To kind of set the record straight, B/L had one hell'va time (along with
everyone else) trying to meet the emission requirement from 1967 onward. Then,
on top of that, the DOT crash requirement. So much so that the money set
aside or budgeted for upgrading design and new models went into that research
file. Too bad. I was part of the chase on the engine side and it was just
terrible the cost and effort at the time. Emission control was the very first
thing on everyone's agenda. Use of the modern electronic injection, ignition
and catalytic converters would have solved it then, just as it has in the
present cars.
Never be beaten by equipment
> From: TR3driver@ca.rr.com
> To: fot@autox.team.net
> Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2011 10:35:27 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Fot] FW: TR6 Timing
>
> > I would also like to direct some
> > blame to the BL
> > exec who thought up this dueling distributor idea.
>
> Actually, I believe the vacuum retard was a US requirement. Possibly you
> could blame BL for trying to keep the vacuum advance, but since it does
> improve things, that part seems like a good idea.
>
> And BL was certainly not the only company to use "dueling" modules. My
1970
> Audi had exactly the same setup and still made almost 1 hp/ci.
>
> As you've no doubt realized by now, the port on top of the carb is for the
> vacuum advance. The retard port (if you have one) is on the bottom. And
> there is a difference.
>
> -- Randall
> _______________________________________________
> fot@autox.team.net
>
> http://www.fot-racing.com
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/fot/kaskas@cox.net
_______________________________________________
fot@autox.team.net
http://www.fot-racing.com
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
|