Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 30 of 30

Thread: Recurve Duraspark

  1. #16
    Well...it made sense at one point...

    I think maybe he meant 14 deg of "initial" advance and I should have corrected that but just did a cut/paste. So when your engine is at idle with the vacuum disconnected from the distributor and plugged, this is where you set the initial timing. As you begin to accelerate, the vacuum advances the timing until the mechanical part takes over and the vacuum from the manifold or carb port dies off.

    Somebody way smarter than me can explain it better but here's a pretty good web page if you need some light reading:

    http://www.angelfire.com/on/geebjen/timing.txt

    I didn't get to install it yet but I have Friday off so I'll do it then for sure and report my findings.

    Kenny Likins
    Ballard, Seattle, WA
    www.redfalken.com

    `62 Tudor Sedan (`69 200, C4, 8-inch 4-lug 2.79 rearend, Duraspark II, MSD, Weber 32/36 DGEV)

  2. #17
    Yeah, that link pretty much echo'd the CI document.

    Initial advance is set by rotating the distributor in the hole, so they can't set it for you. They can recommend it and use that as a reference point to say what all the other values can be, but it still seems odd that they include vacuum advance. The best they could do is to indicate the maximum vacuum advance you can attain at idle (when the vacuum is greatest).

    Essentially it is like this:

    1) You set initial advance without any vacuum assist and at an idle speed below any introduction of mechanical advance. This setting, as seen in "the books" was all based upon compression ratios, fuels, octanes, etc... at that time. Though still a good place to start, the reason you may want to vary from this is because we are in a different day and age of fuels and you may not be running a completely stock setup anymore.

    2) Mechanical advance is 100% rpm based. The old Load-o-matic distributors didn't have mechanical advance, so Ford actually did use vacuum (a mixture of manifold and venturi) to make a fake "mechanical" advance - which was needed (is always needed) during acceleration.

    With the DSII distributor and any post-1967 distrubutor, which has mechanical advance, this is the thing you are modifying with new springs. There are two weights inside that "fling out" with centrifugal force and these drive against a cam, of sorts, to rotate the breaker plate on Fords. Changing the weights effect how quickly the weights can move and how quickly the breaker plate rotates and how quickly you see advance.

    Since there are two weights, you can, depending on how the springs are setup, have one weight move to allow for fast advance action and then the other comes into play later. At this point - both are in play together. If both spring are in play, their tension is summed. So, if you have one weak and one strong spring (as is the case with the suggested mod) and both are "under tension" all the time, you could actually have two equally sized springs as well - as long as the sum of two weaker springs are the same and one strong and one weak. If you have one spring slightly un-sprung (possibly the cause of them wanting you to bend a tab), then it might allow a quick advance - at first - and then when both are under tension it allows a slow and steady advance over the rest of the RPM range.

    3) Vacuum advance. This only operates at idle and cruise, but highest vacuum is at idle. This is added to initial advance as soon as you set that and reinstall the vacuum line. So, in reality, this is what your "idle advance" is: initial plus vacuum.

    That's the way I see it so far. Sorry for typing this all out and hijacking your thread Kenny, but hopefully it will come in handy. I'd still like to know whether they added vacuum advance to mechanical advance to give you total. Seems awfully coincidental that they just happen to add up.
    Roger Moore

    63 "Flarechero"
    powered by: 347ci stroker | Tremec T5 | 8" 3:45 TracLoc rear



  3. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Luva65wagon View Post
    3) Vacuum advance. This only operates at idle and cruise, but highest vacuum is at idle. This is added to initial advance as soon as you set that and reinstall the vacuum line. So, in reality, this is what your "idle advance" is: initial plus vacuum.
    The vacuum advance is typically connected to a port that is just above the throttle blades. This is different than the old Load-o-Matic stuff. In this manner, there is little to no vacuum advance at idle. It's when the throttle just opens that the vacuum advance will be greatest and it will vary based on engine load. It is still best to set base timing with the vacuum capped off. Then reconnect the vacuum and go. The vacuum advance can is adjustable on Kenny's new dizzy. You can use a small allen wrench to adjust the amount of advance you get at a preset vacuum setting. The wrench adjusts the preload on a spring in the vacuum can.
    Patrick Brown
    331 Stroker / T5 / 8" / Wilwood Disks / RRS R&P Steering / Megasquirt EFI


