• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Help with an Edelbrock carb please

kiwigtx

Henchman #4 and Jack-Stand Racer #2
Staff member
FBBO Gold Member
Local time
11:59 AM
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
35,218
Reaction score
94,426
Location
NZ - just short of the South Pole
Just a small bit of help required please. I searched a bunch of YouTube clips, and still didn't find the answer. Having seen the pic posted by Milit73 of the Mustang I thought I could get the answer.

Edelbrockcarb_zps9c850b0e.jpg


(Pic borrowed from Milit73 thread) hope that's OK.

Question is - The vacuum ports have been numbered - Is No.1 the one to use for Vacuum Advance to the distributor? or does it not matter. I have the same carb setup in my truck, and also run a vacuum gauge. However the hoses are plumbed the other way around in my truck - ie/ gauge runs off No.1 and Distributor off No.2. Have I got it wrong? I only have Holley books for reference material.

Any help welcome...thanks. :icon_thumright:
 
Kiwi, you want to use the #1 port - the ported or timed one. Not manifold vac.
 
As many of you are aware, timing and vacuum advance is one of my favorite subjects, as I was involved in the development of some of those systems in my GM days and I understand it. Many people don't, as there has been very little written about it anywhere that makes sense, and as a result, a lot of folks are under the misunderstanding that vacuum advance somehow compromises performance. Nothing could be further from the truth. I finally sat down the other day and wrote up a primer on the subject, with the objective of helping more folks to understand vacuum advance and how it works together with initial timing and centrifugal advance to optimize all-around operation and performance.

TIMING AND VACUUM ADVANCE 101

The most important concept to understand is that lean mixtures, such as at idle and steady highway cruise, take longer to burn than rich mixtures; idle in particular, as idle mixture is affected by exhaust gas dilution. This requires that lean mixtures have "the fire lit" earlier in the compression cycle (spark timing advanced), allowing more burn time so that peak cylinder pressure is reached just after TDC for peak efficiency and reduced exhaust gas temperature (wasted combustion energy). Rich mixtures, on the other hand, burn faster than lean mixtures, so they need to have "the fire lit" later in the compression cycle (spark timing retarded slightly) so maximum cylinder pressure is still achieved at the same point after TDC as with the lean mixture, for maximum efficiency.

The centrifugal advance system in a distributor advances spark timing purely as a function of engine rpm (irrespective of engine load or operating conditions), with the amount of advance and the rate at which it comes in determined by the weights and springs on top of the autocam mechanism. The amount of advance added by the distributor, combined with initial static timing, is "total timing" (i.e., the 34-36 degrees at high rpm that most SBC's like). Vacuum advance has absolutely nothing to do with total timing or performance, as when the throttle is opened, manifold vacuum drops essentially to zero, and the vacuum advance drops out entirely; it has no part in the "total timing" equation.

At idle, the engine needs additional spark advance in order to fire that lean, diluted mixture earlier in order to develop maximum cylinder pressure at the proper point, so the vacuum advance can (connected to manifold vacuum, not "ported" vacuum - more on that aberration later) is activated by the high manifold vacuum, and adds about 15 degrees of spark advance, on top of the initial static timing setting (i.e., if your static timing is at 10 degrees, at idle it's actually around 25 degrees with the vacuum advance connected). The same thing occurs at steady-state highway cruise; the mixture is lean, takes longer to burn, the load on the engine is low, the manifold vacuum is high, so the vacuum advance is again deployed, and if you had a timing light set up so you could see the balancer as you were going down the highway, you'd see about 50 degrees advance (10 degrees initial, 20-25 degrees from the centrifugal advance, and 15 degrees from the vacuum advance) at steady-state cruise (it only takes about 40 horsepower to cruise at 50mph).

When you accelerate, the mixture is instantly enriched (by the accelerator pump, power valve, etc.), burns faster, doesn't need the additional spark advance, and when the throttle plates open, manifold vacuum drops, and the vacuum advance can returns to zero, retarding the spark timing back to what is provided by the initial static timing plus the centrifugal advance provided by the distributor at that engine rpm; the vacuum advance doesn't come back into play until you back off the gas and manifold vacuum increases again as you return to steady-state cruise, when the mixture again becomes lean.

