Continuing ignition timing debate from the 416 thread.

[Newbomb Turk]

I know when we parked my twin turbo BBC at 5850rpm full load for 60 seconds it made my butt pucker up. That’s why I suggested doing it on a mild engine. Something with peak tq in that 4500 range.

lol yep. It takes some getting used to when doing it. The first couple of times I did it I was sweating like a hog and pretty much scared I was killing it.

I’ve had to pull a couple of the engines down for other reasons after testing and they don’t look any different so I just do it now and don’t think about it. Not much anyway.

 

[TT5.9mag]

Peak torque and peak power.

The problem is if you don’t have a way to move the timing electronically you have to do it manually and thats hard to do.

You need to be able to at least see a vacuum gauge and your torque output and then check the timing with the light.

I can do all that sitting at the console.

But I’ve done it manually and if you are only doing peak torque and power it’s not all that bad. But that distributor will be very hot. Im not that smart and started turning it without a glove on. It wasn’t a pleasant experience.

Just for the sake of conversation it wouldn’t be cool to see just if or how much his number changes steady state vs his sweep test. At this point just trying it at peak tq would be interesting

 

[92b]

How often do you have the crate engines on the dyno? They’re fairly mild (~9.2:1 comp and 450hp right?) and it wouldn’t be hard to try a steady state test at peak TQ and swing the timing around. Just to see what happens. I for one do NOT have the experience on a dyno either one of you have, but I do know one of the smartest guys I’ve ever been around on a dyno did exactly that to find the timing requirements. I’d be very interested in the results of your test.

A 602 in roch 2bbl. hobby stock configuration peaks around 300 hp. Good idea for a test I'll think about how might be the best way to do that. If you were close I would make you help.

 

[TT5.9mag]

lol yep. It takes some getting used to when doing it. The first couple of times I did it I was sweating like a hog and pretty much scared I was killing it.

I’ve had to pull a couple of the engines down for other reasons after testing and they don’t look any different so I just do it now and don’t think about it. Not much anyway.

For some reason at the 300lb/ft level it doesn’t bother me at all, but at 900lb/ft it definitely did. I’ll wing up one of my small blocks and park it there without even thinking twice about it. But things get serious real quick when boost comes up and stays there. You start thinking about all the little things instantly. Is my plug too hot? What’s the chamber temp? Do I have enough ring gap? Is the coating on the piston going to live or will it scuff the skirt? All the things.

 

[92b]

Still having a hard time wrapping my head around this. You can't use a sweep test on a dyno set an ignition curve because it sweeps too fast and the power changes you see won't be accurate enough to determine a curve. But, you can use a dyno in a sweep test to determine if you made any gains when you change the curve?

I see you hit the agree but as I read that it looks like a contradiction.

 

[TT5.9mag]

A 602 in roch 2bbl. hobby stock configuration peaks around 300 hp. Good idea for a test I'll think about how might be the best way to do that. If you were close I would make you help.

Man Iowa isn’t THAT far. I’d love to spend a day or 3 on the dyno there. Looks like about 26 hours one way.

Ok maybe it’s pretty far.

 

[92b]

Man Iowa isn’t THAT far. I’d love to spend a day or 3 on the dyno there. Looks like about 26 hours one way.

Ok maybe it’s pretty far.
View attachment 1716472892

Uber?

 

[Newbomb Turk]

For some reason at the 300lb/ft level it doesn’t bother me at all, but at 900lb/ft it definitely did. I’ll wing up one of my small blocks and park it there without even thinking twice about it. But things get serious real quick when boost comes up and stays there. You start thinking about all the little things instantly. Is my plug too hot? What’s the chamber temp? Do I have enough ring gap? Is the coating on the piston going to live or will it scuff the skirt? All the things.

Yeah, you can catch a hot plug real quick loading the engine steady state.

You certainly need to be aware of it and watch the numbers.

I know guys who would never steady state an engine. They think it’s hard on them but if you think about a boat they are constantly loaded.

You can also see how the A/F ratio changes under steady state testing.

I’m assuming that is another reason why sweeping tests let you run more timing than steady state because the a/f ratio is much different.

Plus, I’m not sure on a sweep you have enough cycles for the change in timing to take effect.

