Thermoquad 1966 Metering Rods

Bewy said
Rumble fish.
Post #8. Not crazy at all for the purpose of testing to see if a richer mixture improves/stops pinging. I have done it, many times. Just because you have not done it does not mean it doesn't work.

Running a full unrestricted jet that normally has a metering rod is n it without reducing the size accordingly is nuts and something I would never do to see if making it richer solves anything.

Bewy said
Your post 9 & 11 are just nonsense. There is no such thing as the 'total area of the circumference'.

Perhaps I worded it poorly.
The jet has an opening of .098, the total open area is reduced by the size of the metering rod. .067. What remains is the area that the fuel flows past. It’s shape is a circle and the area that’s left behind is what I was trying to describe.

Bewy said
If you bothered to fully read what I said, it was to cruise at light throttle [ on the idle cct, not the cruise step of the met rod so as to avoid plug fouling ] to the test location.

Horse ****

Bewy said
Apparently you are unaware that when comparing fuel flow through a jet you use area, not diameter.

This I understand. The area of what is left over when the rod is in the jet is circular.

Bewy said
A 045 met rod tip in a 098 jet gives an area of 0.005953 sq in. With no met rod, 098 jet only, the area is 0.007543. The increase in area by removing the 045 met rod tip is only 16%, not the nonsense you came up with.

Horse ****.

Read it again. I’ll use rounder numbers.

100 jet, 66 rod. 33.3 left over in area.
Remove the rod and you increased the area 66%. Triple of what was there. Simple.