A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » VW air cooled
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Timing Opinions



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 16th 05, 04:20 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Timing Opinions

I really want to hear what you experts have to say on this. I know, I
went through this a few weeks ago but I'm getting better.

I changed the points and condenser this afternoon. My buggy had been
getting harder to start (second revolution instead of the first) and
being picky as I am and having the parts handy, swapped them out. I had
been getting a little detonation when I hit it hard or pulling a hill
too.

I set the timing static per the Idiot manual and really moved the diz a
lot more than I though it should but who am I to argue with a static
timing light. Put it all together and pushed the starter and she fires
right up. So far so good.

Then I decided I would see what things looked like with a strobe light.
Once again, with only a minor adjustment and a slight tweek to the carb
and I'm at 7 btdc and 30 full advance. Idle is about 900 rpm.

Now I can jam on the throttle and no pinging, she starts when my finger
just touches the button and life is good. However, I don't seem to have
a lot of hp in 4th gear. Acceleration is fantastic and I could stand
the front end up in first and second without too much effort. But I got
nothin in 4th gear. I'm not looking for 80 mph but as light as this car
is, I should at least be able to accelerate. As it is, about 55 is all
she wrote.

For the record, I've got a bus trans, dp heads, 34 carb and 009 diz.
I'm running wide 60's and I know that robs some power but I would
figure to have it a little better than this. What would you guys expect
from such a setup?

Thanks,
<><
TC

Ads
  #3  
Old June 16th 05, 03:27 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks Kevin,

I know the bus trans is for torque and not speed. And I'm really not
into speed anyway. I even thought about swaping it out while I was
doing the motor because this is a street buggy, not a hill climber or
sand car. I'm sure a lot of those kind of guys would love to have this
trans.

I like the 009 and have run it with a 34 for years on a '74 super daily
driver and never had any problems but I am about to search ebay and the
parts pile for a stock diz and give it a try. I've also been watching
the thread about the pertronix and msd and might give that a shot.

Yes, 60's are much wider than stock and even though they rob power,
they look way cool.

Thanks again Kevin. I'm just looking for ideas.

<><
TC

  #4  
Old June 17th 05, 03:22 AM
Joey Tribiani
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Then I decided I would see what things looked like with a strobe light.
> Once again, with only a minor adjustment and a slight tweek to the carb
> and I'm at 7 btdc and 30 full advance. Idle is about 900 rpm.
>
> Now I can jam on the throttle and no pinging, she starts when my finger
> just touches the button and life is good. However, I don't seem to have
> a lot of hp in 4th gear. Acceleration is fantastic and I could stand
> the front end up in first and second without too much effort. But I got
> nothin in 4th gear. I'm not looking for 80 mph but as light as this car
> is, I should at least be able to accelerate. As it is, about 55 is all
> she wrote.
>
>


your timing values look good....the timing is based on RPM so any *actual*
power loss should be evident in all gears at the same general engine
speed.....fuel starvation could be a possibility at higher speeds where the
engine uses more fuel.... your tires can also affect things by effectively
changing your gear ratio(smaller would make for a quick speed up but top out
early, larger would be slower to accellerate and *theoretically a higher
topspeed...that of course is assuming you have enough horsepower to propel
the car to the new *potential)....if you are plenty powerful in all gears
and believe there is a definite problem i would suspect fuel
starvation....there are tests to help confirm or rule out this...


  #5  
Old June 17th 05, 06:39 PM
ThaDriver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I gave up on timing lights - especially for my bugs - a long time ago! I
keep advancing them untill they kick back when starting, then retard them
untill they stop. Then I drive them & put them under a load at low rpm up
a hill & if it pings retard it untill it quits. Always winds up with more
advance (& power) than if timed with a light.
You need more top-end powwer? Dual carbs. Cam. Big valves. Money... :-)
(but anyway the dual carbs will help a LOT)
~ Paul
aka "Tha Driver"

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing.

  #6  
Old June 17th 05, 07:55 PM
Joey Tribiani
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"ThaDriver" <imangeloneAThotmailDOTcom@> wrote in message
lkaboutautos.com...
>I gave up on timing lights - especially for my bugs - a long time ago! I
> keep advancing them untill they kick back when starting, then retard them
> untill they stop. Then I drive them & put them under a load at low rpm up
> a hill & if it pings retard it untill it quits. Always winds up with more
> advance (& power) than if timed with a light.


if you are comfortable with that procedure that is fine, but i personally
would hesitate to state it so "mater-of-factly"....it is not a good practice
and i have seen pistons with holes in them due to this.....not all "pinging"
is even detectable.... when i loaned out my timing light to a fellow that
decided to make it his own, i timed my car in the above manner...it ran
great...but the two head temp guages read abit higher than i liked.....(new
engine, so no "before" data to compare)...i drove it this way for
awhile....while i did run "good" the power was "peaky"....turns out it was
around 50BTDC at full advance....not good....actually timing it with the
proper procedure made the car feel less "peppy" off the line, but overal
performance(accelleration, etc) was much better....seat of the pants is not
a good timing meathod.....


  #7  
Old June 18th 05, 12:01 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Joey Tribiani wrote:
> "ThaDriver" <imangeloneAThotmailDOTcom@> wrote in message
> lkaboutautos.com...
> >I gave up on timing lights - especially for my bugs - a long time ago! I
> > keep advancing them untill they kick back when starting, then retard them
> > untill they stop. Then I drive them & put them under a load at low rpm up
> > a hill & if it pings retard it untill it quits. Always winds up with more
> > advance (& power) than if timed with a light.

>
> if you are comfortable with that procedure that is fine, but i personally
> would hesitate to state it so "mater-of-factly"....it is not a good practice
> and i have seen pistons with holes in them due to this.....not all "pinging"
> is even detectable.... when i loaned out my timing light to a fellow that
> decided to make it his own, i timed my car in the above manner...it ran
> great...but the two head temp guages read abit higher than i liked.....(new
> engine, so no "before" data to compare)...i drove it this way for
> awhile....while i did run "good" the power was "peaky"....turns out it was
> around 50BTDC at full advance....not good....actually timing it with the
> proper procedure made the car feel less "peppy" off the line, but overal
> performance(accelleration, etc) was much better....seat of the pants is not
> a good timing meathod.....


Thats why I did it using both methods. I used the static timing light
for years and never had any problem. Then, just maybe 5 years ago or
less, I had the money so I bought a cheap timing light. Mostly just the
curiosity to see the difference.

Personally, I like the static method and then fine tuning by ear and
feel but I've never moved it much. Was really surprised at how far up
it was, the last time it was set, I did it with the strobe light.
Putting in new points shouldn't make that much difference. But it's
right and strong now but I still wonder about the top end performance
of lack thereof.

<><
TC

  #8  
Old June 19th 05, 03:01 AM
ThaDriver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>I gave up on timing lights - especially for my bugs - a long time ago! I
> keep advancing them untill they kick back when starting, then retard

them
> untill they stop. Then I drive them & put them under a load at low rpm

up
> a hill & if it pings retard it untill it quits. Always winds up with

more
> advance (& power) than if timed with a light.


if you are comfortable with that procedure that is fine, but i personally

would hesitate to state it so "mater-of-factly"....it is not a good
practice
and i have seen pistons with holes in them due to this.....not all
"pinging"
is even detectable.... when i loaned out my timing light to a fellow that

decided to make it his own, i timed my car in the above manner...it ran
great...but the two head temp guages read abit higher than i
liked.....(new
engine, so no "before" data to compare)...i drove it this way for
awhile....while i did run "good" the power was "peaky"....turns out it
was

around 50BTDC at full advance....not good....actually timing it with the
proper procedure made the car feel less "peppy" off the line, but overal
performance(accelleration, etc) was much better....seat of the pants is
not
a good timing meathod.....
****************
WOW! 50 BTDC is unreal! In the past when I've checked mine it was never
anything like that; just a little more advanced than called for in the
book. Never had any problems in 30+ years messing with VWs.
~ Paul
aka "Tha Driver"

America - made in China! :-(


  #9  
Old June 19th 05, 03:50 AM
Joey Tribiani
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"ThaDriver" <imangeloneAThotmailDOTcom@> wrote in message


> WOW! 50 BTDC is unreal! In the past when I've checked mine it was never
> anything like that; just a little more advanced than called for in the
> book. Never had any problems in 30+ years messing with VWs.
> ~ Paul



i hear ya Paul, but not everyone can be so sure....i never used a timing
light on my racecars, but on my streetcars i do...too easy to get it off and
it still "sound" and run "good"....


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Timing chain on 93 Honda Accord garcia Honda 6 March 24th 05 09:08 PM
Timing belt / water pump mpet500 Honda 15 March 16th 05 05:18 PM
1992 Camry Timing Belt [email protected] Technology 4 March 8th 05 04:11 PM
Honda Passport - Timing Belt ajpdla Honda 3 December 12th 04 04:12 AM
Civic Timing Belt Saga - Continued disallow Honda 5 November 17th 04 08:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.