triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Back to LBC's...Z-S

Subject: Re: Back to LBC's...Z-S
From: James Charles Ruwaldt <jruwaldt@indiana.edu>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 14:52:55 -0500 (EST)
Cc: "'triumphs@autox.team.net'" <triumphs@Autox.Team.Net>
I think the whole point of this discussion is that in the seventies the 
technology hadn't developed to the point where cars could be designed to 
meet emissions and produce maximum power.  Instead of saying that 
emissions controls sap power, let's say that it's more difficult to 
design an engine with maximum power and proper emissions.  The only 
reason race cars aren't designed with emissions controls is that they 
don't have to be.  I'm sure a Cosworth IndyCar engine could be designed 
to put out the thousand or so horsepower it gets, even with emissions 
controls.  Of course, there's also the extra weight that emissions 
components add.
That good emissions and high power aren't mutually exclusive is quite 
true.  However, modern cars manage this with complicated electronic 
equipment undreamed of by Harry Webster and his team.  
According to the Haynes Zenith Stromberg Repair Manual, gas burns most 
completely at about a 15:1 A/F ratio.  At about 12:1 it produces the most 
power.  At about 18:1 the engine runs the most efficiently.  It would 
seem that somewhere between 14:1 and 18:1 would be the best emissions.  
One wonders how such a device as an EGR valve actually reduces emissions 
when it lowers efficiency somewhat.  Apparently, it decreases some 
emissions at the cost of other, perhaps less toxic, emissions.
I can't imagine what owners of later TR6's think, but the emissions 
controls on the '72 seem to be very practical in nature.  There's a 
crankcase breather hose, which even the PI models had.  That the spark is 
supposed to be 4 ATDC may not be desirable for power, nor is the 7.75:1 
CR, compared to the 9.5:1 of the PI's.  However, the vacuum retard on the 
distributor can't possibly have any negative effects.  It simply retards 
the spark when the throttle is closed during deceleration.  I'd say the 
ZS 175 CD-SE is about the best designed carburetor for meeting emissions 
without sacrificing power, at least when it's new.  As with everything, 
after several years of wear, all bets are off.  I'd say we're better off 
cursing Lucas than Zenith, anyway.  Zenith did a great job of producing a 
carburetor, while Lucas fell down on the task of making a clean-burning 
injection system.  Don't forget after all, the '71-'73 TR6's are more 
powerful than the '69-'70's, if only by a few points.
Jim Ruwaldt
'72 TR6 CC79338U(being restored)
Bloomington, IN


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>