Great success with Weber/Redline32/36 Single Two barrel setup Options

[Shivers]

I'm amused at a couple of things I read here. First of all is talking about performance. The 914 is a nice little car to putt around in and is a lot of fun but it will never fit my needs for speed so that is not on the table for me,. The second is the blind hate for the carbs even though there is a definite place for them in certain applications. Just refer to my conversion and car as "Bad orange car"

I don't know what you are driving to fit your need for speed, but you should have a look at a few of the outlaws here. Some of the modifieds are running Hellcat horsepower in a car that weighs half what the dodge weighs. Might want to check it out, there not all Moms 1.7 any more.

[AZBanks]

I'm amused at a couple of things I read here. First of all is talking about performance. The 914 is a nice little car to putt around in and is a lot of fun but it will never fit my needs for speed so that is not on the table for me,. The second is the blind hate for the carbs even though there is a definite place for them in certain applications. Just refer to my conversion and car as "Bad orange car"

LOL!!!

Of course a 914 won't meet your need for speed if you do modifications that make it slower and you are bragging about it.

If you don't think the 914 is about performance, you haven't looked at enough of the member cars on this site.

The term "Blind hate" implies there isn't a reason for it. Carbs are easier to work on but they don't run as well as fuel injection. Carbs are inferior to fuel injection, end of story.
Yes, carbs can work but they aren't as good. That's not hate, that is facts.

There is a place/application for carbs; when you don't want to spend the time and money to have a better running car.

OTOH, maybe I, most of the people on this site, EVERY CAR MANUFACTURER ON EARTH, and every top level race team in the world are wrong and carbs ARE better than fuel injection...

[barefoot]

They didn't deliver them with carbs because they had an eye on the smog regulations that were emerging.

A bit more context:

The majority of cars in the 1970's were carb equipped both Foreign and Domestic.

Although emissions standards were part of the Clean Air Act of 1963 and ammended in 1965, there wasn't any serious emissions regulation until 1968 model year. EPA didn't even come into existance until Dec 2, 1970.

The main issue with aircooled is high HC and NOx emissions. High HC at startup when things aren't yet fully expanded and sealing well, and high NOx when running from hot cylinder head temperatures (compared to water pumpers). IIRC VW Beetle did go to FI in 1975 but certainly the early 914's weren't as heavily emissions regulated and probably didn't require FI.

I drove several Mazda's, Datsuns, and Toyota's of that mid to late 70's era with carbs. But being watercooled, they didn't start from the emissions disadvantaged postion of air cooled boxer engines. IRRC all had air injection pumps to reduce unburned HC.

Not a carb hater -- had a 73' 1.7L (later rebuilt to 1911) that ran great on IDF's. But starting was quite a chore if the temperatures went single digit and below.

But at the end of the day . . . FI is superior from a mixture and emissions control perspective.

Glad OP's happy with car -- just drive & enjoy (IMG:style_emoticons/default/driving.gif)

VW started using the Bosch D-Jet in Fastbacks & Squarebacks in 1968 to meet US immersion standards. As said above air-cooled needed more help than water cooled

[andys]

I'm with you to a point. A 1.7 has just enough performance to be fun. If a carb shaves performance off an already mediocre performance engine, it is worth noting.

I really don't think there is that much "blind hate" for carbs on the forum. I have carbs on mine for much the same reason as you. Back in the 80s I got tired of delays and roadside repairs caused by an aging FI. No mechanics in my area knew anything about these systems and the Internet wasn't a thing then so I didn't have access the DIY info out there now. The sensible thing was to carb the engine.

When judging reactions on this forum to carbs, we should remember there is a lot of hype out there about carbs being an "upgrade" to FI and a lot of people want to bolt them on to improve performance. They aren't an upgrade but they may be the right choice when various tradeoffs are considered. I have no problem at all with the single progressive carbs but as was already mentioned, those long intakes can be a problem. They made my car about as unreliable as the FI it replaced during certain times of the year, but they may work fine for other folks. Just enjoy your car. It looks nice! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)

Similar experience here. The EFI left me stranded a few times (in the mid 70's), even after dealer troubleshooting. Upon complete exasperation, I switched to a carb....My room mate had a new Holley fuel pump, and the carburetor shop (Remember those?) down the street had a single barrel Ford/Holley carb for cheap. One afternoon, and installation done! Never left me stranded after that. And you know what, it ran pretty darned good, actually. Oh, it was a '72 2.0.
Andys

[98101]

Similar experience here. The EFI left me stranded a few times (in the mid 70's), even after dealer troubleshooting. Upon complete exasperation, I switched to a carb....My room mate had a new Holley fuel pump, and the carburetor shop (Remember those?) down the street had a single barrel Ford/Holley carb for cheap. One afternoon, and installation done! Never left me stranded after that. And you know what, it ran pretty darned good, actually. Oh, it was a '72 2.0.
Andys

My Dellortos are running fine now, though I have a bit of a worry how they'd do if I took another drive up to Flagstaff.

[Mike D.]

I ran one in my bus for a while, 1911cc (1.7 w/ big bore kit). I modified this Air cleaner to seal the bottom and added the warm air set up to avoid icing. I got the CSP version of a 123 distributor. Cold and hot start was never a problem and 5K Lb bus got 18mpg.