| ||
Visit MustangSteve's web site to view some of my work and find details for: FYIFORD Contributors' PICTURES - Power Brake Retrofit Kits for 65-66 Stangs - Classic Mustang FAQ's by MustangSteve - How to wire in a Duraspark Ignition - Mustang Ride Height Pictures and Descriptions - Steel Bushings to fit Granada Spindles to Mustang Tie Rods - Visit my EBAY store MustangSteve Performance - How to Install Granada Disc Brakes MustangSteve's Disc Brake Swap Page - FYIFORD Acronyms for guide to all the acronyms used on this page - FYIFORD Important information and upcoming events |
Offline
RPM beat me to is but I beat Gabba
I ordered Crane Cam kit with the adjustable vacuum advance (that was discussed in this thread) and had this fitted. I cheated though and had a shop do it for me as they have all the timing and tuning gear.
Anyway, I gave the shop TKO's timing figures and that is what we used. With the adjustable vacuum advance, this was wound fully in and then wound out two complete turns. I am not sure if this is enough yet or not, but there is no pinging.
I took the car for a spirited drive post the re-curve and here are my thoughts and what I noticed;
1. Engine idle felt more free, like a sewing machine running calmly. Sounds weird, but I noticed a difference at idle.
2. On acceleration, I feel that it winds up pretty nicely now.
3. When doing 55-60 and I punched it, I noticed the jolt into the seat. Usually at 60mph, the car would still have some pull, but this was a lurch and a jolt.
All in all, yeah I think it has woken up the 289. If I had the money, I would have loved putting it on a dyno before and after.
Thanks for the guide here fellas and for the encouragement to make this modification. Thanks for starting this post Gabba!
2.
Last edited by Stevo (8/20/2019 5:12 AM)
Offline
You can always try adding more by bumping base timing, but what I found on these low compression 289s is that I could never get one to ping, at least on decent gas. The ethanol is even more detonation resistant than the octane rating would imply, because ethanol is really had to ignite without a spark. I run 89 octane in mine, and I could probably get away with 87. I could never get it to ping under any circumstance with 93 or 89 (I used to run 93 like an idiot before I realized it just didn't need it). I even had the timing WAY off at one point, but still no pinging. I think if you could dyno it though you'd see the improvements stop about 40-42 degrees and then it would start going backwards. At some point you're introducing ignition too soon on the upstroke and the engine starts fighting itself because the mixture has burned before TDC, and now the energy left to push the piston back down is reduced from optimal.
Offline
TKOPerformance wrote:
You can always try adding more by bumping base timing, but what I found on these low compression 289s is that I could never get one to ping, at least on decent gas. The ethanol is even more detonation resistant than the octane rating would imply, because ethanol is really had to ignite without a spark. I run 89 octane in mine, and I could probably get away with 87. I could never get it to ping under any circumstance with 93 or 89 (I used to run 93 like an idiot before I realized it just didn't need it). I even had the timing WAY off at one point, but still no pinging. I think if you could dyno it though you'd see the improvements stop about 40-42 degrees and then it would start going backwards. At some point you're introducing ignition too soon on the upstroke and the engine starts fighting itself because the mixture has burned before TDC, and now the energy left to push the piston back down is reduced from optimal.
I would definitely say that mine is more agile now. Winds up quick and you really feel how light these cars truly are. I am not sure I would want much more HP in this thing after this mod.
Offline
Killing me .. I started this thread I I haven’t been able to drive it still .. I just got done my trans cooler install. Now I’ll drove test mine too lol
Offline
Stevo wrote:
TKOPerformance wrote:
You can always try adding more by bumping base timing, but what I found on these low compression 289s is that I could never get one to ping, at least on decent gas. The ethanol is even more detonation resistant than the octane rating would imply, because ethanol is really had to ignite without a spark. I run 89 octane in mine, and I could probably get away with 87. I could never get it to ping under any circumstance with 93 or 89 (I used to run 93 like an idiot before I realized it just didn't need it). I even had the timing WAY off at one point, but still no pinging. I think if you could dyno it though you'd see the improvements stop about 40-42 degrees and then it would start going backwards. At some point you're introducing ignition too soon on the upstroke and the engine starts fighting itself because the mixture has burned before TDC, and now the energy left to push the piston back down is reduced from optimal.
I would definitely say that mine is more agile now. Winds up quick and you really feel how light these cars truly are. I am not sure I would want much more HP in this thing after this mod.
WOW!!!!!!!^^^^^^^^^^
6s6
Offline
Yeah, give it some time
He'll want 1-3/4" long tube headers and a snotty cam before its all over...