  4. #19
    This is contrary to the thread on Classic Inlines thread. They indicated this to be called "ported vacuum" which was used in the early smog emission days, but was not the way to go today. But they did indicate it was a "debated subject" and then proceeded to explain what each was. The Load-o-matic carbs only offered a load-sensing vacuum using the little diaphragm doodad on the carbs.

    So, anyway, I guess it is still debatable.

    I've spent all of 20 minutes so far looking into it. I only know that when doing a DSII swap when I have a 1100 carb - I only have manifold vacuum as a real source and should not be using the original feed from the 1100. I will continue to study the pros and cons, but I'm hooking it up to manifold vacuum tonight, for now.
    Roger Moore

    63 "Flarechero"
    powered by: 347ci stroker | Tremec T5 | 8" 3:45 TracLoc rear



  5. #20
    This is the thread on ported versus manifold vacuum sources:

    http://www.classicinlines.com/VacAdvance.asp
    Roger Moore

    63 "Flarechero"
    powered by: 347ci stroker | Tremec T5 | 8" 3:45 TracLoc rear



  6. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by pbrown View Post
    The vacuum advance can is adjustable on Kenny's new dizzy. You can use a small allen wrench to adjust the amount of advance you get at a preset vacuum setting. The wrench adjusts the preload on a spring in the vacuum can.
    I wish! I tried several sized allen wrenches and it is what it is. I think Crane and Standard make one for about $35-40.

    When I get mine hooked up I'm going to compare ported vs. manifold. I borrowed Jeff's vacuum gauge so I can see what it's doing too. I've read plenty of forums where just as many people use one or the other and the consensus always seems to be "whatever works for you".

    Kenny Likins
    Ballard, Seattle, WA
    www.redfalken.com

    `62 Tudor Sedan (`69 200, C4, 8-inch 4-lug 2.79 rearend, Duraspark II, MSD, Weber 32/36 DGEV)

  7. #22
    Well, first of all, you have to have the option. Perhaps your Weber offers the option, but the 1100 doesn't, really.

    I've not done a lot of research yet, so for me the jury is still out, but tonight I added a manifold vacuum source and plugged off the Load-o-matic feed source on the carb. With initial timing sitting at 7 BTDC (I didn't try to adjust it to 6) I plugged in the vacuum advance and it jumped to 27 deg, or 20 deg added - at idle. With rev to about 2500-3000 it max'd at 41 degrees total advance. I do [now] have a spare vacuum source, so maybe I'll check vacuum reading too.

    I will say that if I had ported source and the thing was running at 6 BTDC, it runs pretty crappy that way.

    I think I still have some carb issues though. It is running pretty rich and part throttle run is not real smooth, but WOT acceleration is very responsive under no load.
    Roger Moore

    63 "Flarechero"
    powered by: 347ci stroker | Tremec T5 | 8" 3:45 TracLoc rear



  8. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,430
    I was having trouble with that carb as well (I had a filter screwed right on the carb so I hopefully can't be blamed for the dirt)... but I was testing it when I had that bad resistor wire.

    Have you swapped the one off your wagon for testing?

  9. #24
    This is a pretty good article on ported versus manifold. Might also explain why, now, with manifold vacuum connected it seems to be running rich. If only it was easy to gain ported to try it.

    http://www.lbfun.com/warehouse/tech_..._explained.pdf
    Roger Moore

    63 "Flarechero"
    powered by: 347ci stroker | Tremec T5 | 8" 3:45 TracLoc rear



  10. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff W View Post
    I was having trouble with that carb as well (I had a filter screwed right on the carb so I hopefully can't be blamed for the dirt)... but I was testing it when I had that bad resistor wire.

