Fwd: Q-JET

I'm forwarding this reply I wrote to the Jeep list. Names have been altered 
to predict the uninformed!


A: I don't have any emoticons or I'd put the rolleyes guy up for this one!
Absolutely NOT the most powerful (don't see any on hemis or old Chev factory
race cars, do ya?) as the top carbed motors pushing out the ponies don't run
them. It's a toss up between Holley and Carter AFB for that one (and if the
Rochesters were so good, why did it take so long for Edelbrock to build a
racing copy of them? I would really like to try one of those on something
one day) It's not as easy to rebuild as a 2100 or 2150 (I'd sooner have the
2100) Even the Carter BBD is easier to play with the the Qjet, but since
people don't understand them, they toss them rather than learn and go with
what they do know.
   It's like the Chev vs Ford vs Dodge vs AMC fights. They all have their
good points and their bad points. If AMC had the kind of money to throw at
building their motors that Edelbrock put into the new heads, there would
have been fantastic performance gains from the factory. Could you imagine
what the AMC Eagle would have been like with about $500 more invested into
building each rig? 4.0L from the factory with auto overdrive and a low range
would've made them THE SUV to have alongside the Jeep Cherokees in the '80s.
How about a factory 4.0L FSJ with 4.10 gears and a 4.0L or better yet, a
4.6L stroker Mexican motor STOCK with fuel injection? They could've been
first, but it's a case of shoulda, woulda coulda now.


--- In FSJ-List@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "g_r" wrote:

The Q-jet is very easy to rebuild. And it's the most powerful,
reliable, and fuel efficient carburetor ever built. Period.  No
contest
>
> lol
> --- In FSJ-List@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,  <yyyc186@xxxx> wrote:
> > 2150 is still the sorriest excuse for a carb ever made.
> >
> > After I get around to putting in the concrete and sub floor
heating
> in my
> > shed I'm putting in a TBI system from CustomEFI.  My waggie will
be
> better
> > for the environment, get consistent mileage, and never again have
a
> > worthless power valve peeing gas into the intake manifold.
> >
> > Had they put Rochester 2 barrels on these rigs from the factory,
> none of us
> > would be complaining about mileage, we would be complaining about
> places to
> > get bushings.  Every Rochester I ever had ran lean.  The cars got
> great
> > mileage, but they did consume a set of plugs about every 10K.
> >
> > Roland