<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto">There’s some evidence that they went for the 2” Days because harmonics at higher revs caused the pistons to drop in 1.75” carbs. That leaned out the mixed and burnt holes in the engine pistons. The larger carbs could handle the resonance and stay stable. <br id="lineBreakAtBeginningOfSignature"><div dir="ltr">Sent from a small screen, please excuse any typos. </div><div dir="ltr"><br><blockquote type="cite">On Oct 5, 2024, at 13:14, Gordon Reddy via Rovernet <rovernet@rovernet.org> wrote:<br><br></blockquote></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:large">Hi All,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:large"> I am sure this question has been regularly posted in the past but here it is again. Why the 2" carbs on a 2 litre engine? Rover never did anything without a good reason. I believe I read somewhere in the dim, dark past it was because of a lean spot in the rpm range???</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:large">Cheers,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:large">Gord<br></div></div>
<span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Rovernet mailing list</span><br><span>Rovernet@rovernet.org</span><br><span>http://rovernet.org/mailman/listinfo/rovernet_rovernet.org</span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>