"Today's carburetor is a triumph of engineering research and development with outstanding research and development." I love it. Just sheer awesome quote really shows you the optimism and "science can do dis" attitude at the time.
Actually the Rochester Quadrajet is more complex to tune than any of the FI 's from 57 to 65. My brother had a 62 fi on a 327 350 horse hydraulic lifter powertrain. 2 screws on the fuel meter and 2 screws on the air meter had to be balanced using a manifold pressure gauge for optimum performance. Not hard to tune just a little patience and time.
Not many knew how to work on them so they put carburetors on them and threw them away .. I am sure that if anyone bothers to purchase a GM Service manual . They would be easy to tune.. Stock they ran too lean.. adjust it a tad richer for better response and higher horse power.. Just like any modern car engine today to meet emissions standards it is running too lean.. Also it was a $600 option on a $2,200 car.. Today you can buy a modern system that looks like the old Rochester..
@@mikeskidmore6754 By todays standards they are easy enough to tune. But back then fuel injection was a completely new concept. The biggest problem was guys didn't understand the concept and customers didn't want to pay them to tinker. So in the secondhand market most got shelved like you said.
I have that on my 1964 Corvette. People talked crap about them. I LOVE IT. Change the damn Diaphragm seal when it’s worn out. People don’t like things when stupidity seeks in🏁🏁😎
I am so happy these films are still around. I hope those viewing these today don't think the picture was as bad as we see today. Film was/is an incredible medium and done properly is much better than digital. Unfortunately film was celluloid (organic) and unless properly cared for tended to degrade.
Sorry, but no, it didn't do that. There is no barometric capsule device on these systems at all. Never-the-less, they were, and still are a brilliant design in the context of the times.
Back in the day that system was often removed and relegated to a shelf, replaced with a carb. Not many mechanics knew how to work on the system. In 1958 Pontiac used the exact same system, making them extremely rare. I knew a fellow that had two Pontiac systems on a shelf. It was not a timed injection with a single squirt per revolution, it sprayed constantly into all the cylinders. VW used exactly the same concept, they probably bought the system from GM or Bendix.
Rochester and Bendix are / were GM brands. It's interesting that Bendix sold their Electrojector only to Chrysler, and it was a total failure. It got sold to Bosch, who finally produced their electronic fuel injection in 1967 for a VW
@@paulkirkland1535 I posted about that on Jay Leno's video on the injected Chrysler 300D restored by Per Blyxt: There is a car with its original Bendix Electrojector system working. It's a DeSoto, virtually the same car as the Chrysler 300D, here: www.allpar.com/cars/desoto/electrojector.html The owner got the 'computer' working by replacing transistors and capacitors with modern faster-acting equivalents. It seems the Bendix Electrojector is truly a pre-curser of the modern efi - produced way before the system was ready Here's a commentary on the fiasco which the Bendix system as produced was: www.chrysler300club.com/tech/efi/jgrad.html
This systems biggest enemy was ignorance. Same with most carburetors. People tinkered around on these units and threw them away back in the day. It was way ahead of its time.
They were common in the 50s; they were moved in the early 60s after safety advocates pointed out how dangerous they were on the dash. Also, mirrors were screwed into position; there were no breakaway mounts such as we have now.
You're spoiled to today's smooth digital audio. In this clip both audio and video came from film that was produced over 55 years ago, and shown many times on projectors. Also, film deteriorates.
RaymoAZ feedaboo The dash mount rearview mirror only appeared on on a few early hardtops. It was eliminated after about one month of production due to excessive vibration.
Just imagine if they had figured out how to time it like sequential injection, i suppose you could drive something like that off the camshaft? It would have halved the fuel consumption against a dual quad car allong with way more than 1hp per cube inch😮
@Stuurm yea, this was mechanical fuel injection which, while more efficient than carburetors, was less effective than electronic fuel injective, which is more responsive, is able to adjust throttle response more accurately, and can provide a better, cleaner burn. Electronic Fuel injection was very primitive in the '50's-'70's because the wires/electronic control unit were very weak and susceptible to engine noise/heat. Mechanical fuel injection had linkage problems etc.