The key difference is that centrifugal advance (in the distributor autocam via weights and springs) is purely rpm-sensitive; nothing changes it except changes in rpm. Vacuum advance, on the other hand, responds to engine load and rapidly-changing operating conditions, providing the correct degree of spark advance at any point in time based on engine load, to deal with both lean and rich mixture conditions. By today's terms, this was a relatively crude mechanical system, but it did a good job of optimizing engine efficiency, throttle response, fuel economy, and idle cooling, with absolutely ZERO effect on wide-open throttle performance, as vacuum advance is inoperative under wide-open throttle conditions. In modern cars with computerized engine controllers, all those sensors and the controller change both mixture and spark timing 50 to 100 times per second, and we don't even HAVE a distributor any more - it's all electronic.

Now, to the widely-misunderstood manifold-vs.-ported vacuum aberration. 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.

If you look at the centrifugal advance calibrations for these "ported spark, late-timed" engines, you'll see that instead of having 20 degrees of advance, they had up to 34 degrees of advance in the distributor, in order to get back to the 34-36 degrees "total timing" at high rpm wide-open throttle to get some of the performance back. The vacuum advance still worked at steady-state highway cruise (lean mixture = low emissions), but it was inoperative at idle, which caused all manner of problems - "ported vacuum" was strictly an early, pre-converter crude emissions strategy, and nothing more.

What about the Harry high-school non-vacuum advance polished billet "whizbang" distributors you see in the Summit and Jeg's catalogs? They're JUNK on a street-driven car, but some people keep buying them because they're "race car" parts, so they must be "good for my car" - they're NOT. "Race cars" run at wide-open throttle, rich mixture, full load, and high rpm all the time, so they don't need a system (vacuum advance) to deal with the full range of driving conditions encountered in street operation. Anyone driving a street-driven car without manifold-connected vacuum advance is sacrificing idle cooling, throttle response, engine efficiency, and fuel economy, probably because they don't understand what vacuum advance is, how it works, and what it's for - there are lots of long-time experienced "mechanics" who don't understand the principles and operation of vacuum advance either, so they're not alone.

Vacuum advance calibrations are different between stock engines and modified engines, especially if you have a lot of cam and have relatively low manifold vacuum at idle. Most stock vacuum advance cans aren’t fully-deployed until they see about 15” Hg. Manifold vacuum, so those cans don’t work very well on a modified engine; with less than 15” Hg. at a rough idle, the stock can will “dither” in and out in response to the rapidly-changing manifold vacuum, constantly varying the amount of vacuum advance, which creates an unstable idle. Modified engines with more cam that generate less than 15” Hg. of vacuum at idle need a vacuum advance can that’s fully-deployed at least 1”, preferably 2” of vacuum less than idle vacuum level so idle advance is solid and stable; the Echlin #VC-1810 advance can (about $10 at NAPA) provides the same amount of advance as the stock can (15 degrees), but is fully-deployed at only 8” of vacuum, so there is no variation in idle timing even with a stout cam.

For peak engine performance, drivability, idle cooling and efficiency in a street-driven car, you need vacuum advance, connected to full manifold vacuum. Absolutely. Positively. Don't ask Summit or Jeg's about it – they don’t understand it, they're on commission, and they want to sell "race car" parts.

Courtesy John Hinckley (not the one who shot Reagan)
Retired GM/Chrysler Engineer
 
Kiwi, you want to use the #1 port - the ported or timed one. Not manifold vac.

Here we go again...An engine is an engine. Mopar, Ford, Chevy, Yugo...it doesn't matter. I always run full manifold vacuum on NON emissions engines. If you are confused, try it one way and then the other and see what works best for your combination. If it's an emissions controlled vehicle, go with what the manufacturer specified.
Let us know the results of your testing.
 
Yep, here we go again. Agreed. Engines that sling a piston are pretty much the same. I have always run ported vacuum on a mild street car with excellent results. If the cam is really hot then it's time to just lock the distributor out at full advance or near full advance and at that point it's pretty much a race motor.
 
I run on my eddy on ported vacuum, just thought the article was interesting take on it and makes sense to me.
 
Oh crap, there you guys go again- teaching me something new!! Oh well at least I've learned my one thing for the day. ;)

Kiwigtx: Please let us know what comes of your findings.
 