This is only stage 1 of the sickness...
Offline
TKOPerformance wrote:
Yeah, give it some time
He'll want 1-3/4" long tube headers and a snotty cam before its all over...
This is only stage 1 of the sickness...
Ha, ha... Oh man, here we go!
Sadly, this thing called money (or lack of) really cramps my style though
Offline
I'm glad ya got it sorted Stevo. Now that's a fair dinkum Ozzie name.
Where abouts in Oz are you?
I'm sure Gaba will be equally happy with the mod ... eventually.
Offline
Stevo wrote:
TKOPerformance wrote:
Yeah, give it some time
He'll want 1-3/4" long tube headers and a snotty cam before its all over...
This is only stage 1 of the sickness...Ha, ha... Oh man, here we go!
Sadly, this thing called money (or lack of) really cramps my style though
Pay the mortgage, buy new cylinder heads...is this really a decision?
Like I said, sickness...
Offline
TKOPerformance wrote:
Stevo wrote:
TKOPerformance wrote:
Yeah, give it some time
He'll want 1-3/4" long tube headers and a snotty cam before its all over...
This is only stage 1 of the sickness...Ha, ha... Oh man, here we go!
Sadly, this thing called money (or lack of) really cramps my style thoughPay the mortgage, buy new cylinder heads...is this really a decision?
Like I said, sickness...
Don't forget feed the kids, pay for College... The list goes on and on and on...
If I had spare cash, trust me... Cylinder heads, new dual exhaust, intake manifold would be on the list
Offline
TKOPerformance wrote:
I wouldn't change it. GT40 heads shouldn't need a ton of spark lead. Vacuum advance has to be tuned by driving and adjusting. Static numbers on a stationary engine aren't going to get you anywhere because that's not what vacuum advance is for. An old rule of thumb is set the can to add another 10 degrees at 2,000 RPM, but that's an extremely oversimplified way of looking at it. I'd add vacuum advance until it pings then knock it back until it stops, reducing it by about 1 degree for a safety margin.
Just remember clockwise is LESS advance, counterclockwise is more.
I'd also try to get the mechanical advance in sooner with lighter springs. You want it all in by 3,000 or even a bit less.
TKO , the comp cams manual says rotate all the way clockwise for full vaccum advance, reduce by two turns counter clockwise rotation , to reduce spark knock... lol another thing wrong in this manual?
Offline
Gaba wrote:
TKO , the comp cams manual says rotate all the way clockwise for full vaccum advance, reduce by two turns counter clockwise rotation , to reduce spark knock... lol another thing wrong in this manual?
Are you talking about the adjustable vacuum advance? If so, mine was wound out two full turns. I have not experienced any spark knock or anything at that, so I am not messing with mine any further.
Last edited by Stevo (8/22/2019 11:31 PM)
Offline
So now it’s marked also on the vacuum advance how it operates so I am not confused next time if I need to adjust .. the setting I left it on is 6 turns clockwise , basically half way!
If you look closely it’s connected to manifold vaccum at the base of the carb. Idle is reset, The car is ready for a test drive .. !
Total timing set to 36 degrees.
Last edited by Gaba (8/23/2019 7:09 AM)
Offline
Gaba wrote:
TKOPerformance wrote:
I wouldn't change it. GT40 heads shouldn't need a ton of spark lead. Vacuum advance has to be tuned by driving and adjusting. Static numbers on a stationary engine aren't going to get you anywhere because that's not what vacuum advance is for. An old rule of thumb is set the can to add another 10 degrees at 2,000 RPM, but that's an extremely oversimplified way of looking at it. I'd add vacuum advance until it pings then knock it back until it stops, reducing it by about 1 degree for a safety margin.
Just remember clockwise is LESS advance, counterclockwise is more.
I'd also try to get the mechanical advance in sooner with lighter springs. You want it all in by 3,000 or even a bit less.TKO , the comp cams manual says rotate all the way clockwise for full vaccum advance, reduce by two turns counter clockwise rotation , to reduce spark knock... lol another thing wrong in this manual?
What I read stated it the way I posted. Possibly it was incorrect. Is been a long, long time since I messed with adjusting vacuum advance, so I didn't trust my memory. Maybe the source I read go confused about advance and retard because you spin the distributor opposite on a Ford vs. a Chevy to increase or decrease base timing...
REMEMBER!!! When posting a question about your Mustang or other Ford on this forum, BE SURE to tell us what it is, what year, engine, etc so we have enough information to go on. |