Look for more stampings on the carb body. Look for one in the format R-1234 or R-1234-A or R-1234-AA. Or wait for someone with a '76 FPC to cross that 7-digit Chrysler part number to a Holley carb number!

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

My 1976 Parts Catalogs don't show any Holley 1945's as being in the 387... oarts number range, they are in the 400's... maybe it's a 1975?

I'm not sure. The body has a stamping on it that days "76". I will check again, but I didn't see any other stampings, and definitely none that started with an R. I'll check again to be sure though.

The car was built in the very early 1976 model year however. 9/75 I believe. So if it's truly a '75 carb, maybe that's why? The carb looks original to the car, can't say I have a reason to suspect it isn't.

That kind of "Well, they were using up last year's parts" stuff never happened anywhere near as often as internet guessers like to talk about it, and it very completely stopped happening once Federal emissions certifications were required. No, they did not install any 1975-spec carbs on any 1976-model cars. Doing so would have been a very expensive federal crime.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Guess ya really do learn something every day. Did the policy of not reusing last year's party apply to brakes and accessories too? My car is a special edition yet is lacking some standard features of an SE car.

However to stay on topic, I will double check that number again tonight.

To clarify: regulated items (emissions and safety) were locked in; if a running change was made it had to be documented and certified as complying with the regs -- like that TSB matv91 posted. For another example, the brake system specs changed in the middle of '76-model production to comply with stricter requirements for brake performance.

Deviation from other published specs -- equipment, ornamentation, trim, etc did happen because there was no legal aspect to it. (more and more as Chrysler grew sloppier and ran out of money).

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Explains why my car has four wheel manual drum brakes when it should have power front disc brakes because it's an SE.

I've noticed that the Dart Lite models have different tuning specs (ported vac for dizzy etc) and supposedly could manage 30mpg (according to allpar.com and a few other sites). Why can this car get so much better mileage? I realize it had an aluminum engine block and a 4 speed, but is that all it took to teach the 30s for mileage? Or are those numbers also just grossly inflated? Hell depending on who I talk to, 19mpg is good for a slant and others say it's pathetic.

Marketing exaggerations and highly favorable test parameters.
No it didn't. The Dart Lites and Feather Dusters were cast iron engines with special distributors, carburetors, exhaust lines, and aluminum body panels.
19 MPG is great for a slant six. 30 MPG is possible, but very difficult to achieve, especially with a slant in stock configuration.

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.

Kinda figured those were rather exaggerated figures. Guess everyone that says "if the slant doesn't get over 20 then toss it" is full of hot air!

The numbers were EPA, numbers varied, but my Dad's stock Feather got 30 mpg highway regularly on the flat drive 120 mile round trip to and from work daily, in town was much less...

Before I upgraded the build in mine I had gotten the best of 28 mpg on a worn A-833OD and really high mile engine.

What they don't tell you about this particular car is:

The use of aluminum hood and deck lid webs and bumper inserts put the heavy car down to about the same weight as a 1970-1972 version (no Govt crash protection doors and heavy bumper shocks or inserts in those years, also keep in mind that Darts are a bit heavier than the Valiant/Duster so that's saves the weight of one average male high school Freshman.... I had another racer weigh my car at the track with me in it and a full tank of gas...with the aluminum OD box, dutra duals, hyperpak intake, holley 4 barrel... 260 lbs of me...the car only weighed 3200 lbs...).

The auto version didn't get as good of mileage and the early versions made in the August and September build years only had the 3 speed manual. The A-833OD also incorporated the aluminum case, making it a bit lighter... the OD gear also helped keep the rpm low for highway cruising (the 2.94 gearing and OD only allowed best mileage without lugging the engine on the flat at 55mph+)...

Holley 1945 was calibrated for use in the lower rpm band.

The fuel fill spout was modified so you couldn't fill the gas tank over 14 gallons. (The tank shape/stampings are basically the same since 1968, so depending on the year you could hold 16-18 gallons)...

The distributor was timed to have a crap load of timing mechanically, and most of the time the throttle plate was cracked in vacuum advance...

To suppress the knock from all the advance, the EGR was given a larger orfice so you got more spent cool uncombustible gases in the chamber than any of the other models...

Consequently... given all this what most people will not tell you is: It didn't have the best acceleration (merging in heavy traffic was Russian Roulette, and fat chance on the highway of aggressively getting around a couple of trucks on a 2 lane highway)... MPG also fell off greatly when traveling through a mountain pass (your foot was in it heavy trying to keep it climbing the pass).

Huh. Never knew that about the Lite. Dare I say it sounds slower than mine! Really wish my car would have had the 4 speed OD tranny in it. Seems like that would make it a bit more fun to drive.

Either way.... carb swap was a huge improvement. Can't comment on mileage as the needle and seat got stuck and we're flooding the car like hell (more poor fuel economy!). A new needle and seat along with a float readjustment and it runs beautifully. May play with timing a bit more though, as 6* felt to run nicer than the 8* that it's at. Now just have to adjust the choke. It doesn't like to leave high idle. On a hot day (80*F) I used to be able to start the car, let it idle for 5 seconds on high, then tap the gas and go to curb idle. Now with the 1920 on it, if I do that, it stays on the third step of the fast idle cam till the car is almost fully warm. Choke pull off does work fine as well. I'm guessing my choke rod is a touch too long?

Also: I RE-checked the 1945 in my garage. Here's what the side of the carb says:

6R 5147B G
3870923
7076
0916

Thoughts on anything above?

Bump

Do you have a thick gasket under the carb? A thin one would lead to the choke staying on longer and also heat the carb excessively.

_________________
Joshua

Yes I do. I have the fat insulating gasket under it (I think it's 3/8" thick)

Adjust the fast idle linkage and/or the vacuum operated choke pulloff linkage.

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.