mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: The ideal advance curve (too long - correction

To: ValveCurtain@aol.com, mgs@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: The ideal advance curve (too long - correction
From: Phil Bates <jello@ida.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 15:56:45 -0700
Sorry, my degree symbols seem not to have come out very well.  I've
corrected it below.

Phil Bates wrote:

> Usually it is like this.  You don't want too much advance at idle, or
> you won't Idle well, and won't have room to advance for acceleration.
> THerefore you have centrifugal advance.  Generally speaking, and for
> power, not effeciency, once you start advancing, the quicker the advance
> goes in  the better, and there is a maximum that is useful - usually
> about 300 or so.  Hence 8-10 degrees static, + 20 degrees distributor
> advance ==> 30 degrees.  The 25D4 40897 has a curve that is at 20
> (crankshaft) degrees at 2400(crankshaft) rpm (see page 456 in The complete
> Official MGB - needs
> a little translation from distributor to crank 0's and rpm).  I believe
> this is with the vacuum adv. off.  There are other distributors with
> other advance curves, and The complete Official MGB even shows the 40943
> with 24 degrees, so more can be tolerated under the right circumstances.
> So,
> the best way to measure this is:
>
>    * Remove vacuum adv. line
>    * get your harmonic balancer marked for 30 degrees
>    * run the engine RPM up to 2400
>    * Check timing with a strobe for 30 degrees
>
> If you want more advance, mark and set it for more, and if you want a
> double check of the springs, you can go below and above 2400rpm; below
> 2400, you should have less advance, above you should have no more
> advance.  If this isn't the case, your springs are screwed up somehow or
> your breaker plate isn't moving properly.
>
> Generally (again) you can advance the timing as much as you want as long
> as you don't ping on hard acceleration (which takes some driving).  As a
> matter of fact a lot of people tune by ear with just that in mind -
> advance until it pings, and back it off just enough to prevent the
> pinging, and this is probably the most effective way to set your timing
> if you have a good ear.
>
> As for compression ratio it was changed by pistons, i.e. by crown shape,
> flat or dished.  Ratios were 8.0:1 (low compression) or 9.0:1 (high
> compression).  You can get more with different heads, gaskets and
> pistons, but 9:1 is pretty good for performance.  Better cams will also
> offer better performance if you want it.
>
> Barney Gaylord - chime in on dual point distributors and power at this
> point, I've already put in too much here.
>
> Phil Bates
>
> ValveCurtain@aol.com wrote:
>
> > Hi Gang,
> >   A few of you have shown that you use your cars
> > on the street and on the track.  That's way cool.
> > I hope to put my B-GT on the track this summer at
> > Hallett as well as on a number of hot road rallies in
> > the spring.  But that is not why I am writing today.
> >    I have been studying everything I can find on ignition
> > advance curves and am comfortable with how the
> > system works.  Here's a distillation of the research
> > info.
> >
> > + The early cars use centrufugal AND vacuum advance
> >    mechanisms.
> > + Static timing varies but not by too much
> > + Compression ratios are listed as 'high' and 'low' but little
> >    is published about HOW the ratio differs or how it is
> >    changed -- or the absolute ratios, for that matter.
> > + Most of the differences in advance curves are based upon
> >    knee jerk reactions to constantly changing emissions law
> >    limitations, not performance.
> >
> >    All of this brings me to a few conclusions regarding my
> > 1970 MGB-GT.
> >
> > 1. I need to know if my car is high or low compression.  The
> >    piston crowns in my '70 B-GT, the car in question, have the
> >    same crown geometry as those in my '79 MGB.  The heads
> >    seem to be roughly universal, for the most part.  Therefore,
> >    how is the compression ratio changed?  Piston crown?  Head
> >    gasket thickness?  Something else?
> >
> > 2. I don't intend to let my B-GT go untuned and as there is no
> >    emissions testing in Oklahoma, I don't give a wet flip about
> >    emissions.  Therefore, I am not interested in the "correct"
> >    ignition timing for my car but rather in the BEST ignition
> >    timing for the car.
> >
> > The distributor that is supposed to be on my car is a 25D4
> > # 40897.  It has a centrifugal advance described by the curve
> > below.  The vacuum advance maximum is 20 degrees +/- 2 degrees.
> >
> >    RPM   Adv. in crank degrees (not including the static timing)
> >    0        0
> >    600    10
> >    1625   24
> >    3000   30
> >
> > The distributor that I have on the car is a 25D4 #41228.  The
> > vacuum advance maximum is 20 degrees +/- 2 degrees.
> > Advance is given in crank degrees but does not include the
> > static advance setting of 10 degrees BTDC.  The vacuum
> > advance maximum is 20 degrees +/- 2 degrees using the
> > 5-17-10 advance module (Vacuum advance starts at 5psi
> > depression and reached a maximum 10 degrees distributor
> > angle or 20 degrees crank angle at 17psi depression.).
> >
> >    RPM   Adv. in crank degrees (not including the static timing)
> >    0        0
> >    600    3
> >    700    6.5
> >    900    9
> >    1600   15
> >    2200   20
> >
> > Knowing all this, the question that remains is;
> >
> >    What is the best mechanical advance curve for an MGB,
> > using an 18GH engine used for aggressive street driving and
> > the occasional rally (assuming something about the
> > compression ratio queried above)?  From this information,
> > if some kind soul can provide it, I can choose the best
> > combination of advance springs for optimum performance.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Rick

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: The ideal advance curve (too long - correction, Phil Bates <=