Tony D

"What part about mechanical devices don't YOU understand? I think its the part about centrifugal governors, so let me help you. I own 2 aircraft now which have a combined total of 9 centrifugal devices of identical design which all function flawlessly. Ok? Prop govorners, fuel control units, overspeed and underspeed controllers, mag timing, etc plus a shitload more in various cars and aircraft I have owned, managed, flown and fixed over the years. " You mean like a Woodward EGP or EGB, PG or PGL Steam Turbine Governor (or used on various ICE's for decades)? Or perhaps the Governors on Continental Lycoming Packette PE150's 90's and 75's...Been there, done that, Factory Repped it for a while... (Incidentally, most one of those devices you mention rely on the flyweights dampened with springs and in constant fluid motion---in normal operation they NEVER should reach a 'locked' point where the levers push against a solid stop...other than the limit screws on the arms. THAT is why you see it in the distributor and not the other devices, they are on the ramp dampened by springs and in some instances hydraulic pressures and usually have VERY tight drive trains which don't have excessive lash or operate at reduced oeprational speeds so that this effect is minimized...) The government employee reference was simply the obsession at using a DIGITAL DEVICE (the dial-back timing light) to quantify a mechanical device which has inherent lash in it: you invented an issue, which is not in practical application an issue whatsoever then are spending an inordinate amount of time looking for a solution, which ultimately will be what everybody (or at least I) was telling you was going to be the ultimate outcome: it's not going to change anything. It's my observation of many Governmental Programs, if it offends you then I apologize for calling you a Government Employee---it was a rhetorical analogy based on my observation of the similarities, nothing more. Nothing personal. In all the above devices, when using a DIGITAL timing mechanism, you will see VARIATION in EVERY instance. They are not 'smooth and flawless' --- including those damnable governors. The fluctuations are EXTREME if you have the right analytical equipment. Using period correct diagnostic devices (in some cases FAA Dictated stuff) you will see 'rock solid' numbers when in fact the cyclic variations of the flyweights on the levers balanced against the hydraulic cushion is something that is VERY complex to get balanced. And even when you do...IT IS STILL A COMPROMISE. Hence looking for something that is 'perfect' when 'perfect' doesn't exist! I type all caps as in voice communication I would raise my voice one octave, or speak louder at that point to EMPHASIZE that point. You asked if it can be fixed: yes it can, asked and answered: DIGITAL CONTROL OFF THE CRANKSHAFT. It's even legal in SCCA Competition for some reason. The number of Electramotive Digital Timing boxes on Z's increases every year...... The Crane (as stated originally) only processes signals it receives. The reasons for any spark scatter have been delineated in detail. If you have spark scatter, it's not electrical switching error. Most definitely at that RPM point. If you ask for an answer, and want to ignore it, at least say that is what you're doing rather than continually restating the issue like nobody has addressed it previously. I have already stated the universal fact that all OEM's have agreed exists: The timing variation can NOT 'be fixed' it can ONLY be 'minimized'---and for OEM's these days, that is not good enough! When you come to the same conclusion, you can look back on this I suppose. What you do at that point is up to you. You're going to 'minimize it' you won't 'fix' it---which to me means totally eliminate it. Unless you start using more period correct instrumentation which will not reveal the scatter. If you want the quickest fix, just static time it. Then you don't have any problem as you can't see anything. I know people who static time their cars using points and a test light and will argue up and down their car also 'runs flawlessly'... To them, it does. They just don't understand the dynamics involved.

