Vacuum advance - ported vs direct manifold

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 28, 2008 | 06:27 PM
  #1  
88 coupe's Avatar
Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,212
From: Southern CA
Vacuum advance - ported vs direct manifold

The following, contains two articles:

http://www.chevelles.com/forums/show...63&postcount=2

The first, has been floating around the internet (with several different authors) for at least ten years.

Originally Posted by John Z
After 30-40 years of controlling vacuum advance with full manifold vacuum, along came emissions requirements, years before catalytic converter technology had been developed, and all manner of crude band-aid systems were developed to try and reduce hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust stream. One of these band-aids was "ported spark", which moved the vacuum pickup orifice in the carburetor venturi from below the throttle plate (where it was exposed to full manifold vacuum at idle) to above the throttle plate, where it saw no manifold vacuum at all at idle. This meant the vacuum advance was inoperative at idle (retarding spark timing from its optimum value), and these applications also had VERY low initial static timing (usually 4 degrees or less, and some actually were set at 2 degrees AFTER TDC). This was done in order to increase exhaust gas temperature (due to "lighting the fire late") to improve the effectiveness of the "afterburning" of hydrocarbons by the air injected into the exhaust manifolds by the A.I.R. system; as a result, these engines ran like crap, and an enormous amount of wasted heat energy was transferred through the exhaust port walls into the coolant, causing them to run hot at idle - cylinder pressure fell off, engine temperatures went up, combustion efficiency went down the drain, and fuel economy went down with it ........
Other than "0" vacuum at idle, and low initial spark timing, does this "creative writing exercise" contain any facts?

Norm
Old Jul 28, 2008 | 07:11 PM
  #2  
BILL DEMMER's Avatar
Just the facts...
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,259
From: THE GREAT WIDE-OPEN
yup! and it explains, in detail, why-not just what.

ported vacuum advance was caused by emissions requirements.

ernie likes his manifold vacuum.


bill
Old Jul 28, 2008 | 08:51 PM
  #3  
88 coupe's Avatar
Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,212
From: Southern CA
Originally Posted by BILL DEMMER
........ ported vacuum advance was caused by emissions requirements ........
Not even close.

Ported vacuum dates back to the first use of vacuum advance, during the thirties, and was used until computers took over.

Emissions requirements date back to '55 at the earliest.

Norm
Old Jul 28, 2008 | 09:55 PM
  #4  
Dapapadon's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 490
From: Gladstone, OR
OK Norm, I gotta' ask, is the part about the mixture being lean under cruise conditions correct? I'm guessing no. I would assume the mixture is right at cruise speeds, vacuum is high, load is low and the engine can tolerate more timing.

Don
Old Jul 28, 2008 | 11:22 PM
  #5  
88 coupe's Avatar
Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,212
From: Southern CA
Originally Posted by Dapapadon
........ I gotta' ask ........
It's why I started the thread.

Originally Posted by Dapapadon
........ is the part about the mixture being lean under cruise conditions correct? ........
Yes it is. High vacuum closes the economizer valve. which restricts fuel flow to the jets.

Originally Posted by Dapapadon
........ I would assume the mixture is right at cruise speeds ........
The right mixture for cruise conditions is lean, which causes increased MPG on the highway.

Originally Posted by Dapapadon
........ vacuum is high, load is low and the engine can tolerate more timing.
Not exactly. High vacuum leans the mixture, which requires more timing. Fortunately, that same high vacuum supplies the the right amount of advance, at the right time.

Under load, there is less vacuum, the power valve opens, enriching the mixture, and the advance is reduced by the appropriate amount.

Power goes up, MPG goes down. And vice-versa.

Norm
Old Jul 29, 2008 | 07:50 AM
  #6  
BILL DEMMER's Avatar
Just the facts...
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,259
From: THE GREAT WIDE-OPEN
Originally Posted by 88 coupe
Not even close.

Ported vacuum dates back to the first use of vacuum advance, during the thirties, and was used until computers took over.

Emissions requirements date back to '55 at the earliest.

Norm
ok... what were the emissions requirements dating back to '55?
when did the nox emission standard come into play?
Old Jul 29, 2008 | 05:06 PM
  #7  
88 coupe's Avatar
Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,212
From: Southern CA
Originally Posted by BILL DEMMER
ok... what were the emissions requirements dating back to '55? ........
In '60, PCV retrofits were mandated to '55 with a couple of exceptions.

........ when did the nox emission standard come into play?
In '65, NOX retrofits were mandated to the same '55s.
The kit included a cap for the ported source at the carb.

Norm
Old Jul 30, 2008 | 07:52 AM
  #8  
joe_padavano's Avatar
Old(s) Fart
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 50,770
From: Northern VA
Originally Posted by 88 coupe
In '60, PCV retrofits were mandated to '55 with a couple of exceptions....


In '65, NOX retrofits were mandated to the same '55s.
The kit included a cap for the ported source at the carb.

Norm
Just to clarify, this was a Californina state mandate. People from the rest of the country likely aren't aware of it. I'll never forget the ordeal that a friend of mine experienced where he had moved to SoCal with a Dodge. He had previously installed a fully mechanical distributor. CARB made him remove that distributor and install an original vac advance unit just so he could then install the mandated NOX device that rendered the vac advance inoperative.
Old Jul 31, 2008 | 08:54 AM
  #9  
mugzilla's Avatar
is Fast Enough ...
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,308
From: dogtown
Originally Posted by joe_padavano
Just to clarify, this was a Californina state mandate. People from the rest of the country likely aren't aware of it. I'll never forget the ordeal that a friend of mine experienced where he had moved to SoCal with a Dodge. He had previously installed a fully mechanical distributor. CARB made him remove that distributor and install an original vac advance unit just so he could then install the mandated NOX device that rendered the vac advance inoperative.

Got to luv california ...

I had a freind that put a "Smog" motor in his car just to pass smog ..

We also have smog check points where they set up a sniffer and pull

your car over if it's running dirty ...
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
BangScreech4-4-2
General Questions
14
Sep 22, 2016 09:26 PM
Mongoose
Parts For Sale
11
Mar 24, 2014 01:54 PM
pcard
General Questions
0
Feb 11, 2013 05:09 PM
rcdynamic88
Big Blocks
2
Oct 19, 2010 06:05 AM
ctrain22
Big Blocks
7
Sep 8, 2009 04:05 PM




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:26 AM.