Van S. Griffin wrote:
>
> Scions,
> On the calculation of wasted horsepower for the turning fan in a
> Triumph, while it is a whiny detail, the fan when in a moving vehicle,
> sees an already flowing mass of air. This should reduce the 20 odd horses
> that was predicted to unnecessarily load the engine.
>
> There was also a questions on the constant depression ZS carbs and
> altitude change effects on the engine/carbs. As mentioned before the
> amount of oxygen would be less, yet the relative percentages, I
> thought, would have to be very similar here in the living and driving
> altitudes. Is the ratio of nitrogen to oxygen (most of the stuff sucked
> into the engine) a function heavily influenced by altitude? Wouldn't the
> Umph relocated say from Florida to Colorado need to be leaned out? But
> what about the less dense air, I keep getting the vision of a manometer
> and does it make a good analogy to what is going on? I am by no means a
> carb bard. No sig file, Van
Mixture should absolutely be leaned out for permanent moves to higher
elevation. Less dense air means less O2 and a richer mixture. I drive my
6 from sea level at Santa Rosa to 6000 to 8000 feet at Tahoe frequently.
Major differences in performance. I have tinkered with leaning the
mixture at altitude and it does make a significant difference. If I going
to be there more than a couple of days I lean out the ZS,s 1/4 to 1/2
turn. That helps, although even with the best adjustment, performance is
not what it is at sea level. Have also had the six at 11,000 feet in the
White Mountains. Talk about sluggish. Theres barely enough O2 to start a
fire (slight exageration). Nothing nearly so bad as the performance of my
85 XJ-6 at altitude though and its fuel injected and computer controlled,
not much I can do about it.
Deano
|