Re: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment

2003-07-29 Thread yenkochevelle

The vacuum advance canister works sort of like the computer in a modern car.
It constantly changes ignition timing to match engine load. No vacuum while
cranking gives no vacuum advance. High vacuum under light load gives full
vacuum advance.
Crane sells a nice adjustable vacuum advance canister. It uses a allen screw
inside the vacuum advance hose nipple to adjust spring pressure and has an
adjustable stop. The only problem is that it does not look like the original
vacuum canister. If you don't care about having original look, the Crane
unit gives you more adjustments to play with.

- Original Message - 
From: Tom Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 7:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment


 Thanks Herb! Actually, I finally found enough other info on the web to
 confirm what you explained. Also, Chuck went through the distributor
 upgrade/curve adjustment on last week's HP TV which helped as well.

 What was not totally clear from the first few references I found was how
to
 set the total advance. I read that the optimum total advance is around
 36-38 degrees, in by ~2500 rpm. So I went ahead and set my total advance
to
 36 degrees, with both the vacuum and mechanical advance in place. The
 problem is, I am getting 13 degrees of advance from the vacuum, and only
10
 degrees from the mechanical system. So at WOT, the total advance is only
23
 degrees (no vacuum). What I now understand is that the total advance
 should be 36-38 degrees with the mechanical only. The vacuum advance
should
 add another 13-17 degrees above the 36-38 degrees, for a total of 50-55
 advance under light load. I was just surprised to find that the engine
could
 take that much advance. Apparently, this can significantly increase
mileage.
 Of course, one should backoff the advance if detonation occurs.

 Tom

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Herb Lumpp
 Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 6:49 PM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: RE: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment


 Hi Tom,

 I noticed there haven't been any replies to your question Is vacuum
advance
 really necessary in a modified engine? so I'm going to make an attempt...

 For a street driven vehicle, yes the vacuum advance is necessary as well
as
 the centrifugal advance.  Why?  Because in a street driven vehicle, the
 engine is placed under constantly varying loads.  During most normal
driving
 speeds, the engine rpm isn't high enough for the centrifugal advance to
 increase the timing when needed so the timing is advanced/retarded based
on
 the vacuum signal from the engine, depending of course on the load at the
 time (high load = low vacuum, low load = high vacuum).  Of course at
higher
 rpm when there isn't much vacuum signal the centrifugal advance takes
over.

 On a race only engine where peak power and performance is achieved in a
very
 narrow rpm band, vacuum advance isn't needed bacause the centrifugal
advance
 puts the timing at a specified postition within a small rpm window.

 I'm sure I oversimplified it but hopefully it will help you understand it
 better.

 Herb Lumpp
 http://users.adelphia.net/~hlump/



 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom Tomlinson
 Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:24 PM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment


 I've been reading up on how to change the advance curve on my 71 350
Malibu
 with stock distrubutor. I'm planning to replace the points with a Mallory
 unit, and I thought I would also play with the weights and springs to see
if
 I can improve the performance, but I have a couple of questions.

 I've measured the current advance curve using tape to degree the balancer
 and my timing light. Total vacuum advance is 13 deg, and total mechanical
 advance is 10 deg, and it is all engaged (23 deg total) by about 2800 rpm.
 I've read that the optimum total timing advance is about 36 deg on a SBC,
so
 that is where the timing is currently set at 3000 rpm. Timing at idle
works
 out to be about 13 deg (BTDC).

 My question is, is vacuum advance really necessary in a modified engine?
 From what I've read, the vacuum advance is designed advanced the timing
 between 1000 and 3000 rpm, but retard the advance when you go to WOT to
 compensate for a leaner mixture. But on a properly tuned carb (I'm
currently
 using an Edelbrock 1405 with vacuum advance on the ported opening), the
 mixture doesn't go lean, in fact, it goes rich. A rich mixture takes
longer
 to burn, so timing should stay advanced. With the current setup, at WOT
the
 vacuum will go away, so the timing advance will be 13 degrees retarded,
for
 a total advance of 36-13=23 deg, not the optimum 36 deg.

 Would I be better off to remove the vacuum advance and adjust the
mechanical
 advance to provide the total advanced from 13 deg (idle) to 36 deg (3000
 rpm)?

 Hope

RE: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment

2003-07-28 Thread Herb Lumpp
Hi Tom,

I noticed there haven't been any replies to your question Is vacuum advance
really necessary in a modified engine? so I'm going to make an attempt...

For a street driven vehicle, yes the vacuum advance is necessary as well as
the centrifugal advance.  Why?  Because in a street driven vehicle, the
engine is placed under constantly varying loads.  During most normal driving
speeds, the engine rpm isn't high enough for the centrifugal advance to
increase the timing when needed so the timing is advanced/retarded based on
the vacuum signal from the engine, depending of course on the load at the
time (high load = low vacuum, low load = high vacuum).  Of course at higher
rpm when there isn't much vacuum signal the centrifugal advance takes over.