So I did a search...(yes newbies, the search function does work) and found this thread

Ive always run on ported vacuum, but I have always had "regular" cams. my ahem, Dart has a pretty crazy cam and am considering using manifold vacuum.

soooooooo any results to report back Kiwi??
 
Sorry to redirect the thread back to the original topic without giving you an answer, but anyway, I've run both ported and manifold on my Satellite. It runs well either way. Slight improvement in low idle stability on manifold. However, it's a sweet driver, not a dragster.
 
So I did a search...(yes newbies, the search function does work) and found this thread

Ive always run on ported vacuum, but I have always had "regular" cams. my ahem, Dart has a pretty crazy cam and am considering using manifold vacuum.

soooooooo any results to report back Kiwi??

After altering the vacuum tubing to the correct port, the engine started much better, faster and reached a smooth idle faster from cold. No engine run-on when hot and shutting off. I would say that the correct port makes a huge difference. The engine RPM through the gears also seemed to make a little more power, so I wounder if the vacuum loss has robbed me of a few horsepower for sometime now. maybe I could crack the 16 second barrier after-all. :tongue3:
 
Ported vacuum is the way to go on a street car, even with a hot cam. I think of ported vacuum like a mechanical computer. It's there when you need it (light throttle and load) and goes away when you don't want it (high load and heavy to full throttle). Brilliant!

The basic mechanical timing curve must be correct for the engine and is a default setting at any given RPM. The vacuum advance can only advance the timing from any given point in the curve based on load. On the contrary, if you retard the base timing and run manifold vacuum to the distributor to make up the difference at idle, your timing will actually retard to the default mech setting as you open the throttle, assuming you don't have a mech advance curve that can make up for the sudden change in vac retard. This will result in a huge flat spot (bog). I have seen this! Now let me explain what my 72 Porsche 911 did. It had a vacuum retard diaphragm on the dizzy, which kept the initial timing at 5 ATDC for emissions reasons. But as you crack the throttle the sudden drop in manifold pressure caused a very rapid timing jump of 5 or 10 degrees and the mech advance took over from there. And I don't recall that having a vac advance port. Another brilliant solution using a vacuum diaphragm (but in reverse).

Mar, I'd leave it on the ported port but take a look at the curve in the dizzy. May have to take some out of the mech advance and add that to the initial. Hot lumpy cam might like 15 BTDC.
 
BTW: If the advance diaphragm causes a "loss of vacuum" at idle, or any speed, it is leaking and should be replaced.
And, I agree. It is important to set up a proper timing curve for any vehicle.
 
Between the 2 different vacuum ports, I always found it best to spend some time and effort to find what runs best for THAT car and driver. I have also added in delay valves to see how they could help. Keep records and correct any problems by trying something different till you get what you like. I have had that 2 second delay valve cure a running problem before.
 
Not to hyjack the post but I have a ? I just rebuilt a eld 600 and I've never ran this carb it was included in with a car I bought anyways the car had a 750 on it (318 sticker) I know the 750 is way to big but I got a hellava deal on it anyways I rebuilt this 600 and stuck it on and now the car hesitates and ideals funny I adjusted it and it's just not getting better, now I've rebuilt many carbs with no problems I didn't see anything wrong when I was in there any ideas guys as soon as you get it going it's fine but ideal it's terrible. I was thinking maybe the vacuums were diff between the two but I found that incorrect, also the vacuum advance is on the pass side port . Everything else is plumbed like the 750 was ??? Help.


PLEASE RE_POST in: General Mopar Tech questions.
http://www.forbbodiesonly.com/moparforum/forumdisplay.php?32-General-Mopar-Tech-Discussions
 
Nearly all of the 60's cars I worked on (muscle cars and normal drivers) used ported vacum for the vacum advance from the factory. You can make a car run on either as it of course depends on the combo. I also have liked ported vacum for my street cars when I run a vacum advance. But acording to Mr vacum advance I run a junk dist in my 63 since its a race dist with no vacum advance. I guess thats why it has such great throttle responce at all rpm. I give it alot of mech advance real fast at low rpm's and the eng works good like that. Ron

- - - Updated - - -

Courtesy John Hinckley (not the one who shot Reagan)
Retired GM/Chrysler Engineer


I guess Mr Hinckley thinks he is the only one who knows anything about the vacum advance unit. Anyone who calls others the names he does I have no respect at all for. Ron
 
Auto Transport Service
Back
Top