 

[9secRR]

I’m going go out on a limb here and say I’m almost certain Steve Morris knows a thing or to about timing. You don’t get to where he is in the engine building community without knowing most things. Can’t be a fluke to be race engine business this long.

 

[92b]

Yeah, you can catch a hot plug real quick loading the engine steady state.

You certainly need to be aware of it and watch the numbers.

I know guys who would never steady state an engine. They think it’s hard on them but if you think about a boat they are constantly loaded.

You can also see how the A/F ratio changes under steady state testing.

I’m assuming that is another reason why sweeping tests let you run more timing than steady state because the a/f ratio is much different.

Plus, I’m not sure on a sweep you have enough cycles for the change in timing to take effect.

Tuning a boat motor might be done better steady state since that is how it will be used mostly. If there is a change in a/f ratio after some period of time at steady state then you would see it. And sweep testing might be better for motors that sweep through the rpm range.

Ok, I had to find the Superflow book and my notebook.

Going off my memory I got it wrong. Superflow says 100 cycles and the other people I talk to said it’s 250 if not 300 cycles to affect a change.

SuperFlow is talking about how fuel behaves while testing. But the time is the same. And it affects ignition timing the same.

Cycles is rpm. It takes 100 cycles to affect a change. Again, that’s what SuperFlow says. I believe it to be at a minimum 250 cycles.

It’s the exact same with timing. When you are moving so fast, even at 300 rpm/second it’s too fast so the engine thinks it wants more timing than it does.View attachment 1716472562View attachment 1716472563View attachment 1716472566

I finally had time to read this and it's good information. Thank you for taking time to take pictures and share it. As you said there is no mention of timing in this paper. It also is a strong argument for sweep testing if that is how the engine is going to be used. And steady state testing for motors that will be used in a steady state.

 

[92b]

The paper says it can take up to 100 cycles for fuel to stabilize after a change. 100 cycles = 1 second @ 6000 rpm. I'm pretty sure 100 cycles is not a hard number which is why they phrased it as "almost 100 cycles". The explanation of how the fuel travels at different speeds atomized vs wet flow seems to make sense as to why it was observed that what was an ideal a/f ratio for steady state turned out to be lean during a sweep.
I don't see how this same phenomenon would relate to timing. Unless the A/F ratio was not corrected from steady state to a sweep. But that would just mean you are adjusting timing for a too lean A/F ratio. Even if timing was affected by the sweep of the motor it seems to me it would make more sense to follow the papers recommendation for setting the A/F ratio "test for best power" and test the motor how it will be used.

 

[92b]

Here is a test on the box going in my car. It’s wired up exactly as it will be in the car. I forgot I recorded this, as I had forgotten if I even tested this box and was going to pull the box back off the car just to test it.

This just happens to be a very good box.

If you watch it I have the nasty habit of using distributor and crank degrees interchangeably and that’s bad.

Every tic mark is 1 distributor degree or two crank degrees regardless of how I screw it up.

But the box does retard. If someone really wants to throw up in their mouth I can do a test with the orange box hanging on the wall and you can see what massive, early retard looks like. I think that box retards at least 8 degrees by 7k or something. It’s pretty nasty.

I watched your video again. I can’t hear exactly what you are saying in the video but in the post you describe this as a test for box retard. I don't see how this is measuring box retard as it seems the way you are testing it the box is operating independent of the distributor machine. The timing retard you are seeing is coming from the combination of your distributor and the distributor machine itself. You would need to measure from the secondary side of the coil to include the module or box.

 

[92b]

What did he say about timing curves for all 5 gears?

Do you feel that the timing curve should be different for 1st gear than it should be for 5th gear?

 

[Newbomb Turk]

I’m going go out on a limb here and say I’m almost certain Steve Morris knows a thing or to about timing. You don’t get to where he is in the engine building community without knowing most things. Can’t be a fluke to be race engine business this long.

You’d be surprised. Go watch the video yourself. He did at least one on timing, compression ratio and how compression ratio doesnt affect timing. Nor does boost.

It was sad really because people watch that and think he’s correct but he’s not. I mean it seems simple doesnt it?

If you have a 10:1 engine and you bump the compression rate to 12:1 will it take the same timing? Of course not. Not only will the total timing be different the curve will be different.

