Thank you, VintageMopar, for mentioning known problems with Carter AFBs and Edelbrock carburetors based on the AFB design. I vaguely recall, from decades ago, mention of this problem in magazines.
I have long known -- and mentioned on this thread and elsewhere -- about heat-related carburetor problems in motorhomes, vans, and similar COE-type vehicles.
This is why I advocate using one or two marine inline bilge blowers to force cool air into the doghouse and around the upper part of the engine. In addition to improving fuel economy and engine efficiency, this should reduce (but not eliminate) the AFB hot soak problem.
I also advocate OEM, aftermarket, or custom cold air intakes. While these will improve fuel economy and engine performance, cold air intakes will do little, if any, to reduce the AFB hot soak problem.
Both bilge blowers and cold air intakes are suitable for all COE-type vehicles, regardless of carburetor or other types of naturally aspirated air-fuel systems. Of the two, cold air intake is most effective for improved fuel economy and engine performance.
Editted to remove question that VintageMopar already answered in his post above. :S. (Reread his post and ... finally noticed everything he said.)
The AFB hot soak problem means extended engine cranking to refill the float bowls. Extended engine cranking is hard on the SLI (engine) battery, battery cables, starter relay, and starter motor. It's also hard on the ignition coil because the start circuit bypasses the ballast resistor, sending full battery voltage to the coil.
(Until recently, I had not considered and didn't recognize potential damage to the coil. I believe it was VintageMopar who brought this to my attention -- as well as everyone else.)
This is another reason to prefer electric fuel pumps, located in or near the fuel tank(s) instead of OEM mechanical engine-mounted fuel pumps. (Electric fuel pumps can refill and pressurize the fuel system before cranking the engine. They can also eliminate vapor lock problems.)
