>From ian:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hmm... my only personal intimate experience with another distributor
was on my Suzi 650GZ which has equal weights/springs. I always thought
that the centrifugal unit was carefully BALANCED thus the weight/springs
must be equal.
I can see the benefit of two elbows on the advance curve caused by a two-
sided setup, but if it's not balanced, won't that cause premature/excessive
distributor shaft/bushing wear?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The weight pivot mechanism is tied together so each arm must move out an
identical amount(remove the springs sometime and move one arm, the other
follows). Therefore, each spring may physically locate on a different arm,
but they share a combined load. So you end up with a two-stage effect that I
previously described. My Esprit (US emissions curve) came with 2 heavy springs
that wouldn't allow full advance till about 5500 rpm. It accelerated like a
slug. I've put in two weak springs (from a Cal Custom Chevy spring kit) that
give full advance by 2500-3000 rpm (just like the Euro Esprits). There is
no detonation and the car accelerates like it should. I belive the retarded
curve was for the benefit of EPA DYNO certification. Of course a "knock-sensor"
as part of a computer controlled ignition would be better for those cars needing
a complex curve, but the two spring aproach is a crude way to make a more
optimal complex curve cheaply (a knock sensor would give you as much advance
as the engine could take at any rpm without detonation).
-Bob T.
|