I'm still waiting for the quotation of the FIA section that allows a foam filled structure to replace a roll cage... Foaming an interior component to fill a void and prevent accident acceleration of body parts is well documented since Volvo started putting cardboard tubes in the door finisher panels to prevent broken knees during side impacts with the new federally-mandated door bars in 73... Similarly, composite construction utilizing structural foams is also well documented. But the thought that you can spray stuff inside an existing structure that was not originally designed to have it used in such a matter is again belying sound engineering basis for support. Just because something works well in ONE application does NOT mean you can apply it with similar results everywhere. It simply doesn't work that way. And, to put it bluntly (as John Coffey did...) it screws up more on the car than it will EVER fix. That being said, I 'Great Stuff' foamed the C-Pillar area on my 1966 Corvair Corsa. This is a WELL DOCUMENTED modification to the car (extant from the 70's when you bought foams in two parts mixed them in bags and quickly stuffed them where you wanted it!) It is not for structural enhancement, but rather to acoustically block an open channel from the engine room DIRECTLY to the rear seat door panel. To quiet the interior, it worked phenomenally well. Combined with some closed-cel Aircraft Firewall Insulation (from Aircraft Spruce) the interior of that car was considerably quieted down. Applying similar teqhniques to the VW Bus had NO effect, as the Germans had a bit more foresight than to allow a large hole bigger than two fists (on each side) from a fire-prone area directly to the vehicle's interior. So then you get to figure out what solvent removes/disolves the damn stuff because if it gets poked for any reason, and the 'skin' is penetrated all it does is become a big sponge to hold moisture on unprotected panels. (Look at the Cowl Piece on many early cars where that resonance-deadening sponge was applied, and then allowed the cowl to rust from the UNDERNEATH up into that fresh paint job you did just a month before...) I've not seen ONE car come by me with PROPER structural foam utilized. UNIVERSALLY it's been "Great Stuff" in the red cans, and that's not the same stuff. There is a discussion about 'urethane' foams, which is about as generic and improper as you can get! Even if you do get proper structural hard urethane foams...Don't do it. Quit arguing about something that wasn't considered---the applications are not what was in discussion and only adds to the confusion surrounding this SPURIOUS application of product from internet myth and misapplication! "Great Stuff" is not styrofoam, and it may not be a polystyrene foam any longer given gevernment mandates. The ability to get Silicone Foams has had the Corvair World change from the original Polyurethane Foams to Silicone-Based RTV Foams for the 'fire stop' capability so that the original 'soundblock' fucntion for the modification comes with a PRACTICAL fire-safing of the interior of the car.

It obviously occurs as frequently as that other thing oft-spoken of: "Rain" and "Snow" These, too, are foreign to me and would like an explanation of "Lock", "Rain", and "Snow"! I have a feeling in Koniambo I will be introduced to one of them...

Noisy valves are happy valves. Quiet valves are hot, ready to burn valves!

Yep! MLS do not compress. They are resuable. Short drives like when testing an engine leads to condensation. If you don't get it up to temperature (oil to 200+) then you will have water in there. If you have a PCV under a slight vacuum in the gearcase, you will 'boil' at a marginally earlier temperature as well. Usually the oil is hottest rolling in from the head, or directly off the bearings---that is where water should be flashing off to steam to be evacuated. If you don't have some place for it to go (PCV, or enough blow-by flow from bad rings to push it out your road-draft tube...) it will stay in there and just build to the point that it turns into sludge. In Michigan during the winters, people that lived and worked in-town and drove less than 5-10 minutes to work would literally get chocolate mousse in their crankcase from the condensation formed in less than 1000 miles of driving (could be a month or less!!!) That's about the only positive to a higher temperature thermostat, and that's why they go in mine during the winter for the 'short drive' cars. Anything I drive for an hour at a burst keeps the 160 thermostat.

"Timing mark still dances above 3000rpm. Maybe they all do that??" For the THIRD time: MECHANICAL DEVICES INHERENTLY HAVE SLOP FROM THE FIVE AREAS LISTED IN MY FIRST POST What part of this aren't you absorbing. I think it's the 'Mechanical Devices all have slop in them inherently and you can't eliminate it, only MINIMIZE it.' The thing is smooth on the springs, until it hits the stops, then the inherent lash in the gears driving the upper parts comes into direct play. "My motor man says the Crane XR3000 is a POS" Probably because it's not the POS he sells at his shop. For your stated use, likely it's overkill. Statement: Way to take nothing, turn it into something, then solve a problem which doesn't exist in the first place. Are you a government employee, bychance? You want smooth, steady as a rock timing? Do what the OEM's ALL did WITHOUT EXCEPTION: Crankfire Timing.

