Few things to cover:
- the orifice size in post 134 looks a little bigger than the one I encountered in the 9333, but similar design. This might explain the smaller sec jets in the CS TQ because that would slow down the dashpot release, make the AV function like a choke blade & richen the mixture.
- the CS TQ has the IFR being fed from the fuel bowl, not from he main well AFTER passing through the m/jet like most other carbs. Only other carbs I am aware of that have this are DCOE & IDA Weber carbs.
- 4500 Hs have 2" sec bores from memory; plus a venturi. TQ/QJ have 2.25" bores & no venturi to cause a restriction. This explains the larger the larger TQ jets, & possibly the small holes in the sec discharge tubes might have an influence on the jet size.
- the top section of the AV on 6000 & 9000 TQs is bent forward. This section was straight on the CS series. Do not know why, but suspect AV/fuel flow action started earlier on the CS.
- QJ/TQ have the booster ring in the primaries, Hs don't. I guess that changes a lot of things in regard to jet & AB size & position.
- the 9333 carb had 101 pri jets. That carb had a horrendous 3/4/1" exh thick heated spacer under it, I think EGR related.
- have seen the C&S carb, it is not new. There is a company that specialises in VW engines that converts Dellorto carbs to a spray bar system with claims of more HP.
- in the TQ/QJ/H dyno test quoted above, it would be interesting to know if all of the TQ tuning tricks were used to maximise output. Only 5 hp difference between the H & the TQ. Could the TQ have done better? On the TQ, these tuning changes could have been tried, but were they: WOT position of the sec blades; being so large they can influence distribution & air flow. WOT position of the AV, which is adjustable. There are a few different AV dashpots available, different spring rates.