Timing changes???

Question

Hi All,If you've read any previous posts, you know where I'm with certainadjustments.  This is a good one.  During a normal timing job I have alwaysdisconnected the vacuum line from the distributor to adjust and set my curbidle advance.  This is what my manuals state.Ok,  Since I've now switched to manifold vacuum, which always supplies somesuction, do I need to adjust the timing using a connected vacuum tube orjust keep doing it as the books suggests?

L.W.(ßill) · Accepted Answer

Hi Paul,     The vacuum hose disconnected and plugged just like the timinginstructions say. Have the engine idling as slow as possible so thecentrifugal weights won't add any advance to your initial timing.        God Bless America, ßill O|||||||Omailto:      Brogren wrote:

Paul Brogren · Answer

That's what I did.  I'm running 9 deg advance disconnected.  And about 15deg. approx, with the vacuum line to manifold.  Send your Views.

Steve G · Answer

In as much as your change to the vacuum advance routing deviates from theintended method of operation, why are you worrying about what is "correct"?There is no correct procedure with present arrangement.  The initial timingadjustment is calculated taking into account the rate of advance of themechanical advance and the original vacuum advance rate at specific throttleopening.Personally, I'm not sure Iagree with this change of the vacuum system.  Thissituation of no vacuum to the advance at an idle is not a post emmissionsthing brought about to save the environment and take away our fun.  Back inthe 50's and 60's,(that's as far back as I go) there were vehiclesconfigured both ways.  They were designed to operate one way or the other.One isn't better than the other, they're just different from one another.When you consider that for one engine, say a 350 chev, there are probablyhundred's of different part numbers for vacuum advances with differentinternal spring tensions and travel...

L.W.(ßill) · Answer

Sounds good from here, if it doesn't ping on lite acceleration.         God Bless America, ßill O|||||||Omailto:      Brogren wrote:

L.W.(ßill) · Answer

You mentioned a couple reasons why cars were so much quicker in thesixties. Of course the advanced timing was to take advantage of highercompression, and longer duration cams, polluted         God Bless America, ßill O|||||||Omailto:      G wrote:

Steve G · Answer

Not all cars were quicker or more economical in the sixties.  Some were realslugs. But the point is that it was not whether it had manifold vacuum tothe advance or ported vacuum to the advance that made some slugs and othersnot.  Total timing advance was probably very similar, just different methodsof getting there.  BTW, with knock sensors in  cars today  timing is runningmuch more advanced than it ever has.

L.W.(ßill) · Answer

Yes, with the POS Volkswagen that began the foreign car invasion.And of course that little Nash Rambler that the TJ still uses theirengine, but the big three sold mostly V8s and a family would be laughedat if they bought something that wouldn't turn sixty in nine seconds.      Most of us locked the distributor in at thirty eight to fortydegrees total. Running over three hundred thirty degrees duration we hadno problem start

L.W.(ßill) · Answer

Economics, we didn't need no economical Nash. Gas was twenty sixcents a gallon. And I still feel the same way at two bucks a gallon,it's the cheapest product we may buy. That's we still drive life savingtrucks. Name me something that's cheaper, you might suggest it to:http://www2.

Timing changes???

Join the Discussion

Didn't find your answer?