If you are running 10 pounds of boost and you bump it to 15, would the timing be the same? No, it would not.

If you look close at the graphs he posts you can see when he’s missing it. The peak power goes up, but the bottom of the pull to around peak torque loses power. He blows it off because the engine doesn’t run at that rpm down the track. That is true, but many of those engines are drag and drive and I’ve seen a couple of NA engines that were street/strip stuff and he did the same thing.

I know that he’s hurt some engines on his dyno with too much timing. I know it for a fact because I got it from the horses mouth. He was a paid consultant for the testing and he kept telling Morris he was hurting it with timing. But he kept add in more timing and not paying attention to what was happening below and around peak torque.

I don’t have time or I’d go see if I could find the video where he talks about compression ratio, timing and all that.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

The paper says it can take up to 100 cycles for fuel to stabilize after a change. 100 cycles = 1 second @ 6000 rpm. I'm pretty sure 100 cycles is not a hard number which is why they phrased it as "almost 100 cycles". The explanation of how the fuel travels at different speeds atomized vs wet flow seems to make sense as to why it was observed that what was an ideal a/f ratio for steady state turned out to be lean during a sweep.
I don't see how this same phenomenon would relate to timing. Unless the A/F ratio was not corrected from steady state to a sweep. But that would just mean you are adjusting timing for a too lean A/F ratio. Even if timing was affected by the sweep of the motor it seems to me it would make more sense to follow the papers recommendation for setting the A/F ratio "test for best power" and test the motor how it will be used.

Like I said, there are people who say it’s 250 cycles.

You need to do some steady state testing and move the timing and see what happens.

Im not sure why you think steady state testing won’t show you something different?

I have done it and the results are what I’m telling you. This is why I wasn’t going to even bother with this thread. You keep saying you don’t get it and you don’t.

You either need to do some steady state testing and prove it doesn’t work or just get off it. I will continue to tell people that virtually every engine out there wants LESS timing at peak torque and MORE timing at peak power because timing follows the VE curve.

It’s basic ****. The problem is doing sweep tests will not show you where the timing needs to be. You keep posting graphs of tests where all you are doing is adding timing everywhere to taking it away everywhere.

Im not talking about that. Im talking about taking the time to develop a curve using steady state load and the numbers the engine wants at peak torque and peak power won’t be the same, with peak torque wants LESS timing and peak power wanting MORE timing.

Can you do a sweep test and figure that out? If so, I love to hear how you do it because if you could accomplish a correct curve with sweep testing it would save me a huge amount of time.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

I watched your video again. I can’t hear exactly what you are saying in the video but in the post you describe this as a test for box retard. I don't see how this is measuring box retard as it seems the way you are testing it the box is operating independent of the distributor machine. The timing retard you are seeing is coming from the combination of your distributor and the distributor machine itself. You would need to measure from the secondary side of the coil to include the module or box.

What you don’t see is the test I did of just the distributor. With the distributor locked out it will rpm to 10k and not retard.

Then I wire the ignition system just like it is in the car and test it again and what you see is the amount of retard and the rpm where it occurs.

It’s that simple. Im not sure why this is confusing to you.

 

[92b]

What you don’t see is the test I did of just the distributor. With the distributor locked out it will rpm to 10k and not retard.

Then I wire the ignition system just like it is in the car and test it again and what you see is the amount of retard and the rpm where it occurs.

It’s that simple. Im not sure why this is confusing to you.

Because your distributor machine can't see what your box is doing the way you are testing it. What triggers the distributor machine? What triggers the box?

 

[Newbomb Turk]

Do you feel that the timing curve should be different for 1st gear than it should be for 5th gear?

Absolutely. If timing in different gears doesn’t matter then why do some guys pull timing at the hit? Because they can’t get the car hooked so they pull timing and kill some power to get the car moving.

If the car isn’t traction limited you can ADD timing at the hit and make the car 60 foot quicker because you can use more timing on an engine that isnt loaded as hard, and I first gear the engine isnt loaded like it is in every subsequent gear as the ratios in the transmission gets higher andthe load goes up.

I know there are times where some engines with a huge amount of mixture motion can actually pull some timing out in high gear and make more power, but those are highly tuned NA engines.

