might be affecting things.


C|

[lostforawhile]

Hmm, my service manual says it advances the timing. I've also verified it by looking at how the plunger moves when vacuum is applied. But this is for a Prelude (A18A1) so I suppose it could be different on the A20.


Anyway you want manifold vacuum and not timed vacuum. The amount of advance applied is inversely proportional to manifold pressure. At idle and low throttle the timing is advanced to improve fuel mileage and driveability. As the throttle is opened more the manifold pressure drops thereby lowering the extra advance. At full throttle there is NO advance applied. Keep in mind this is completely independent of the mechanical (centrifugal) advance which is RPM dependent, and increases with RPM.

I can tell you from my own experience that these engines LOVE off idle and low throttle advance. Mid and high throttle timing seems to not be so critical. One other thing you might check is if the diaphragms leak. Every one that I have ever seen leaks at least a little bit. If it leaks bad it might be affecting things.


C|

exactly, these dizzys are calibrated for manifold vacuum, even the setup of the mechanical advance takes this into account, some dizzys use timed vacuum ports, but they are calibrated differently , my SU carbs have a timed vacuum port off of one carb, but it will be blocked off in my case

[2oodoor]

that is something I had a hard time adjusting to, using manifold vacuum for the vac advance. Every other vehicle except a few weird smog controlled Fords have used carb ported vacuum to make the vac advance come in at off throttle and not on at idle.
I never did hook up the vac advance on the LX, just have the base timing up a good bit and it seems happy.
Also I am not sure if the carbed dist. are made like the FI ones in that the "breaker plate" is set on a ball bearing turnstyle. Cleaning all that up and some nice machine oil on it made a world of difference on my FI car. Time to do the same with the other one.
I did have a ghost intermitant issue on one of the Hondas I had where it turned out to be the vac advance leaking vacuum. This possibly could cause that 3500 rpm nudge youre feeling too Steve. My issue was at idle though, it would randomly just fall out stalling. It was like the diaphragm would settle in the housing crooked and let it leak by, more so than being busted or having a hole in it.

[apache07x]

Just took a 100 mile plus highway drive for the first time since I got the bugs worked out for the most part....28.1 mpg

[apache07x]

Just took a 100 mile plus highway drive for the first time since I got the bugs worked out for the most part....28.1 mpg

That's as good as the OEM carburetor on 87 octane and pushing a GT front clip now too I can't complain

[TotaledTL]

I was running the Weber 32/36 DGEV brand new out of the box. The one that is the same as the Holley 5200 that came on the Mustang and Pinto 4 and 6 cylinders. While it was the first actual Weber I dealt with I've worked on plenty of Pintos, Mustangs, Aries and other dodges that had the 5200 on them and they have all been horrible. I think their junk and no one is going to convince me different. Not even the president of Weber of America who I've sent numerous emails back and forth with trying to figure out what was wrong with the one I had. I finally sent it back. Millage was horrible, surged at highway speeds just would not run for me at all I'd fix one symptom and something else would falter. IDK maybe I'm just a Holley man and I know how to work on them and the Weber wasn't going to make me happy no matter what. But I did have a very bad experience with Weber and it's left a horrible taste in my mouth. I can't even say Weber in my house or my fiance goes to swinging lol. Not really but almost.

Thank you and I believe I got it figured out on the advance. Seems to be the one closest to the distributor or the rear one looking from the front of the engine and it likes full vacuum on it more than the timed vacuum coming from the carburetor. Either manifold or timed carburetor vacuum works but the manifold vacuum works the best on mine. It works well with both hooked up too I guess its a matter of personal preference. Bottom end seems to work better with both hooked up but with just the rear one hooked up the hesitation is gone in the 3500 to 4500 range. I'm assuming the motor likes the extra timing on take off but not in the middle RPM range. I think I will run both I like the better take off myself. Wish there was a way to drop the timed vacuum off of the carburetor in the higher RPMs so I could have my cake and eat it too!

This had me worried because I was in the process of putting on a Weber when I read it. Completed it yesterday & so far it's running fine. Idle is much smoother. Hope to post some pics, etc. real soon.