On a race only engine where peak power and performance is achieved in a very
narrow rpm band, vacuum advance isn't needed bacause the centrifugal advance
puts the timing at a specified postition within a small rpm window.

I'm sure I oversimplified it but hopefully it will help you understand it
better.

Herb Lumpp
http://users.adelphia.net/~hlump/



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom Tomlinson
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment


I've been reading up on how to change the advance curve on my 71 350 Malibu
with stock distrubutor. I'm planning to replace the points with a Mallory
unit, and I thought I would also play with the weights and springs to see if
I can improve the performance, but I have a couple of questions.

I've measured the current advance curve using tape to degree the balancer
and my timing light. Total vacuum advance is 13 deg, and total mechanical
advance is 10 deg, and it is all engaged (23 deg total) by about 2800 rpm.
I've read that the optimum total timing advance is about 36 deg on a SBC, so
that is where the timing is currently set at 3000 rpm. Timing at idle works
out to be about 13 deg (BTDC).

My question is, is vacuum advance really necessary in a modified engine?
From what I've read, the vacuum advance is designed advanced the timing
between 1000 and 3000 rpm, but retard the advance when you go to WOT to
compensate for a leaner mixture. But on a properly tuned carb (I'm currently
using an Edelbrock 1405 with vacuum advance on the ported opening), the
mixture doesn't go lean, in fact, it goes rich. A rich mixture takes longer
to burn, so timing should stay advanced. With the current setup, at WOT the
vacuum will go away, so the timing advance will be 13 degrees retarded, for
a total advance of 36-13=23 deg, not the optimum 36 deg.

Would I be better off to remove the vacuum advance and adjust the mechanical
advance to provide the total advanced from 13 deg (idle) to 36 deg (3000
rpm)?

Hope this makes sense.

Tom Tomlinson
'71 350 Malibu



___
Chevelle-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://chevelles.net/mailman/listinfo/chevelle-list_chevelles.net


RE: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment

2003-07-28 Thread Tom Tomlinson
Thanks Herb! Actually, I finally found enough other info on the web to
confirm what you explained. Also, Chuck went through the distributor
upgrade/curve adjustment on last week's HP TV which helped as well.

What was not totally clear from the first few references I found was how to
set the total advance. I read that the optimum total advance is around
36-38 degrees, in by ~2500 rpm. So I went ahead and set my total advance to
36 degrees, with both the vacuum and mechanical advance in place. The
problem is, I am getting 13 degrees of advance from the vacuum, and only 10
degrees from the mechanical system. So at WOT, the total advance is only 23
degrees (no vacuum). What I now understand is that the total advance
should be 36-38 degrees with the mechanical only. The vacuum advance should
add another 13-17 degrees above the 36-38 degrees, for a total of 50-55
advance under light load. I was just surprised to find that the engine could
take that much advance. Apparently, this can significantly increase mileage.
Of course, one should backoff the advance if detonation occurs.

Tom

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Herb Lumpp
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 6:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment


Hi Tom,

I noticed there haven't been any replies to your question Is vacuum advance
really necessary in a modified engine? so I'm going to make an attempt...

For a street driven vehicle, yes the vacuum advance is necessary as well as
the centrifugal advance.  Why?  Because in a street driven vehicle, the
engine is placed under constantly varying loads.  During most normal driving
speeds, the engine rpm isn't high enough for the centrifugal advance to
increase the timing when needed so the timing is advanced/retarded based on
the vacuum signal from the engine, depending of course on the load at the
time (high load = low vacuum, low load = high vacuum).  Of course at higher
rpm when there isn't much vacuum signal the centrifugal advance takes over.

On a race only engine where peak power and performance is achieved in a very
narrow rpm band, vacuum advance isn't needed bacause the centrifugal advance
puts the timing at a specified postition within a small rpm window.

I'm sure I oversimplified it but hopefully it will help you understand it
better.

Herb Lumpp
http://users.adelphia.net/~hlump/



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom Tomlinson
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment


I've been reading up on how to change the advance curve on my 71 350 Malibu
with stock distrubutor. I'm planning to replace the points with a Mallory
unit, and I thought I would also play with the weights and springs to see if
I can improve the performance, but I have a couple of questions.

I've measured the current advance curve using tape to degree the balancer
and my timing light. Total vacuum advance is 13 deg, and total mechanical
advance is 10 deg, and it is all engaged (23 deg total) by about 2800 rpm.
I've read that the optimum total timing advance is about 36 deg on a SBC, so
that is where the timing is currently set at 3000 rpm. Timing at idle works
out to be about 13 deg (BTDC).

My question is, is vacuum advance really necessary in a modified engine?
From what I've read, the vacuum advance is designed advanced the timing
between 1000 and 3000 rpm, but retard the advance when you go to WOT to
compensate for a leaner mixture. But on a properly tuned carb (I'm currently
using an Edelbrock 1405 with vacuum advance on the ported opening), the
mixture doesn't go lean, in fact, it goes rich. A rich mixture takes longer
to burn, so timing should stay advanced. With the current setup, at WOT the
vacuum will go away, so the timing advance will be 13 degrees retarded, for
a total advance of 36-13=23 deg, not the optimum 36 deg.

