Author Topic: Vacuum advance confusion  (Read 9221 times)

Offline Strawdawg

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2209
    • Vortex Buicks
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #15 on: September 20, 2010 - 10:28:57 PM »
the ported vacuum has nothing to do with the Bernoulli effect which pulls fuel out of the boosters.

Ported vacuum is the same as manifold vacuum once the throttle has been opened and as such, it goes almost away depending upon the throttle bore size.     

The Bernoulli effect continues to allow fuel to be pulled/pushed out of the bowl....

this is a pretty simple explanation of all three

http://www.lbfun.com/warehouse/tech_info/timing%20&%20vacuum%20advance/vacuum_explained.pdf
« Last Edit: September 20, 2010 - 10:35:50 PM by Strawdawg »




Offline Supercuda

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 534
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #16 on: September 21, 2010 - 09:06:00 AM »
Manifold vacuum is entirely dependent upon the throttle blade covering up the venturi of the carb. Vacuum is only "seen" below the blade, Which is why you do not see vacuum at the ported source until the throttle blade moves past the port. As the blade moves towards full open, the possibility of creating a vacuum goes away, because there is no longer any restriction over the manifold. If you have measurable vacuum at WOT, you need more carburetor. Fuel is pulled into the airstream by the siphoning action of the air rushing past the booster venturi, not by any vacuum that we can measure. This siphoning is what draws the fuel out of the carb at every circuit that meters fuel into the engine. The pressure drop at the fuel port is the siphoning agent, and we can "see" this action by monitoring a vacuum gauge, as long as we are only trying to monitor the idle circuit. Tapping into the booster venturi to monitor the main feed circuit is not practical in the field, so we rely upon a visual indicator (seeing the fuel come out of the mains). As for the presence of manifold vacuum at the ported source under idle conditions, this means that you have the throttle blades too far open, and the idle circuit is not properly metering fuel, as the fuel out of the transfer slot is not controlled by the idle mixture screw. If you have this problem, close the primary throttles until the vacuum goes away on the port, and then adjust secondary throttle blade angle until correct idle speed is achieved. If this results in a secondary throttle exposing too much of the rear transfer slot, reset the blades to expose the proper amount of slot, and drill a hole on the downhill side of the secondary throttle blade, to replace the air you just took away by closing the throttle blades.

Offline Bullitt-

  • Permanent Resident
  • *******
  • Posts: 12167
  • Better Things To Come Member Since 2/16/06
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #17 on: September 21, 2010 - 09:19:30 AM »
That's a great explanation ......I'll add that the absence of the negative pressure from idle to off idle to send fuel into the venturi is why accelerator pumps are needed to compensate.
 I learned more about carburetion theory reading this article than any
http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/83118_carburetor_basics/index.html
Wade  73 Rallye 340..'77 Millennium Falcon...13 R/T Classic   Huntsville, AL
Screwed by Photobucket!

Offline Supercuda

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 534
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #18 on: September 21, 2010 - 09:30:35 AM »
You have an excellent grasp of the topic, Bullitt.

Offline dodj

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 6197
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #19 on: September 21, 2010 - 02:25:51 PM »
Thanks for the input everybody. A lot of fog has lifted.  :2thumbs:
Scott
1973 Challenger  440 4 spd 
2007.5 3500 6.7 Cummins Diesel, Anarchy tuned.
Good friends don't let friends do stupid things. ........alone.

Offline mojavered

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 853
  • Someday!
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #20 on: September 21, 2010 - 11:59:20 PM »
I have been told that total advance with vacuum could be as high as 50 degrees
Can it be even higher?  Maybe around 60?  I might need to take a look at my setup and make some adjustments, but I am running about 12 initial, 40 total, and right about 60 w/vacuum hooked up.  Brand new MP dizzy. 
Jason

Offline Bullitt-

  • Permanent Resident
  • *******
  • Posts: 12167
  • Better Things To Come Member Since 2/16/06
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #21 on: September 22, 2010 - 12:10:02 AM »
Can it be even higher?  Maybe around 60?  I might need to take a look at my setup and make some adjustments, but I am running about 12 initial, 40 total, and right about 60 w/vacuum hooked up.  Brand new MP dizzy. 

Googled for info, the most I can find referenced is 60 Degrees  :dunno:

http://www.moparchat.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-82252.html
« Last Edit: September 22, 2010 - 12:11:40 AM by Bullitt- »
Wade  73 Rallye 340..'77 Millennium Falcon...13 R/T Classic   Huntsville, AL
Screwed by Photobucket!

Offline Aussie Challenger

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3407
  • In Kansas loaded for Drive to West Coast.
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #22 on: September 22, 2010 - 06:26:10 AM »
I have found that many auto equiped cars have manifold vac at idle to enhance take off and manual cars don't, their vac advance port picks up above the throttle butterfly.   :2cents:
Dave

Offline Strawdawg

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2209
    • Vortex Buicks
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #23 on: September 22, 2010 - 10:02:58 AM »
I have found that many auto equiped cars have manifold vac at idle to enhance take off and manual cars don't, their vac advance port picks up above the throttle butterfly.   :2cents:

When emissions standards were first mandated, one of the early crude methods of improving emissions at idle was to pull the timing back and remove the vacuum advance from the equation at that point.  To do this, some carbs came with a ported vacuum connection above the throttle blades which served to switch the vacuum off when the blades where in the idle position. 