This is all standard distributor stuff. Polishing of centrifugal weight working ramps, using 'sticky' grease to smooth the advance, altering the weight/spring tension/slot/peg to limit advance/retard... The bouncing will happen as a function of inertia and the springs working against it. The way to get around it, is to go fully digital. That's it. Any mechanical timing device will have a range of advance that is there depending on which point you are at--there is only narrowing the range. You will not make it rock steady unless the mechanical action is eliminated completely.

Yeah, getting people to pay is always a problem. I got into that with a former employer, who wanted me to stop work on a Net-10 paying customer I was billing at $150hr+ Premium Charges to go work on a 'COD Call-In' which paid $65 an hour. I recall that conversation well: "Joe, there are some customers you DON'T want!" I think one of the prime reasons he's still in the business today is the service work my partner and I brought into the job paid on time, consistently, and never argued over the bills. Big margins on big equipment compared to his traditional line of work. Couldn't understand why we would take weeks on the job and didn't 'do more work' (meaning more customer visits)---but never complained when those $100K invoices were paid Net-10 or on-time Net-30 (instead of the usual 60 and 120 day float...) Hell, I had terms and conditions for the larger jobs that the customer provide payment for parts IN ADVANCE (we're talking full payment for our cost, with the profit to be paid on the back end---usually couched to the customer as '50% parts cost up-front'...muahahahaha!) To think he hated me as much as he did is sometimes mind boggling. He never thought this stuff up, we gave him GOLDEN customers who paid what we wanted, when we wanted it, and sometimes IN ADVANCE so his 'small business' didn't suffer the weight of playing in the Big Dog's league. Hell, it paid his wife's Mercedes lease at $840 a month as well as giving her a $245,000 raise the second year we were there... Don't get me started... A portable fab shop in SoCal working in industrial stuff (gates, ornamental iron, light structural) will stay consistently busy, it's just finding or getting the word out to prior customers that you are out there. Moving alone for work rarely works out. The only people I know that do that should be retired. Wife and Husband teams with big fat bulldogs that live in travel trailers and go from plant startup to plant startup as skilled labor, or supervision on rotating contracts. It's an interesting life if you and the missus wants to travel. But with kinder, it's not going to work. And leaving for long periods just to make $$$ is tougher on the kids than most think. Skype does some stuff, but not substitute for some things.

"I'm too old for too much of this crap." I'm starting to say that more and more myself...

If you have an ADJUSTABLE TIMING GEAR you can make a "B" an "F" and vice-versa! I have a Tomei, and love it! Nothing like dialing in the EXACT cam setting that nets you best power under curve. Usually it's not 'straight up' but 2-3 degrees one way or the other. The effect on Torque can be spectacular...

"Alot of other countries besided this one are acutallu using that methond instead of using roll cages. " I'll call B.S. on this one, show me the country or at least reference the FIA specification that allows this. Total load of crap!

PM responded to...

"What I found a bit disappointing, however was some of these which required 'skilled labor' were only willing to pay $10/hour. You can get nearly that flipping burgers. That $10/hour equates to $1,600 month and if you factor in a car, insurance, room, food, and gas ... it's not even close to a living wage." Hence my suggestion that he work for himself. When you are paying fabrication companies 30$ an hour for work (closer to 50-65 for general structural work here in SoCal) the EMPLOYEES of the company usually get 1/3 of that rate at most. If they are independents, they get that full amount, minus expenses. It doesn't take long as a skilled tradesman to realize you aren't going to make a lot of money working for entry-level outfits forever. To make any appreciable money, you need to strike out on your own. It's always easiest to make a job when you already have one, but if you get into a situation where you're bringing in work to the company...you may as well do it yourself. There are risks to it, but the reward upside is phenomenal. And, to paraphrase Conan the Barbarian: "The greatest satisfaction is to drive your former employers before you, crush them, and hear the wailing lamentations of their women!" Been there, done that! I agree with Conan! And beware what you classify as a 'living wage'---that is what they make room-mates and second jobs for! Been there as well.