    Have you swapped the one off your wagon for testing?
    Gene and I were staring at it tonight and this was floated. The answer is no, though. But it wouldn't be really hard to do. It's a slightly different carb though, so I'll hold off just until I give up trying other things here.

    FWIW, with what was in it when I opened it, I can see why you would have had troubles. So no, the once rusty tank in the flarechero would be to blame.
    Roger Moore

    63 "Flarechero"
    powered by: 347ci stroker | Tremec T5 | 8" 3:45 TracLoc rear



  11. #26
    A little more insight from my readings....

    Basically manifold and ported vacuum are the same except at idle, where ported is OFF at idle and manifold is ON.

    Initial advance is determined by whether you use or don't use one of these.

    Still looking when I can, but nothing so far has helped me learn whether the recurve I did on mine, based upon the CI instructions, is doing what it was supposed to do.

    Roger Moore

    63 "Flarechero"
    powered by: 347ci stroker | Tremec T5 | 8" 3:45 TracLoc rear



  12. #27
    Not trying to beat this horse anymore than needed (OK, maybe I am), but I can really begin to see why there is no consensus out there on the subject of "which port to use." Even MSDtechsupport gets a basic idea of engine vacuum wrong, which I don't think is a debated subject. I was very surprised by this, but doesn't help clear the confusion out there:

    We recommend that the vacuum advance cannister be connected to a ported vacuum source. This will provide vacuum at idle, part throttle, and cruzing speeds.
    This is not correct. It is very well established - reading 99.9% of the sites I've read (this would be the .1% that didn't agree) - that there is NO vacuum at idle from ported source because this port is above the throttle plates.

    He then continues with:

    Do not connect it to manifold vacuum because this will increase with RPM. With that, you would run the risk of having too much timing which can cause detonation.
    This too is wrong, partly. Manifold vacuum and ported vacuum have the exact same characteristics and provide the same readings off-idle. And do not increase with RPM at all. At cruise, say 3000 RPM +/- you will have all mechanical advance and a good portion (if not all, depending on the vacuum canister) of your vacuum advance, which will hopefully put you in the upper 40's, low 50's for advance. Total mechanical is hoped to me about 36-38 (initial plus mechanical) and adding vacuum to this, which is ~14 deg added, puts you at 52 degs at cruise. Too much advance, when you don't want it, or need it, or under the wrong conditions, can cause detonation. That part is true.

    I think I can echo Kenny now when he said most people just say:

    do what works best for you...
    ...because there is nobody out there that is saying anything that is the same.

    Most of those who are in agreement pretty much say it depends on the cam you use as to whether you might benefit from one source or the other. I will continue to play with it.



    Roger Moore

    63 "Flarechero"
    powered by: 347ci stroker | Tremec T5 | 8" 3:45 TracLoc rear



  13. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    300
    I just got my dizzy back yesterday from the same shop Kenny went to (Thanks again Kenny for bringing mine with you). Ben confirmed what I always knew was true: too much mechanical advance although he reported much more than I thought was happening: 50 degrees! He got it reigned in to 18 degrees all in at 2800 RPM.

    I dropped it in as soon as I got home yesterday morning (a process which still gets frustrating), and wow what a difference in throttle response. It had a real smooth slow rise in RPM from 700 to 2500 when I tested it in the driveway. Driving it around was much better as well, no more detonation on hills. The next step is to get the Vacuum advanced tuned in, it is still advancing too much on the ported vacuum but is much better than before.

    All of the threads I have read seem consistent with Pat's account of ported vacuum and the purpose of it is only for those times where more advance is needed at lower RPM (Such as climbing a hill).

    I can see the pull arm off of the vacuum diaphragm and have confirmed that max ported vacuum seems to be around 1500 RPM for a very short window. The ported timing is correct, but the pull is too much. Pat is also correct on the hex screw adjustment on the diaphragm, however not all of them have it, mine included. I need to decide if my next step is to replace the diaphragm with an adjustable one or try to limit the vacuum line.
    Brian
    '67 Falcon Bus/240/C4/Offy DP/MSD Duraspark II/Holley 4160

  14. #29
    This is interesting and frustrating - because for every one thread I find suggesting the use of ported vacuum I find two or three saying to use manifold. And half of those proporting ported seem to describe its function as something it isn't, or manifold as something it isn't. I really wish someone would post some links to support why they believe one thing over the other. I'm sure I won't solve this mystery, but I'm not going to ignore simple physics, which is playing a big part in my continuing search.