For some reason, a few jumped on the bandwagon and claimed this was "better" when in fact it was worse from a performance standpoint as it not only reduced gas mileage, but the total lack of timing at low rpm made the cars more sluggish than ever.

These days, it seems that most people understand that the ported vacuum was for emissions and that the manifold vacuum port is the best choice for most cars if one is going to run vacuum advance.  The type of tranny is not normally pertinent in the choice.

The danger we sometimes run into is when we run 16-20 degs of initial advance and then plug in the vacuum advance on top of it, we may have too much advance at low rpm and it will be noticed when the throttle is opened a bit in normal driving.  That is when an adjustable vacuum advance comes in handy as it can be used to avoid the conflict.   

Or, the ported vacuum outlet can also be used as a work around to remove the vacuum advance from the equation until higher rpm if one does not have an adjustable cannister.

Race cars, or cars that don't get driven enuf to keep the gas fresh in the tank, probably don't care about gas mileage can do away with the device and find something else to argue over :D

Offline Aussie Challenger

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3407
  • In Kansas loaded for Drive to West Coast.
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #24 on: September 22, 2010 - 10:22:22 AM »
My comment was from early cars, 50's through 60's. I do remember the early vac retard distributors, what a joke, somehow most that I worked on the hoses fell off or wouldn't stay on.   :naughty:
Street driven cars or cruisers might benefit from vac advances being connected but any sort of competition the vac advance is a big NO NO.
Yes we also have to look at total advance and also be aware of detonation, unlike pinging which we can hear, which usually become evident as a pistons dies.   :money:
Dave

Offline AMXguy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1035
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #25 on: September 22, 2010 - 10:50:37 AM »
I fought this for 2 years on my 440 six pack and after much trial and error I found an initial of 16 with mechanical all in at 36 at 2500 rpm  along with 15 degrees of vac advance for 51 works PEFECT on my car. vac advance must be hooked to MANIFOLD VACUUM or it doesn't work right on pre smogger cars.

 this is the best read I've ever found on the subject.

 http://www.corvette-restoration.com/resources/technical_papers/Timing101.pdf
1970 R/T SE Challenger
 1970 Superbee
 1969 S code Mach 1
 1967  GTO

Offline cjm

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 228
  • 70 Cuda - In Progress.....
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #26 on: September 22, 2010 - 02:27:37 PM »
Now I'm a little confused on this. I thought that the "total" timing at 3000rpm's should not exceed 35 degrees, regardless on whether you are using vacuum advance or not...   I thought that if you don't use vacuum advance, you increase the initial to achieve the "total" of 35-36, but 51 sounds way to high.... ?

Offline MEK-Dangerfield

  • C-C.com Expert
  • ********
  • Posts: 20946
  • I don't get NO respect! Member since 1/25/2002
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #27 on: September 22, 2010 - 03:36:08 PM »
Now I'm a little confused on this. I thought that the "total" timing at 3000rpm's should not exceed 35 degrees, regardless on whether you are using vacuum advance or not...   I thought that if you don't use vacuum advance, you increase the initial to achieve the "total" of 35-36, but 51 sounds way to high.... ?

You have it correct for most of us. The idea is to advance as much as you can before you experience detonation, then back off a little. So in my case, the 36* total advance works with my 10:1 compression ratio engine and 93 octane gas. If I were to use race fuel, then I would be able to advance my timing further.

Mike

1970 Challenger - SOLD
2016 SXT+.  1 of 524 SXT+'s in Plumb-crazy for 2016.

Offline Strawdawg

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2209
    • Vortex Buicks
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #28 on: September 22, 2010 - 05:20:53 PM »
Now I'm a little confused on this. I thought that the "total" timing at 3000rpm's should not exceed 35 degrees, regardless on whether you are using vacuum advance or not...   I thought that if you don't use vacuum advance, you increase the initial to achieve the "total" of 35-36, but 51 sounds way to high.... ?

35-36 degs is the wide open throttle number...all in by 3000, or there abouts.....and at wide open throttle, there should be virtually no vacuum present to activate the vacuum advance so that is all you will see.

At cruise, you should be able to handle somewhere in the range of 50-55 deg total advance which includes the additional provided by the vacuum advance.

The vacuum advance should not cause detonation in part throttle driving when engine load is low.  It is possible, if one cranks the initial advance up to something like 16-20 degrees on a car that has high vacuum to get too much advance from the vacuum advance IF the vacuum canister is adjusted to activate at too low a vacuum number.  In that case, one has to back the adjustment screw out until the vacuum advance does not begin to add more advance until a higher rpm.

This is often not a problem on an engine with a longer duration cam that does not make a lot of low rpm vacuum.

Offline mojavered

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 853
  • Someday!
Re: Vacuum advance confusion
« Reply #29 on: September 22, 2010 - 06:24:18 PM »
Can someone post a pic of this allen screw that can be adjusted to take the vacuum advance out?  Thanks!
Jason