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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
> 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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
>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
|
|||
|
|||
"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 | |
|
|
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 |