I hold JB Weld close to my heart, but it won't last in this application. Fuel will degrade it over time. The cast iron welds nicely with a wire welder.

_________________

Super Six Conversion Stromberg

What's the spec on the wire you used? What kind of shielding? Did you pre-heat it? Cooling?

_________________
'15 Chrysler 200S V6
'74 Duster 360, factory 4 speed car

1018 cold rolled, .035 wire. Nothing special.

The gas was 75/25 Nit./ Argon. Or you can use straight CO2.
No pre heat and air cool.

_________________

Super Six Conversion Stromberg

Updated and fixed the pictures. I can't believe this was 15 years ago...

The Super Six intakes are getting pricey on Ebay. You could weld a flange for another type of carb so that an adapter isn't needed. I have an aluminum 1 barrel intake that I got from an '87 D150, its cast rather than electron beam welded. I would like to do this mod with it.

I've got a couple of cast iron 1 bbl intakes, and will have another one soon, after I get the current engine out of my truck, this is an older one that is old enough to not ever had an EGR valve, I'd like to convert one to a parallel 2 barrel intake just because.
I think that this has been talked about elsewhere before / but besides adapting linkage to be able to operate the carb in the new orientation,
with all else being the same, (same carb, long block all the same) I'm wondering about performance difference between carb mounting positions?

I am in the stages of modifying an aluminum intake for ether a dual-jet or Quadra-jet.

Planning on putting a divider between the front 3 and rear 3 cylinders while I'm at it.

No idea if it will make an improvement in low speed fuel efficiency, but I can always cut it out later if need be.

It has been pointed out to me that in this article I neglected to mention that the original factory intakes do not put the carb perfectly perpendicular to the intake. There is an angle to the carb pad. When I did this conversion I didn't bother with measuring and reproducing the angle. However, if oe is doing this process and intending to keep a carb, the angle of the carb mounting pad should be taken into consideration.

I noticed that on my stock 1974 manifold, but I thought it was just loose machining tolerances. What's the reason for the tilt? I don't believe I noticed the same tilt on my Super Six manifold.

Most dividers - the effective ones - seek to segregate cylinders based on firing order and not on physical location.

Why is the Slant Six pad angled? It's so when you leave the line and your front wheels are 3 feet in air, the carb is sitting level.

Look again: yep, it's got a tilted carb mount, same as the 1bbl. It's so the carb sits level despite the downward-rearward tilt of the engine as installed in the vehicle.
Hee! Good one. (whoever wants to spend a second or two thinking about the firing order of the Slant-6 engine will also get to have a nice little laugh about GregCon's joke, then they can whistle a happy little tune as they set to work dividing the front 3/rear 3, knowing they're doing it right)

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

I read Dave York's article a while ago and decided to try in my 225 slant rebuild.
I've followed Dave's approach fairly closely but have run into an issue with the 2 barrel carb as it rotates the throttle blades in the opposite direction to what the single barrel and the car's throttle linkage does. I'm not keen on cutting up the throttle shaft.
I noticed in the pic in the article the carb is reversed on the manifold(carb linkage on opposite side of the carb), so I might try an extension rod with universal on the existing throttle linkage to reach the for side of the carb which will allow it to rotate the throttle blades to right way.
I have some pics of the work, but I'm having trouble attaching them to this post due to the file size.