Would I be better off to remove the vacuum advance and adjust the mechanical
advance to provide the total advanced from 13 deg (idle) to 36 deg (3000
rpm)?

Hope this makes sense.

Tom Tomlinson
'71 350 Malibu



___
Chevelle-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://chevelles.net/mailman/listinfo/chevelle-list_chevelles.net


___
Chevelle-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://chevelles.net/mailman/listinfo/chevelle-list_chevelles.net


Re: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment

2003-07-28 Thread Don
I thought that was a great explanation Herb!

- Original Message - 
From: Herb Lumpp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 6:48 PM
Subject: RE: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment


Hi Tom,

I noticed there haven't been any replies to your question Is vacuum advance
really necessary in a modified engine? so I'm going to make an attempt...

For a street driven vehicle, yes the vacuum advance is necessary as well as
the centrifugal advance.  Why?  Because in a street driven vehicle, the
engine is placed under constantly varying loads.  During most normal driving
speeds, the engine rpm isn't high enough for the centrifugal advance to
increase the timing when needed so the timing is advanced/retarded based on
the vacuum signal from the engine, depending of course on the load at the
time (high load = low vacuum, low load = high vacuum).  Of course at higher
rpm when there isn't much vacuum signal the centrifugal advance takes over.

On a race only engine where peak power and performance is achieved in a very
narrow rpm band, vacuum advance isn't needed bacause the centrifugal advance
puts the timing at a specified postition within a small rpm window.

I'm sure I oversimplified it but hopefully it will help you understand it
better.

Herb Lumpp
http://users.adelphia.net/~hlump/



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom Tomlinson
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment


I've been reading up on how to change the advance curve on my 71 350 Malibu
with stock distrubutor. I'm planning to replace the points with a Mallory
unit, and I thought I would also play with the weights and springs to see if
I can improve the performance, but I have a couple of questions.

I've measured the current advance curve using tape to degree the balancer
and my timing light. Total vacuum advance is 13 deg, and total mechanical
advance is 10 deg, and it is all engaged (23 deg total) by about 2800 rpm.
I've read that the optimum total timing advance is about 36 deg on a SBC, so
that is where the timing is currently set at 3000 rpm. Timing at idle works
out to be about 13 deg (BTDC).

My question is, is vacuum advance really necessary in a modified engine?
From what I've read, the vacuum advance is designed advanced the timing
between 1000 and 3000 rpm, but retard the advance when you go to WOT to
compensate for a leaner mixture. But on a properly tuned carb (I'm currently
using an Edelbrock 1405 with vacuum advance on the ported opening), the
mixture doesn't go lean, in fact, it goes rich. A rich mixture takes longer
to burn, so timing should stay advanced. With the current setup, at WOT the
vacuum will go away, so the timing advance will be 13 degrees retarded, for
a total advance of 36-13=23 deg, not the optimum 36 deg.

Would I be better off to remove the vacuum advance and adjust the mechanical
advance to provide the total advanced from 13 deg (idle) to 36 deg (3000
rpm)?

Hope this makes sense.

Tom Tomlinson
'71 350 Malibu



___
Chevelle-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://chevelles.net/mailman/listinfo/chevelle-list_chevelles.net


___
Chevelle-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://chevelles.net/mailman/listinfo/chevelle-list_chevelles.net


[Chevelle-List] Advance curve adjustment

2003-07-17 Thread Tom Tomlinson
I've been reading up on how to change the advance curve on my 71 350 Malibu
with stock distrubutor. I'm planning to replace the points with a Mallory
unit, and I thought I would also play with the weights and springs to see if
I can improve the performance, but I have a couple of questions.

I've measured the current advance curve using tape to degree the balancer
and my timing light. Total vacuum advance is 13 deg, and total mechanical
advance is 10 deg, and it is all engaged (23 deg total) by about 2800 rpm.
I've read that the optimum total timing advance is about 36 deg on a SBC, so
that is where the timing is currently set at 3000 rpm. Timing at idle works
out to be about 13 deg (BTDC).

My question is, is vacuum advance really necessary in a modified engine?
From what I've read, the vacuum advance is designed advanced the timing
between 1000 and 3000 rpm, but retard the advance when you go to WOT to
compensate for a leaner mixture. But on a properly tuned carb (I'm currently
using an Edelbrock 1405 with vacuum advance on the ported opening), the
mixture doesn't go lean, in fact, it goes rich. A rich mixture takes longer
to burn, so timing should stay advanced. With the current setup, at WOT the
vacuum will go away, so the timing advance will be 13 degrees retarded, for
a total advance of 36-13=23 deg, not the optimum 36 deg.

Would I be better off to remove the vacuum advance and adjust the mechanical
advance to provide the total advanced from 13 deg (idle) to 36 deg (3000
rpm)?

Hope this makes sense.

Tom Tomlinson
'71 350 Malibu


-
To Unsubscribe please visit www.chevelles.net/list.html
To start a new topic, send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]