Q-jet vs. Edelbrock, which is better?

[buickgsman]

Hello everyone, I have a question regarding carburetor choice for my engine. It’s a 73 455 block with a comp cams 268H cam, ported stage 1 heads, shorty headers, 2.5 flowmaster exhaust with x pipe, edelbrock aluminum intake and an edelbrock 750 performer carb. I have a nice q-jet off of an 72 455 and I was wondering if this carb would boost performance any. At the rear wheel dyno, with a 2004r automatic in the car it put down 334HP and 444lb.ft of torque. The car runs great, but I'm wondering if switching to the q-jet would boost performance over the edelbrock? Any opinions? Also, I'm swapping in a new Tremec 600 trans, so the engine should perk up a bit on the dyno as there will be no loss through the torque converter.

Thanks,

Bob

[RED GS 1]

Bob,
Swap the carbs out [easy install] and check it out. That's an easy one!:TU:

[pooods]

I say a good Q-Jet will run better. And, gas mileage will improve. Do it and see.

[rivstg1]

Bob, I"m interested in hearing of your opinion on the 2004r tranny behind the BB. I was thinking of doing just the same thing in my Riviera. pro's/con's???? Did you have to have it built up to handle the torque like I've heard you have to do?

Kelly

[Leviathan]

If it's an 800 CFM Q-jet I'd bet on it being better. We know from experience that a 455 performs more with an 800 Q-jet than a 750 Q-jet, and that the Edelbrock Q is very similar to the Rochester Q (Same castings IIRC?).

Anyhow, with that in mind I'd say that if the 800 Q jet was setup properly it should outperform the 750 Edel.

[rivstg1]

Hey Bob, I really really want to know about your 2004r conversion ( cost, driveabliltiy, durability behind the BBB, lower first gear....is it noticeable? Did you need a different torque converter? etc

:confused:

HEEELLLLPPPPPP.......okay, I'm better now