Brad, if you look at the other post I have in this section, you will see a basic description of my engine, minus the 11.25 comp, 258/.685 solid roller, mopar alum cnc by Modern, cant remember the ex, flow, but it was 446 on the intake port. 2-1/8 TTI headers.

The point of all this, is that all any consumer has is the CFM rating from the manufacturer to make a choice when buying a carb. Yes, you can compare throttle plate, bore and venturi sizes to get SOME idea what it may really flow, but, honestly, most car guys really don't know how to intrepret that data to make a good choice. I remember in the 70s/80's most of the head porting articles focused mainly on total flow(cfm) until it became more common to realize that flow velocity was as, or more important than, total flow.
Guys on here constantly say,"We don't race dyno's" but do you really want to go back to the days of only big race teams have dyno's, no little guys with garage flow benchs to port heads and use the data to make more power? We have to use the info we have to make decisions on which products are the best choice and will hopefully, make the most power.
What we have here,IMO, is that a significant section of the industry, carbs, has vendors that are inflating their flow ratings at the expense of the consumer. A case , in point, is the Holley HP950 mentioned before, it was on this site, that I learned that that was deceptive advertising. If you truly needed 950 cfm, you were not going to get it from that carb, as issued, but you paid $800 for an inadequate product. We have a wealth of knowledge on this board and I am sure that there are people on here who have a good idea which of say, the many 1050 cfm, 4150 carbs really will flow the number on a car that is capable of utilizing it.
To the poster who said that I don't need 1200 cfm, I never said I did, but I would ask you, if my engine, on the dyno, utilized twin 900+ cfm carbs and the A/F ratio's were correct througout the pull and the horsepower jumped up over 60 more, than the previous twin 800's, how would you come to the conclusion that my engine cannot utilize 1200 cfm. Educate me, as I really want to understand why this would be so. I am neither a carb neophyte and I am certainly not an expert, but I know a bit about setting carbs up, but I am sure open to learning more.
Really, the premise of this post was fairly simple, who knows what 4150 carbs in the 1000+ range, are known to be the real deal. I am sure that a lot of people reading this post would like to know too, but so far, not much hard info. Not trying to be a smartass, just a bit frustrated trying to get usable info from someone who knows. Lee.