Subject: Re: [TR] distributor advance

From: Tony Drews <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 12:16:33 -0600

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1844044818737695487==
 boundary="------------17E4FF900910496C50BA98A4"
Content-Language: en-US

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------17E4FF900910496C50BA98A4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I'm not saying all advance is used at idle, but what I'm saying is that 
when all the mechanical advance is used, you're at a different advance 
setting than before (you had to change the timing after changing the 
springs, so when you do that the full advance amount changes 
correspondingly).  I'm unclear which direction it changed.  Your "at 
3200 RPM" observation would almost always be at full advance regardless 
of which springs you're using.

Stiffer springs should equate to less advance at idle than before I'd think.

Regards, Tony Drews

On 2/28/2020 8:09 PM, Peter Arakelian wrote:
> Tony, if I follow you correctly, you are saying that by changing the 
> springs I may have made it so that all the mechanical advance is used 
> up at idle and I may have no more at speed.  Where with the older 
> springs I would get mechanical advance later in the rpms and so have 
> more advance at speed.
> Would the marking on the weight of 13 degrees indicate its maxium 
> advance?  If so, I suspect I may in fact be using all the mechanical 
> at idle since my idle timing jumped past the pully markings and I can 
> only estimate a 10-15 degree jump. Maybe I should go back to the old 
> springs.
> >>The springs should just change what RPM it takes to get to full advance
> but the full advance should be the same (weights against the stops).?
> I'm a little unclear on how much you changed the timing, it sounds like
> you had to retard the timing after the spring replacement - this would
> also retard the "all in" timing, which would be what you're running at
> 3200 RPM.? It's possible it's worse at 3200 now than it was before
> because the full advance timing is now less.<<

--------------17E4FF900910496C50BA98A4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>I'm not saying all advance is used at idle, but what I'm saying
      is that when all the mechanical advance is used, you're at a
      different advance setting than before (you had to change the
      timing after changing the springs, so when you do that the full
      advance amount changes correspondingly).  I'm unclear which
      direction it changed.  Your "at 3200 RPM" observation would almost
      always be at full advance regardless of which springs you're
      using.</p>
    <p>Stiffer springs should equate to less advance at idle than before
      I'd think.</p>
    <p>Regards, Tony Drews<br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/28/2020 8:09 PM, Peter Arakelian
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:[email-masked]">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <style></style>
      <meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 11.00.10570.1001">
      <!--[gte IE 5]><?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->
      <div>Tony, if I follow you correctly, you are saying that by
        changing the springs I may have made it so that all the
        mechanical advance is used up at idle and I may have no more at
        speed.  Where with the older springs I would get mechanical
        advance later in the rpms and so have more advance at speed.</div>
      <div>Would the marking on the weight of 13 degrees indicate its
        maxium advance?  If so, I suspect I may in fact be using all the
        mechanical at idle since my idle timing jumped past the pully
        markings and I can only estimate a 10-15 degree jump. Maybe I
        should go back to the old springs.</div>
      <div> </div>
      <div><span style="font-family: &quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;
          font-size: 11pt; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin;
          mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
          mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:
          &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi;
          mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;
          mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">&gt;&gt;The springs should just
          change what RPM it takes to get to full advance <br>
          but the full advance should be the same (weights against the
          stops).? <br>
          I'm a little unclear on how much you changed the timing, it
          sounds like <br>
          you had to retard the timing after the spring replacement -
          this would <br>
          also retard the "all in" timing, which would be what you're
          running at <br>
          3200 RPM.? It's possible it's worse at 3200 now than it was
          before <br>
          because the full advance timing is now less.&lt;&lt;</span></div>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>

--------------17E4FF900910496C50BA98A4--

--===============1844044818737695487==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

** [email-masked] **

Archive: http://www.team.net/pipermail/triumphs  http://www.team.net/archive

--===============1844044818737695487==--

---

From: Peter Arakelian <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 20:02:41 +0000

--===============3943036047045966650==
Content-Language: en-US
	boundary="_000_DM5PR06MB3564342585E08095A07CA2F5C1E90DM5PR06MB3564namp_"

--_000_DM5PR06MB3564342585E08095A07CA2F5C1E90DM5PR06MB3564namp_
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I should have done this from the start.  checked the Bentley manual.  Lists=
 my distributor and the advance specs.  Shows centrifugal advance at idle o=
f 0-2 degrees on the crank.  So my stiffer springs are advancing too much i=
nitially, which will reduce the amount of extra advance I get at speed..  W=
ill change back.