Agree with Randy... There is an alternative for working for other people: Work for yourself. Do you know how much those gates you make sell for? What the materials cost? A Bobcat in the back of a clapped out truck, and the ability to go repair someone's gate or go to their place and make what they want can pay pretty well. No it's not secure, you are not an employee, there is stress involved. But the first big project pays off, and you sit there looking at your bank account going "I could live off this for three months if I work it right!" and you start to realize working for yourself doing something you're good at, and that people need to have done can be handsomely rewarding. You may not get rich, but likely you will make far more than you ever did as an employee and the tax advantages start to add up little by little. You can go to places overseas as a welder, get shot at, and make $80K for 4 months work rotation. But that's not for everybody!

"Has anyone here made their own "short throw" shifter by cutting down a stock one and either threading or mounting the knob in another fashion? I kinda hate paying for something I can make myself with my limited fab skills. " As it's in quotation marks, I'll reply yes, I have. But it's not shortening the throw in the traditional sense of altering the pivot point so the same lever moves less. You simply shortened the lever, lessening the mechanical advantage and the arc it moves. Shifting effort is increased quite a bit doing it this way. The SMC Conversion was REALLY short, but worked well if you mated it with a LOOOOONG shift lever (like a truck) to get the shifter closer to the wheel.

If you can identify which one is low or warped I could see that working...but....

There were transition heads that simply had little block-off plates on the cam towers after going to an internally oiled cam. The supply is the same for both oiling methods, just how it is delivered is different. The grooves on the journals allow oil to move around to a drilled passage in the tower, and out to the spray bar. Block them off, and then it all stays in the towers. The internal cams have holes in those same grooves to go to the center of the cam and out to individual lobe holes. Most people will do the enlargement of the oiling galley when the head is off to allow more oil up there. I lost a turbo around a hard sweeping corner when the oil sloshed away from the pickup under boost. I could see low oil causing problems with pressure.

"Also, it was my understanding that cam towers will wear to the cam a little, so a cam may not spin as freely as you'd want it to on a fresh install." This is ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT! The cam should NEVER run on the aluminum bearings except at startup under valve spring pressure. As soon as lubrication is supplied it will run on a film of oil. There is NO 'wearing in' of the cam towers. Anybody stating there is is missing the line-boring concept, or has improperly installed them and used that as an excuse to justify not going back and making it right.

Spray Starting Fluid down the intake and see if it catches. If it doesn't, it's not your ECU. Pulsing of the injectors is all you need. If you've flooded it, it can take three days to dry out! "Hot Plug" and burning out the combustion chambers may help in this instance... A little sparse on details, but it looks like you're missing the forest because of all the trees in the way.

That would seem to indicate a warped head more than anything else... Bet Tool Boy lubed up those cam tower bolts 'real good' when he torqued them... Well, speaking of Tools...I have to go sink a couple of 5/8-11 Helicoils into a gearbox and then have the locals hail me as Conquering God of Metal by saving them $120K replacement costs for a new gearbox...

I was always partial to Ted Nugent's "Wango Tango"... Can't access YouTube here so can't link it! It has everything, Saliva... Turbochargers... Maseratis...

Yeah, I was quickly looking for property myself!

My bone stock "Blue Turd" 260Z was usually within a few seconds of modified cars (S30's) on most track days. And if anyone cares to remember the BSP Datsuns were time competitive with Vetted, SCCA grouped them together. With a modified engine putting out more HP? oh yeah!

Ditto Larcis. Mild port and cam with 350 on CA pump gas and 21psi, but usually at 17 to use cheap gas as a daily driver! With an unported head and stock cam results were similar, but on higher octane and totally different driving characteristics.

Yes that cam will help past 5k for sure. The torque peak I'd higher. The pressure plus spring pressure would be what you have. For some reason your springs seem to have failed. And that is enough to cause the issue at idle...maybe allowing movement and variable geometry at the higher toms as well.... Like I previously said: what else can you do? I am definitely NOT a fan of elevated oil pressures!