Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*vacuum\s+advance\/retard\s+differences\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*vacuum\s+advance\/retard\s+differences\?\s*$/: 19 ]

Total 19 documents matching your query.

1. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 08:46:20 -0700; ** Sorry, no flame intended, but. . .I beg to differ. . .The primary reason that manufacturers started using a vacuum retard unit was for emission control purposes. If it provides a perceived smooth; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00801.html (8,534 bytes)
2. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 11:36:05 -0500; None taken. Heck, I don't even have carbs on my Triumph so what do I know? ;{) I agree that the vacuum retard was introduced as an emissions control device and that merely retarding the timing a cou; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00803.html (8,801 bytes)
3. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:23:25 -0400; Message text written by Barry Schwartz reduce emissions at the expense of engine efficiency.< Barry, I beg to differ. Since the car is producing no output at idle (it is merely turning itself over pr; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00812.html (8,338 bytes)
4. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:23:28 -0400; Message text written by Erik Quackenbush act like an on/off switch to kick in a few extra degrees at idle, or, when it is active (at idle) is the amount of retard proportional to the vacuum signal? I; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00813.html (8,903 bytes)
5. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 10:35:01 -0700; ** Based on the ones I have seen, it acts just like an advance, that is it's proportional. BUT. . . the retard unit is only active at idle (roughly 18-22 in hg). Usually the activating port is only; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00815.html (8,926 bytes)
6. RE: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 10:38:17 -0700; Hmmm, what term would you apply to how much fuel it takes to keep the engine turning ? My refrigerator doesn't produce any net work either (viewed from outside), but we talk about it's efficiency ...; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00816.html (8,535 bytes)
7. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 10:49:55 -0700; ** Well, lets stop and think about this a moment - it's still working, producing power isn't it? Just turning itself over is work (try doing it yourself just for grins and see how easy it is to turn; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00817.html (9,322 bytes)
8. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 11:16:03 -0700; A .31 second search on Google for "vacuum retard" produces 9100 hits. Their are 3 or 4 on the 1st page that deal with TRs!!! Obviously this is a subject of interest!! With little chance of resolution; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00818.html (8,786 bytes)
9. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 14:48:14 -0400; Message text written by Barry Schwartz producing power isn't it? Just turning itself over is work (try doing it yourself just for grins and see how easy it is to turn at say 800 rpm). I think you'll; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00823.html (10,055 bytes)
10. RE: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 14:44:08 -0400; Message text written by Randall Young engine I would call that overhead. Unless the desired result of the process is the exhaust note then there is no primary output (forward propulsion) and hence al; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00824.html (9,952 bytes)
11. RE: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 12:05:37 -0700; As I see it, the desired result of an idling engine is to keep the engine running. The less fuel burned to accomplish that end, the higher the efficiency. Much like my refrigerator (where I don't pl; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00826.html (9,195 bytes)
12. RE: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 14:08:35 -0500; OK lets settle this now. A 100% effcient car would be one way. Leave the engine off and give it a push down Pikes Peak. No energy used but lots of miles driven. As I see it, the desired result of an; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00829.html (9,523 bytes)
13. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 15:18:45 EDT; But, by this logic, pushing the car uses no energy. So the most energy-efficient thing to do would be to leave the car at home and walk... Chris Eck 59 Bugeye 59 TR3A /// triumphs@autox.team.net mail; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00830.html (8,710 bytes)
14. RE: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 15:47:59 -0400; Message text written by Randall Young running. The less fuel burned to accomplish that end, the higher the efficiency. Much like my refrigerator (where I don't plan to ever recover that potential ene; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00831.html (8,876 bytes)
15. RE: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 15:48:03 -0400; Message text written by "Chambers, Robert D, NPONS" engine off and give it a push down Pikes Peak. No energy used but lots of miles driven. < Actually, that would have an efficiency of infinity. Ener; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00833.html (8,863 bytes)
16. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:53:42 -0700; (1) : effective operation as measured by a comparison of production with cost (as in energy, time, and money) <<< Your definition was #2. Randall /// triumphs@autox.team.net mailing list /// To unsub; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00839.html (8,685 bytes)
17. Re: vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 20:04:26 -0400; Message text written by Randall (1) : effective operation as measured by a comparison of production with cost (as in energy, time, and money) <<< Your definition was #2. < Obviously enough people hav; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00843.html (8,495 bytes)
18. vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 17:59:42 -0600; But you should still look up the meaning of "maid" cause it ain't what cha think it is! Obviously enough people have been using the word efficiency where they should have been using efficacy that it; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00888.html (8,342 bytes)
19. vacuum advance/retard differences? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 09:58:30 -0400; Message text written by Don Spence think it is! Obviously enough people have been using the word efficiency where they should have been using efficacy that it has maid it into the dictionary. < Blame; /html/triumphs/2001-09/msg00897.html (8,307 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 19
Page: [1]