So yes, the timing requirements for the engine are based on load and there is less load on the engine in low gear than in high gear. That should be evident by the fact that the engine will rpm significantly faster in,ow gear than in high gear.

Load affects timing. Change the load and the timing changes. That’s why vacuum advance should be used on anything that sees street time. Or circle track stuff.

We know that under cruise load the chamber isnt filled (lower VE) and the burn rate of that lower VE is much slower, so for maximum efficiency you add timing at a cruise with VA.

Again, this goes to why most engines need a curve. And why sweep testing won’t sort out a curve.

I watch a ton of dyno videos and I never see the operator actually do anything other than add timing across the entire curve or remove timing across the entire curve.

Nicks Garage is another example of timing nonsense. I’ve never seen him change the curve or even say what the curve is to start with. He either adds to the curve or reduces the curve.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

Because your distributor machine can't see what your box is doing the way you are testing it. What triggers the distributor machine? What triggers the box?

Do you know what machine I have? It doesn’t trigger like a Sun does. The machine gets triggered from the SOURCE, so on points or ANY system that acts like points like a Unilite the machine gets triggered by the “points” or in the case of the Unilite it triggers off the green wire, which is just like triggering points.

So the machine sees exactly what the trigger is doing whether the box is hooked up or not. I can actually test most ignition boxes with just the machine and nothing else. You can’t do that with a Sun or any other machine Ive ever seen, with the exception of those King brand machines and Ive only seen a few pictures of those.

So when you see the timing going backwards in the video thats exactly what it’s doing and it’s the box doing it.

 

[92b]

So yes, the timing requirements for the engine are based on load and there is less load on the engine in low gear than in high gear. That should be evident by the fact that the engine will rpm significantly faster in,ow gear than in high gear.

How would you test this ? With the car at a steady state or with the car sweeping through the rpm range?

 

[92b]

Do you know what machine I have? It doesn’t trigger like a Sun does. The machine gets triggered from the SOURCE, so on points or ANY system that acts like points like a Unilite the machine gets triggered by the “points” or in the case of the Unilite it triggers off the green wire, which is just like triggering points.

How does it trigger on a msd 2 wire?

 

[92b]

You can’t do that with a Sun or any other machine Ive ever seen, with the exception of those King brand machines and Ive only seen a few pictures of those.

Msd makes a tester for this. 89981

 

[71GSSDemon]

You’d be surprised. Go watch the video yourself. He did at least one on timing, compression ratio and how compression ratio doesnt affect timing. Nor does boost.

It was sad really because people watch that and think he’s correct but he’s not. I mean it seems simple doesnt it?

If you have a 10:1 engine and you bump the compression rate to 12:1 will it take the same timing? Of course not. Not only will the total timing be different the curve will be different.

If you are running 10 pounds of boost and you bump it to 15, would the timing be the same? No, it would not.

If you look close at the graphs he posts you can see when he’s missing it. The peak power goes up, but the bottom of the pull to around peak torque loses power. He blows it off because the engine doesn’t run at that rpm down the track. That is true, but many of those engines are drag and drive and I’ve seen a couple of NA engines that were street/strip stuff and he did the same thing.

I know that he’s hurt some engines on his dyno with too much timing. I know it for a fact because I got it from the horses mouth. He was a paid consultant for the testing and he kept telling Morris he was hurting it with timing. But he kept add in more timing and not paying attention to what was happening below and around peak torque.

I don’t have time or I’d go see if I could find the video where he talks about compression ratio, timing and all that.

I think some of what Steve does in the videos is for shock value HP numbers. Kill some for the goal of singular peak. For drag and drive, those guys put a cruise tune in. I am sure drastically different than race tune

I am loving this whole thread and discussions. Thank you all

 

[92b]

I think some of what Stve does in the videos is for shock value HP numbers. Kill some for thr goal of singular peak. For drag and drive, those guys put a cruise tune in. I am sure drastically different than race tune

I am loving this whole thread and discussions. Thank you all

If he re-tuned to the last horsepower for every single change it would take 10 episodes to do what he did in that one. So a lot of shortcuts and compromise. Not saying that's the right way to do it but it probably works out better for the average attention span. Including mine lol.

 

[92b]

So when you see the timing going backwards in the video thats exactly what it’s doing and it’s the box doing it.

Where does the machine get the secondary ignition reference?