Literally nothing. All I do is work, sleep, and knock down body filler. After that, I apply more body filler so I have something to knock down at a later date. Word on the street is there’s some shenanigans coming up soon, but until then, here’s a carburetor review.
I started out like everyone, running stock garbage because good caurburetion is expensive. After that, I again walked the “everyone” walk by switching to Edelbrock carburetors. They run great right out of the box. That’s their thing, and they do it well. They have arguably the best choke assembly in the industry, making them ideal for a daily driver, but they lack a lot of nice features that Holley utilize, and they also have a tendency to boil fuel. My next move? Holley, of course. The 4160 is a great design, but I went right to the top with the 4150, mainly for the secondary metering block and changeable jets. This is kind of about a Holley, or at least something they engineered.
Quick Fuel is a company that I believe was started by former Holley employees. Basically, they take the Holley 4150 and 4160 carburetors, and improve on the design. The carburetors I’ll be comparing are the Quick Fuel HR-680-VS and the Holley 0-80570. First thing’s first, yes, they’re different sizes, but that doesn’t change what I’m going to compare. Here we go!
First, the Quick Fuel is constructed of aluminum, and the Holley is zinc. The Quick Fuel is really shiny, and way lighter. Holley make an aluminum Street Avenger now, but I don’t have one for a direct comparison. The Quick Fuel has way more machine work done to it, and some edges are sharp enough to draw blood. Most of the Holley is just cast flat, with minimal machine work. The Quick Fuel also has changeable air bleeds, where the Holley ones are permanently pressed in. For what it’s worth, the Quick Fuel has more bracket and cable mounting options than the Holley. If the Holley has what you need, it’s irrelevant, but if not, the Quick Fuel is a lot handier.
The choke assembly is very similar on both, and my Holley never worked great, so we’ll see if the Quick Fuel can pull it off. The Holley is better than a Rochester, but worse than an Edelbrock, if that makes sense. One thing I really like about the Quick Fuel, is the vacuum secondary adjustment. On the Holley, a screw has to be removed, followed by the swapping of a large, cone-shaped spring to a stiffer/softer one (depending on which way one wants to go). It’s not that bad, I guess, but on the Quick Fuel, all that’s involved is the simple turning of an adjustment screw either clockwise or counter-clockwise. Slick! Another bonus? Glass windows that are o-ring sealed and secured with a snap ring for adjusting the float level. The Holley used cheesy, plastic, thread-in plugs that were hard to see through and could not be used for everyday driving. Bottom line? I haven’t run the Quick Fuel, but it was a good value at a similar retail price to the Holley, not to mention the fact that I got it on sale. It comes with a lot of additional features, and it looks slick, too. Only time will tell the performance, though. I’m certainly optimistic.