    There are are no differrces between manifold and ported except that at idle one supplies no vacuum (ported) and the other with full vacuum (manifold). Both produce the exact same same vacuum signal - as soon as you go off idle.

    There is a purported "venturi vacuum", but there has been no indication I can find as to whether any Carb provides this port. The Load-o-matic Carb sort of made this and may be the reason of this example, but nobody "out there" draws the exact association.

    The only change you will be making with the use of ported or manifold is how it is set up to run at idle - period. What initial advance you use and how you adjust idle and air/fuel to maintain idle. WOT or cruising operation is unaffected but the use of either - except as to how you set up initial advance, which will shift the entire advance curve, since mechanical and vacuum advance curves don't vary - off-idle - whether you use ported or manifold.

    So Brian, what did you set your initial advance to? Kenny, what will you set yours to? What, if anything, were you advised to do in this regard? Factory settings? For what? A motor with or without ported vacuum source?

    Unfortunately I don't have ported vacuum. This is simply a mission for me now (damn it all anyway... ) ) This is how I learn stuff. Ported vacuum didn't even get thought up or introduced until the 70's to address emission control, so only smog carbs and aftermatket carbs offer it... to allow their use on cars with emmision controls. It wasn't introduced to aid in performance applications. I have found no source on-line to counter this. Even the other night, when I was looking at the instructions in Gene's new Edelbrock carb, they listed both source types and said to use ported with "emission controlled motors."

    As for adjustable vacuum canisters, they allow adjustment of the tension of the spring behind the vacuum diaphragm. This allows a motor with a cam that can't produce a lot if vacuum to still operate a vacuum advance. It either shortens the curve (less tension) or lengthens it (more tension) for the same source - nothing more.

    Anyway, sorry to be so emotional about this. Once I get into researching something, as you can see, it becomes a bit obsessive. I know, say it. Roger, get a life.
    Last edited by Luva65wagon; December 23rd, 2011 at 10:05 AM. Reason: Android tablet stopped letting me edit my typo's...
    Roger Moore

    63 "Flarechero"
    powered by: 347ci stroker | Tremec T5 | 8" 3:45 TracLoc rear



  15. #30
    The new, recurved DSII is in and running really well. The hardest part was getting it to drop onto the oil pump rod and be on the correct tooth of the gear.

    I have it set at 12 degrees right now and get a very tiny amount of that rattle can pinging when I have it under load. This is only on a really big hill a few blocks away and when I mash the pedal to the metal. Tomorrow I'll bring it down to 11 and see how that sounds.

    I also will take a vacuum reading from the ported source and see how that looks. Brian was over and I hooked the vac gauge up to the manifold, just under the carb where I have the tranny modulator and PCV hoses attached. Warmed up at idle it was at 18. When you give the engine a quick goose it drops to near zero real quick and then comes back up to 18. If you accelerate slowly it will rise to about 20 but then comes back down again to 18.

    Brian also noticed that the armature from the vac advance canister would pull when I accelerated off idle and stay there. He said his would pull at first but then come back to the resting position. And he says the canister diaphragm isn't torn either.

    Now I've only ran it off ported vacuum so far but maybe tomorrow I'll try manifold. It did seem to idle better when warming up and I also noticed the lean spot I have when accelerating hard is less noticeable.

    Kenny Likins
    Ballard, Seattle, WA
    www.redfalken.com

    `62 Tudor Sedan (`69 200, C4, 8-inch 4-lug 2.79 rearend, Duraspark II, MSD, Weber 32/36 DGEV)

Similar Threads

  1. DuraSpark in a 6 cyl
    By Luva65wagon in forum Tech Talk
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 31st, 2008, 09:29 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •