Hmmm...
Perhaps it's just the mild climate out here in the wild west.
I understand why HEI ought to be better, but the empirical evidence suggests
that there isn't a whole lot of practical difference, at least where cold
weather or high revs are not a factor.
I also understand the appeal of modern technology. My daily driver is a '98
Dodge. As much as I like it, I would be reluctant to swap my Dodge's '90s
technology into my '54 AD half ton.
For example, I'm sure the Dodge fuel injection, if someone took the trouble
to modify it, would work much better than the original Rochester one barrel.
It would just be a questionable thing to do.
I'm not talking about using an entire modern engine, which is, I think, a
different issue.
Regards,
Grant S. gls@4link.net
-----Original Message-----
From: Passnb4U@aol.com <Passnb4U@aol.com>
To:Cc: oletrucks@autox.team.net <oletrucks@autox.team.net>
Date: Friday, January 28, 2000 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: [oletrucks] Gen. - Alt. / Points to electronic
> If I might chime in for a bit.
>
> My feeling is the reason to go HEI is to eliminate points all together.
>Better cold weather starting, and generally easier to maintain.
>
> Mechanical advance has it's place, but usually in the hotrodding area,
>vacuum advance adjust to engine load much better and keeps the timing more
>optimum for better fuel economy.
>
> Vacuum advance also has mechanical in it as well, vacuum advance usually
>will get you to about 12-14*'s more advance over initial setting, then the
>mechanical advance (springs and wieghts) will take over for total advance.
>
>Mike
>
>
>
oletrucks is devoted to Chevy and GM trucks built between 1941 and 1959
|