[apache07x]

This had me worried because I was in the process of putting on a Weber when I read it. Completed it yesterday & so far it's running fine. Idle is much smoother. Hope to post some pics, etc. real soon.

Good luck with it. I hope it runs well for you. Personally I've never had good luck with them so I refuse to ever run one or attempt to again. I'll walk first. But hey lots of people on here have had good luck with them but I've shown there is a better alternative. Holley carburetors are a lot more readily available, I got proof they get as good or better mileage if set up right and plenty of power. Try to do a search on ebay for a Holley 2 barrel and a weber of any kind and you'll see Holley is the king!

[g.frost]

28 mpg highway, must be an automatic.

[cygnus x-1]

Good luck with it. I hope it runs well for you. Personally I've never had good luck with them so I refuse to ever run one or attempt to again. I'll walk first. But hey lots of people on here have had good luck with them but I've shown there is a better alternative. Holley carburetors are a lot more readily available, I got proof they get as good or better mileage if set up right and plenty of power. Try to do a search on ebay for a Holley 2 barrel and a weber of any kind and you'll see Holley is the king!

Holley's will certainly be more available in the US.

It is entirely possible you got a bad Weber. From what I've heard the newer Weber castings are not so great since they started making them in Spain instead of Italy. And actually according to Roodoo the 38/38 I sold him has a casting flaw that I never knew about. Fortunately he found a way to fix it.

As far as those Pintos and Mustangs go, well, you can pretty much guarantee those carbs were made to a price point and not to a quality point. So it's no surprise they suck.


C|

[apache07x]

28 mpg highway, must be an automatic.

Yes it is an automatic and it's got the aftermarket GT front on it as well which is comparable to pushing a wall going down the road. But you think 28 is a bad number?

[apache07x]

Holley's will certainly be more available in the US.

It is entirely possible you got a bad Weber. From what I've heard the newer Weber castings are not so great since they started making them in Spain instead of Italy. And actually according to Roodoo the 38/38 I sold him has a casting flaw that I never knew about. Fortunately he found a way to fix it.

As far as those Pintos and Mustangs go, well, you can pretty much guarantee those carbs were made to a price point and not to a quality point. So it's no surprise they suck.


C|

I could have got a bad casting. I blew casting sand or something out of it several times. Not sure what it was but it looked almost like beach sand? Yeah I'm sure the 5200's were not built as well as a normal Weber would be since they were a leased / rented casting by Holley who probably didn't care and wasn't happy about having to using them. I suppose my experience with them all as a whole has left me jaded a bit. I' like the Holley 2300 series, I'm get 28 mpg on the highway and happy as can be about it. I really don't think 28 mpg is a bad number is it? I probably can get it a little better with some more tuning on both the carburetor and timing but why bother when it runs well and I'm not going to get a whole lot more out of it?

[apache07x]

Roodoo - I know you were saying something about using a 4 barrel. What were you thinking about a 390 Holley or something like that? I guess if you used a small one and kept your foot out of it you would get decent mileage....probably better than a 2 barrel?

[cygnus x-1]

28MPG is not spectacular but it's certainly not bad either. So much of your fuel mileage depends on how you drive, the type of driving, and even the weather, so it's hard to compare to other people's mileage. You could probably tune it and get more but if you don't drive a lot of miles it might not be worth it. You would need to work the numbers and calculate how long it would take to recoup any more investment in it.

Anybody know what the original EPA mileage ratings were for these cars?


C|

[apache07x]

28MPG is not spectacular but it's certainly not bad either. So much of your fuel mileage depends on how you drive, the type of driving, and even the weather, so it's hard to compare to other people's mileage. You could probably tune it and get more but if you don't drive a lot of miles it might not be worth it. You would need to work the numbers and calculate how long it would take to recoup any more investment in it.

Anybody know what the original EPA mileage ratings were for these cars?


C|

Below are the EPA numbers I found and I'm getting 21 in town and 28 highway so that's the same in town and a tiny bit better on the highway.