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=3D550986> for Window=
s 10

Sent: Saturday, February 29, 2020 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: distributor advance

I'm not saying all advance is used at idle, but what I'm saying is that whe=
n all the mechanical advance is used, you're at a different advance setting=
 than before (you had to change the timing after changing the springs, so w=
hen you do that the full advance amount changes correspondingly).  I'm uncl=
ear which direction it changed.  Your "at 3200 RPM" observation would almos=
t always be at full advance regardless of which springs you're using.

Stiffer springs should equate to less advance at idle than before I'd think=
.

Regards, Tony Drews
On 2/28/2020 8:09 PM, Peter Arakelian wrote:
Tony, if I follow you correctly, you are saying that by changing the spring=
s I may have made it so that all the mechanical advance is used up at idle =
and I may have no more at speed.  Where with the older springs I would get =
mechanical advance later in the rpms and so have more advance at speed.
Would the marking on the weight of 13 degrees indicate its maxium advance? =
 If so, I suspect I may in fact be using all the mechanical at idle since m=
y idle timing jumped past the pully markings and I can only estimate a 10-1=
5 degree jump. Maybe I should go back to the old springs.

--_000_DM5PR06MB3564342585E08095A07CA2F5C1E90DM5PR06MB3564namp_
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:sc=
hemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/of=
fice/2004/12/omml" xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"=
<meta name=3D"Generator" content=3D"Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:"Cambria Math";
	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:11.0pt;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang=3D"EN-US" link=3D"blue" vlink=3D"#954F72">
<div class=3D"WordSection1">
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">I should have done this from the start.&nbsp; checke=
d the Bentley manual.&nbsp; Lists my distributor and the advance specs.&nbs=
p; Shows centrifugal advance at idle of 0-2 degrees on the crank.&nbsp; So =
my stiffer springs are advancing too much initially, which
 will reduce the amount of extra advance I get at speed..&nbsp; Will change=
 back.</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Sent from <a href=3D"https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink=
/?LinkId=3D550986">
Mail</a> for Windows 10<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div style=3D"mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-top:solid #E1E=
1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"border:none;padding:0in"><b>From: </b><a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:[email-masked]">Tony Drews</a><br>
<b>Sent: </b>Saturday, February 29, 2020 10:16 AM<br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: distributor advance</p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<p>I'm not saying all advance is used at idle, but what I'm saying is that =
when all the mechanical advance is used, you're at a different advance sett=
ing than before (you had to change the timing after changing the springs, s=
o when you do that the full advance
 amount changes correspondingly).&nbsp; I'm unclear which direction it chan=
ged.&nbsp; Your &quot;at 3200 RPM&quot; observation would almost always be =
at full advance regardless of which springs you're using.</p>
<p>Stiffer springs should equate to less advance at idle than before I'd th=
ink.</p>
<p>Regards, Tony Drews</p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">On 2/28/2020 8:09 PM, Peter Arakelian wrote:<o:p></o=
:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style=3D"margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Tony, if I follow you correctly, you are saying that=
 by changing the springs I may have made it so that all&nbsp;the mechanical=
 advance is used up at idle and&nbsp;I&nbsp;may have no more at speed.&nbsp=
; Where with the older springs I would get mechanical
 advance later in the rpms and so have more advance at speed.<o:p></o:p></p=
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Would the marking on the weight of 13 degrees indica=
te its maxium advance?&nbsp; If so, I suspect I may in fact be using all th=
e mechanical at idle since my idle timing jumped&nbsp;past the pully markin=
gs and I can only estimate a 10-15 degree jump.&nbsp;Maybe
 I should go back to the old springs.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:.5in;ma=
rgin-bottom:5.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
&gt;&gt;The springs should just change what RPM it takes to get to full adv=
ance <br>
but the full advance should be the same (weights against the stops).? <br>
I'm a little unclear on how much you changed the timing, it sounds like <br=
you had to retard the timing after the spring replacement - this would <br>
also retard the &quot;all in&quot; timing, which would be what you're runni=
ng at <br>
3200 RPM.? It's possible it's worse at 3200 now than it was before <br>
because the full advance timing is now less.&lt;&lt;<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--_000_DM5PR06MB3564342585E08095A07CA2F5C1E90DM5PR06MB3564namp_--

--===============3943036047045966650==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

--===============3943036047045966650==--