[Tigers] Timing

Tony Lang achd73 at yahoo.com
Mon Nov 6 21:50:55 MST 2017 

Going out on a limb with saw in hand, I am pretty sure Chrysler was why the Tiger came to an end. There are drawings of Tigers yet to come but they just didn't have an engine that would replace the 289. The closest was their 318 but the dizzy in the back didn't allow the engine to set back the way the SBF could!!    

Tony Lang (TtT) 

    On ‎Monday‎, ‎November‎ ‎6‎, ‎2017‎ ‎09‎:‎14‎:‎55‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CST, Gary Winblad via Tigers <tigers at autox.team.net> wrote:  
 
 Yeah, I remember those.  Not sure why, but the Tiger did not require 
it..   Really stupid idea by CA..   made cars run really badly.
I remember one nice smog guy asking if I was going to remove it as soon 
as it passed the inspection, if so he said he wouldn't cut the
vacuum hose!
There was another system you could choose instead.. an exhaust gas 
recirculation system the clamped around the exhaust pipe (and
punched a hole in it).
Are you sure 66?  I seem to remember 67 or 68.  IIRC that was one of the 
reasons the Tiger production ended, a smog pump wouldn't
fit...
Gary

On 11/6/2017 11:40 AM, Tom Witt via Tigers wrote:
> For a period of time in the 70’s California required I believe it 
> was... ‘55-‘65 cars to install a NOX system. It consisted of a 
> radiator hose sized copper tube about 3” long, it had a heat sensitive 
> vacuum port (in/out) and two hose clamps. The hose was cut near the 
> radiator and the device inserted. The vacuum source was run to this 
> device and then back to the vacuum advance. It was suppose to reduce 
> NOX by stopping the vacuum advance until the car was warmed up.  Most 
> people just bypassed it after passing the test. There was an even 
> simpler means that consisted of two port caps and a sticker that 
> stated the vacuum advance was disabled – completely. I believe the 
> sticker even discouraged long, heavy throttle usage.  I know some of 
> the Ford 6 cylinder cars had no mechanical advance at all, - only 
> vacuum. Disable that and you got nothing! EFI and computer controlled 
> ignition sure is nice to have these days.
> BTW, at least in California one way to tell a ‘65 from a ‘66 Mustang 
> is to look under the hood.  1966 was the year the state ramped up the 
> smog stuff big time.
> *From:* coolvt at aol.com <mailto:coolvt at aol.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, November 06, 2017 6:22 AM
> *To:* srwick at hotmail.com <mailto:srwick at hotmail.com> ; 
> garywinblad at comcast.net <mailto:garywinblad at comcast.net> ; 
> atwittsend at verizon.net <mailto:atwittsend at verizon.net> ; 
> tigers at autox.team.net <mailto:tigers at autox.team.net>
> *Subject:* Re: Re: [Tigers] Timing
> I remember buying a 1972 Chevy.  For pollution purposes the vacuum 
> advance line was blocked off by a solenoid . It was a 3 speed manual 
> and the solenoid would only open and allow vac. advance in 3rd gear.  
> Of course it was simple to by-pass:-)
>
> In a message dated 11/6/2017 2:05:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> tigers at autox.team.net writes:
>
>    Well I did say I was probably wrong.
>
>    Steve
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    *From:* Gary Winblad <garywinblad at comcast.net
>    <mailto:garywinblad at comcast.net>>
>    *Sent:* Sunday, November 5, 2017 11:13 AM
>    *To:* steve wick; Tom Witt; tigers at autox.team.net
>    <mailto:tigers at autox.team.net>
>    *Subject:* Re: [Tigers] Timing
>    Nooo.. cars had vacuum advance way before anyone gave a rat's a$$
>    about
>    emissions...
>    Emissions brought on the vacuum retard... two hoses to opposite
>    sides of
>    the diaphram.
>    Gary
>
>
>    On 11/4/2017 10:28 PM, steve wick via Tigers wrote:
>    >
>    >
>    > I'm probably wrong, but I think vacuum advance was for
>    emissions, not
>    > gas mileage.
>    >
>    > Steve
>    >
>    >
>    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    > *From:* Tigers <tigers-bounces at autox.team.net
>    <mailto:bounces at autox.team.net>> on behalf of Tom Witt
>    > via Tigers <tigers at autox.team.net <mailto:tigers at autox.team.net>>
>    > *Sent:* Saturday, November 4, 2017 5:51 PM
>    > *To:* tigers at autox.team.net <mailto:tigers at autox.team.net>
>    > *Subject:* Re: [Tigers] Timing
>    > Thanks for the pictures Ron. The second type seems to use not
>    only the
>    > springs, but the cam action on the weights edge as a means of
>    plotting
>    > the
>    > advance curve.  The math for the RPM, spring tension, weight...
>    - AND cam
>    > action baffles my brain.  Somewhere I have a Mallory dual point (no
>    > vacuum
>    > advance) distributor. Got it in a pile of "free" stuff at a Mopar
>    > swapmeet
>    > (No step child parts for him!).  I'll have to check it's advance
>    > system out
>    > some time.
>    >
>    > Oddly I had a Volvo 544 that got 36 MPG on the highway and it
>    only had a
>    > mechanical advance (no vacuum). Seems to defy the necessity of
>    vacuum
>    > advance with mileage like that.
>    >
>    > -----Original Message-----
>    > From: Ron Fraser via Tigers
>    > Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2017 12:16 PM
>    > To: 'Gary Winblad' ; tigers at autox.team.net
>    <mailto:tigers at autox.team.net>
>    > Subject: Re: [Tigers] Timing
>    >
>    > Picture 1 is the early style Ford distributor with oil port, ID#
>    C2OF-J -
>    > note there is 1 slot size for each weight - this is the area
>    that I have
>    > seen wear problems
>    >
>    > Picture 2 is the later style Ford distributor, ID# C8AF-E - note
>    the
>    > 13L &
>    > 18L slots - the 13L slot is being used in this example
>    >
>    > Just wanted to show the differences in these 2 mechanical
>    advance systems
>    >
>    > Ron Fraser
>    >
>    > -----Original Message-----
>    > From: Tigers [mailto:tigers-bounces at autox.team.net] On Behalf Of
>    Gary
>    > Winblad via Tigers
>    > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2017 10:58 AM
>    > To: Smit, Theo <Theo.Smit at garmin.com
>    <mailto:Theo.Smit at garmin.com>>; Tom Witt <atwittsend at verizon.net
>    <mailto:atwittsend at verizon.net>>;
>    > tigers at Autox.Team.Net <mailto:tigers at Autox.Team.Net>
>    > Subject: Re: [Tigers] Timing
>    >
>    > The Tiger distributor I bought from Sunbeam Specialties(was
>    years ago)
>    > was
>    > the kind with the two position advance limit.  I just had to
>    turn it
>    > to the
>    > more limited stop, put in lighter speed shop springs and then
>    limit the
>    > vacuum advance. All on my stock 260, works great, still on
>    regular gas.
>    > Gary
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon> 
>     Virus-free. www.avast.com 
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link> 
>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> tigers at autox.team.net
>
> 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/tigers/garywinblad@comcast.net
>
>

_______________________________________________

tigers at autox.team.net

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/tigers/achd73@yahoo.com


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://autox.team.net/pipermail/tigers/attachments/20171107/412ba110/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tigers mailing list