1987 Honda Accord 4 cyl, 2.0 L, Automatic 4-spd, Regular Gasoline

21 City

23 Combined

27 Highway

This is the link where I found them.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymod...a_Accord.shtml

[2oodoor]

Roodoo - I know you were saying something about using a 4 barrel. What were you thinking about a 390 Holley or something like that? I guess if you used a small one and kept your foot out of it you would get decent mileage....probably better than a 2 barrel?

yes something like a 570 avenger or 390 4150 series, I don't know if those would get better mpg but would be more interesting.

28 is not a bad number at all, Im sure you can get more with some fine tuning on the car itself as well as the tune, but what the heck take a break and enjoy the fruits of your labor a while it's getting hot.

Another alternative 2 bbl I was wondering would work, a Mercarb that comes on a mercruiser 4 cyl. Slightly resembles a GM Rochester 2G. About the only one that hasn't been documented here as trail.

[apache07x]

yes something like a 570 avenger or 390 4150 series, I don't know if those would get better mpg but would be more interesting.

28 is not a bad number at all, Im sure you can get more with some fine tuning on the car itself as well as the tune, but what the heck take a break and enjoy the fruits of your labor a while it's getting hot.

Another alternative 2 bbl I was wondering would work, a Mercarb that comes on a mercruiser 4 cyl. Slightly resembles a GM Rochester 2G. About the only one that hasn't been documented here as trail.

I thought about a Rochester but there are so many variations plus I just worked on the Holleys so much with the race car their familiar. I didn't think 28 was bad either especially after looking at the EPA numbers. With a little more tuning, it smells a bit rich still, and paint on it to slicken it up some I'm sure will help. The front bumper I have on it is no where near as aerodynamic as stock I'm sure and with just primer on it......I figure with a good paint job and some wax I'm good for a bit more mpg's with just that being done. Roodoo I'm not the only one who's enjoying it. My fiance came and got it from me at work today to do a small road trip with it...lol so it must be running good.

[g.frost]

The high geared DX 5 spd manual transmission makes a difference in gas mileage. In 5th gear at 65mph is turning 2600rpm. (4th gear at 75mph is 3500rpm)

At 65-70mph on the highway it is no problem getting 34+mpg any day every day. I get 28mpg in summer just driving around town, not quite as good in the winter.
No, not hot footing the old thing, but not trying to hyper-mile either.

I've had the car since new, know how it's supposed to run, still on the oem carb. 155k miles, I've had some issues with it but carb's never been opened up.

(ok better shut up or it will decide it's time to mess up on me)

[apache07x]

The high geared DX 5 spd manual transmission makes a difference in gas mileage. In 5th gear at 65mph is turning 2600rpm. (4th gear at 75mph is 3500rpm)

At 65-70mph on the highway it is no problem getting 34+mpg any day every day. I get 28mpg in summer just driving around town, not quite as good in the winter.
No, not hot footing the old thing, but not trying to hyper-mile either.

I've had the car since new, know how it's supposed to run, still on the oem carb. 155k miles, I've had some issues with it but carb's never been opened up.

(ok better shut up or it will decide it's time to mess up on me)

My OEM carb never did run quite right but it did get good mileage at first. I got the car at around 150k and at around 188k it just gave up was blowing black smoke and literally flooding out at stop lights / signs, mileage like an SUV... In hindsight maybe I should have just got a rebuilt OEM. The reason I did it at first was to try and save a few $, my step dad who is a retired mechanic said the OEM carbs were always trouble and it just cleaned up all of the mess of vacuum lines and controls from under the hood.

[g.frost]

Don't want to de-rail your thread on the Holly here. May be it can be tuned a bit leaner for better mpg, but should compare to an automatic to be realistic about it. A smog test will tell how lean you are running....

I had to replace the choke opener and a thermovalve on my carb. Runaway Idle and running rich. The choke wants to close if there is a vac leak anywhere in this part of the vac system. Very bad to run an engine like this; it causes oil wash down, cylinder/ring wear, deposits, and fuel dilution in the oil.