Holley 80496-1 carb

[c9zx]

Holley called it a 950 CFM carb. I have seen that rating debated and questioned many times. Does someone know what the CFM is? Does anyone have experience with it? If so, what are your impressions? Possible home is a pretty aggressive 462 in a 1966 Cyclone street car. Thanks, Chuck (S)

[thatdarncat]

I don’t know anyone that has actually flowed one under “standard” test conditions and shared the results, possibly someone has. You can compare the published throttle bore & Venturi sizes of the #80496-1 950 HP with something like the good old List #4781 850 double pumper & List #4779 750 double pumper. The #80496-1 has the throttle bore size of the 850 DP, but the Venturi size of the 750 DP. But then you have to consider that the 950 HP has a contoured main body, and doesn’t have the choke airhorn of the classic double pumpers. How much does that possibly increase air flow?

Pretty sure it was Barry R. that told us that at some point Holley realized some of their competitors were likely picking CFM “sizes” based more on marketing than actual standardized testing, and probably joined the club on some models. Keep in mind under the right conditions it can flow 950 CFM, but then what would the “850” flow under those same conditions?

I have a #80496 (original version, no “dash” 1), and have run it many times on my 11.50 bracket car 428, it works fine. My racing buddy has one on his 750 hp ~430 c.i. SBF bracket car that runs 9.60’s and it works fine on his too. I ran some back to back tests on my car with a #4781 850 DP at the strip many years ago, if I remember correctly the 850 DP ran pretty much the same ET, but it had about 1 more mph in the 1/4, but that’s just by memory. Of course sometimes a little more throttle response off the starting line can balance out a tiny bit more top end mph, in overall ET.

[c9zx]

Kevin, Thanks for the reply and good information. I suppose the next question becomes, is it right sized for the 462, 6600 max RPM engine in a 1966 Cyclone, 3.91:1 geared, 4 speed, street car?  I have a 80496-1 carb, but I don't know if I use it, will I be leaving significant power on the table. It worked well on a 408 CID Clevor, MANY years ago, but the 54 cubic inch difference makes me wonder. Any and all input will be appreciated. Thanks, Chuck

[fryedaddy]

i think the quick fuel 950 q series has bigger ventures and flows as advertised.

[Barry_R]

The 950HP was the first Holley in the HP series, and the "950" in the name was not a flow value - but a marketing driven label. 
It was essentially a completely updated race oriented main body with the venturi sizing of a 750 on top of an 850 throttle body - a common race builder combination of the era.

Air flow was - IIRC - somewhere in the 830ish range.  I had a very early - pre-release - one on my car for a while.  The 850 double pumper I had was a hair quicker at the track, but the 950HP was a really nice carb for driving around and cruising - much nicer at part throttle.  I think the original racer target was oval track more so than drag racers.  I do believe that the original design had significant David Braswell input, working with Marvin Benoit who would go on to become one of the founders of Quick Fuel Technology.

[My427stang]

I'd expect it to run pretty well on a 462, and if it's a good carb, I'd start with it.  It's at least a 750 and they can pull upper 500s with a deep breathing combo

Different animal, but I did a healthy all-iron 457 CJ a while back with a TX.  It made 550 HP with 2x 465s, 2x 600s, and 2x750s.  The bigger carbs made more peak torque, but it's surprising what smaller cabs can do.

[e philpott]

I have the annular booster version 950HP but it looks like a regular 850 body to me with very little taper at the venturi , it does have nice throttle blades with button head screws compared to the 850, I use mine on the Dove spider and got annular boosters because of the huge plenum

[Tommy-T]

I ran a 950HP list 80496 on the 454 inch Hi Riser that was in my Mustang. It was a very early version that didn't have screw in air bleeds. The car was very streetable with what I'd call a mild camshaft but rather high compression. Ran 10.90's and drove all around the Los Angeles area.
Later, when I built another 454 inch FE with an 8-71 blower, I bought another 80496 and ran 2 of them on that motor.
By far the sweetest carb I've ever run as far as street manners along with top end power.

[c9zx]

Many thanks to everyone who responded. Barry, You confirmed what I had heard for many years from a race engine shop. Dave seems to get it right a lot, for a long time. So, should i Dyno it with something larger, feeding my ego, and run  the 80496 on the street, or something else? This may make me sound petty, but who has not smiled when the number is better than predicted. If it is just me, feel free to say so. I appreciate all of the great information and advice I have received here. Please continue to share what you know. Thanks, Chuck (S)

[bluef100fe]

I ran one of those 80496… I believe it was a -1 with screw in bleeds, I got it second hand, worked great from my pump gas 390 in my truck on up to the 514 making north of 750hp in the pulling truck, damn thing drove great on every combination we put it on with minimal fuss. In hindsight, I should never have sold it, lol.

[c9zx]

Cody, Thanks for information. Based on what everyone has said, I'm going to run it. My thanks to all. Chuck (S)