triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Ignition Timing

To: "Tomislav Marincic" <74137.3420@CompuServe.COM>, "Triumph list" <triumphs@Autox.Team.Net>
Subject: Re: Ignition Timing
From: "STU-JO" <STU-JO@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 10:32:46 -0400
Tomislav, why bother with that stuff. I advance my timing until the car
pings under load, then back it off a tad till it stops. I believe its
called powertiming."
When its emissioons time, retard it till it hardly runs.----------
> From: Tomislav Marincic <74137.3420@CompuServe.COM>
> To: Triumph list <triumphs@autox.team.net>
> Subject: Ignition Timing
> Date: Saturday, April 26, 1997 9:05 AM
> 
>       Esteemed Gearheads,
> 
>       I have a question about static vs. dynamic ignition timing on my TR250
> that has probably come up before, but I've been unable to find an answer
on any
> of the usual web pages. Could someone please help?
> 
>       My Haynes manual calls for static ignition timing to be set at 10 deg
> BTDC (page 511). It then calls for the vacuum advance and retard lines to
be
> disconnected from the distributor (Lucas #41202B), and the dynamic timing
to be
> checked at 4 deg ATDC at 800-850 RPM (pages 513,521).
> 
>       I understand the principle of vacuum retard on idle/overrun for
emissions
> purposes, but I can't understand how the static timing could be set at 10
BTDC,
> and how the idling engine gets to 4 ATDC with both vacuum lines
disconnected.
> Page 513 of the manual shows the 41202B distributor has a nominal 4-6
degrees of
> centrifugal advance at 850 RPM. I would expect to see a healthy
distributor
> idling at about 14-16 deg BTDC with everything else properly set and
vacuum
> lines off, no? Obviously, there are other variables at work, but can
anyone
> explain this to me? (I would not be able to follow an explanation along
the
> lines of the points/condenser thread a couple of weeks ago.) TIA.
> 
>       Best Regards,
> 
>       Tom Marincic
> 
>       '68 TR250 CD3574L
> 
>       P.S. Regarding the TR6 seatbelt thread, all cars sold in the USA that
> were manufactured after Jan 1, 1968 were required to have provisions for
> attaching a 3-point belt, even though shoulder belts themselves were not
> required until much later. I put the new Moss 3-point static belts in my
car,
> and they fit wonderfully, though I need to trim off a couple of feet of
excess
> webbing. The lap belts have eyelet type mounts, and clip into the stock
fittings
> in a minute. The shoulder belts fit the factory anchor perfectly. I
prefer
> static belts because you can cinch them tightly for spirited driving and
they
> compensate for any lack of lateral support from the front seats. $0.02.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>