'79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
09-07-2006, 09:49 PM
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
Chrysler's first generation electronic ignition was accurate to 9000+ rpm.
They came both with and without limiters. The models with limiters came in
2 or 3 settings
There was also an easy to install retrofit available from the parts
department that was initially limited to the V-8 models.
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:4500A6A0.DCE527E0@***.net...
> Mallory dual point, total 38 degrees on the crank. first transistor
> ignitions were junk along with all factory stock ignition that limited
> at five grand.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lon wrote:
>>
>> Our rule of thumb was to leave the carbs alone and fix the ignition
>> system first. Then open up the exhaust with good headers and pipes at
>> which point you could usually go a bit richer on the carbs without
>> fouling plugs as much at low speed. Best to put on a good manifold as
>> well. With a really good ignition, the plug fouling was usually not as
>> big a problem, often with a bypass to go back to stock to make it easier
>> to read the plugs for tuning the gas/air flow.
They came both with and without limiters. The models with limiters came in
2 or 3 settings
There was also an easy to install retrofit available from the parts
department that was initially limited to the V-8 models.
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:4500A6A0.DCE527E0@***.net...
> Mallory dual point, total 38 degrees on the crank. first transistor
> ignitions were junk along with all factory stock ignition that limited
> at five grand.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lon wrote:
>>
>> Our rule of thumb was to leave the carbs alone and fix the ignition
>> system first. Then open up the exhaust with good headers and pipes at
>> which point you could usually go a bit richer on the carbs without
>> fouling plugs as much at low speed. Best to put on a good manifold as
>> well. With a really good ignition, the plug fouling was usually not as
>> big a problem, often with a bypass to go back to stock to make it easier
>> to read the plugs for tuning the gas/air flow.
09-07-2006, 09:49 PM
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
Chrysler's first generation electronic ignition was accurate to 9000+ rpm.
They came both with and without limiters. The models with limiters came in
2 or 3 settings
There was also an easy to install retrofit available from the parts
department that was initially limited to the V-8 models.
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:4500A6A0.DCE527E0@***.net...
> Mallory dual point, total 38 degrees on the crank. first transistor
> ignitions were junk along with all factory stock ignition that limited
> at five grand.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lon wrote:
>>
>> Our rule of thumb was to leave the carbs alone and fix the ignition
>> system first. Then open up the exhaust with good headers and pipes at
>> which point you could usually go a bit richer on the carbs without
>> fouling plugs as much at low speed. Best to put on a good manifold as
>> well. With a really good ignition, the plug fouling was usually not as
>> big a problem, often with a bypass to go back to stock to make it easier
>> to read the plugs for tuning the gas/air flow.
They came both with and without limiters. The models with limiters came in
2 or 3 settings
There was also an easy to install retrofit available from the parts
department that was initially limited to the V-8 models.
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:4500A6A0.DCE527E0@***.net...
> Mallory dual point, total 38 degrees on the crank. first transistor
> ignitions were junk along with all factory stock ignition that limited
> at five grand.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lon wrote:
>>
>> Our rule of thumb was to leave the carbs alone and fix the ignition
>> system first. Then open up the exhaust with good headers and pipes at
>> which point you could usually go a bit richer on the carbs without
>> fouling plugs as much at low speed. Best to put on a good manifold as
>> well. With a really good ignition, the plug fouling was usually not as
>> big a problem, often with a bypass to go back to stock to make it easier
>> to read the plugs for tuning the gas/air flow.
09-07-2006, 10:21 PM
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
Best ignition ever made used radar pulse transformers with local
oscillators and a pickup wheel rather than points. Generated a pretty
good burst of high voltage pulses that were width modulated by the
pickup wheel. No point bounce, superheavy spark at low rpm, the voltage
could be bumped at high rpm. Not too many sold commercially by the guy
that invented it, but you could build your own if you were a radar tech.
A bit noisy in the RF range since you were generating a pulse train
rather than a single spark, and rather pricey unless you had access to
something like a T-9 Radar. Then Delta and a few other folks made
electronic ignitions that didn't suck as badly...
Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
L.W.(Bill) ------ III proclaimed:
> Mallory dual point, total 38 degrees on the crank. first transistor
> ignitions were junk along with all factory stock ignition that limited
> at five grand.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lon wrote:
>
>>Our rule of thumb was to leave the carbs alone and fix the ignition
>>system first. Then open up the exhaust with good headers and pipes at
>>which point you could usually go a bit richer on the carbs without
>>fouling plugs as much at low speed. Best to put on a good manifold as
>>well. With a really good ignition, the plug fouling was usually not as
>>big a problem, often with a bypass to go back to stock to make it easier
>>to read the plugs for tuning the gas/air flow.
oscillators and a pickup wheel rather than points. Generated a pretty
good burst of high voltage pulses that were width modulated by the
pickup wheel. No point bounce, superheavy spark at low rpm, the voltage
could be bumped at high rpm. Not too many sold commercially by the guy
that invented it, but you could build your own if you were a radar tech.
A bit noisy in the RF range since you were generating a pulse train
rather than a single spark, and rather pricey unless you had access to
something like a T-9 Radar. Then Delta and a few other folks made
electronic ignitions that didn't suck as badly...
Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
L.W.(Bill) ------ III proclaimed:
> Mallory dual point, total 38 degrees on the crank. first transistor
> ignitions were junk along with all factory stock ignition that limited
> at five grand.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lon wrote:
>
>>Our rule of thumb was to leave the carbs alone and fix the ignition
>>system first. Then open up the exhaust with good headers and pipes at
>>which point you could usually go a bit richer on the carbs without
>>fouling plugs as much at low speed. Best to put on a good manifold as
>>well. With a really good ignition, the plug fouling was usually not as
>>big a problem, often with a bypass to go back to stock to make it easier
>>to read the plugs for tuning the gas/air flow.
09-07-2006, 10:21 PM
#54
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
Best ignition ever made used radar pulse transformers with local
oscillators and a pickup wheel rather than points. Generated a pretty
good burst of high voltage pulses that were width modulated by the
pickup wheel. No point bounce, superheavy spark at low rpm, the voltage
could be bumped at high rpm. Not too many sold commercially by the guy
that invented it, but you could build your own if you were a radar tech.
A bit noisy in the RF range since you were generating a pulse train
rather than a single spark, and rather pricey unless you had access to
something like a T-9 Radar. Then Delta and a few other folks made
electronic ignitions that didn't suck as badly...
Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
L.W.(Bill) ------ III proclaimed:
> Mallory dual point, total 38 degrees on the crank. first transistor
> ignitions were junk along with all factory stock ignition that limited
> at five grand.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lon wrote:
>
>>Our rule of thumb was to leave the carbs alone and fix the ignition
>>system first. Then open up the exhaust with good headers and pipes at
>>which point you could usually go a bit richer on the carbs without
>>fouling plugs as much at low speed. Best to put on a good manifold as
>>well. With a really good ignition, the plug fouling was usually not as
>>big a problem, often with a bypass to go back to stock to make it easier
>>to read the plugs for tuning the gas/air flow.
oscillators and a pickup wheel rather than points. Generated a pretty
good burst of high voltage pulses that were width modulated by the
pickup wheel. No point bounce, superheavy spark at low rpm, the voltage
could be bumped at high rpm. Not too many sold commercially by the guy
that invented it, but you could build your own if you were a radar tech.
A bit noisy in the RF range since you were generating a pulse train
rather than a single spark, and rather pricey unless you had access to
something like a T-9 Radar. Then Delta and a few other folks made
electronic ignitions that didn't suck as badly...
Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
L.W.(Bill) ------ III proclaimed:
> Mallory dual point, total 38 degrees on the crank. first transistor
> ignitions were junk along with all factory stock ignition that limited
> at five grand.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lon wrote:
>
>>Our rule of thumb was to leave the carbs alone and fix the ignition
>>system first. Then open up the exhaust with good headers and pipes at
>>which point you could usually go a bit richer on the carbs without
>>fouling plugs as much at low speed. Best to put on a good manifold as
>>well. With a really good ignition, the plug fouling was usually not as
>>big a problem, often with a bypass to go back to stock to make it easier
>>to read the plugs for tuning the gas/air flow.
09-07-2006, 10:21 PM
#55
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
Best ignition ever made used radar pulse transformers with local
oscillators and a pickup wheel rather than points. Generated a pretty
good burst of high voltage pulses that were width modulated by the
pickup wheel. No point bounce, superheavy spark at low rpm, the voltage
could be bumped at high rpm. Not too many sold commercially by the guy
that invented it, but you could build your own if you were a radar tech.
A bit noisy in the RF range since you were generating a pulse train
rather than a single spark, and rather pricey unless you had access to
something like a T-9 Radar. Then Delta and a few other folks made
electronic ignitions that didn't suck as badly...
Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
L.W.(Bill) ------ III proclaimed:
> Mallory dual point, total 38 degrees on the crank. first transistor
> ignitions were junk along with all factory stock ignition that limited
> at five grand.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lon wrote:
>
>>Our rule of thumb was to leave the carbs alone and fix the ignition
>>system first. Then open up the exhaust with good headers and pipes at
>>which point you could usually go a bit richer on the carbs without
>>fouling plugs as much at low speed. Best to put on a good manifold as
>>well. With a really good ignition, the plug fouling was usually not as
>>big a problem, often with a bypass to go back to stock to make it easier
>>to read the plugs for tuning the gas/air flow.
oscillators and a pickup wheel rather than points. Generated a pretty
good burst of high voltage pulses that were width modulated by the
pickup wheel. No point bounce, superheavy spark at low rpm, the voltage
could be bumped at high rpm. Not too many sold commercially by the guy
that invented it, but you could build your own if you were a radar tech.
A bit noisy in the RF range since you were generating a pulse train
rather than a single spark, and rather pricey unless you had access to
something like a T-9 Radar. Then Delta and a few other folks made
electronic ignitions that didn't suck as badly...
Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
L.W.(Bill) ------ III proclaimed:
> Mallory dual point, total 38 degrees on the crank. first transistor
> ignitions were junk along with all factory stock ignition that limited
> at five grand.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lon wrote:
>
>>Our rule of thumb was to leave the carbs alone and fix the ignition
>>system first. Then open up the exhaust with good headers and pipes at
>>which point you could usually go a bit richer on the carbs without
>>fouling plugs as much at low speed. Best to put on a good manifold as
>>well. With a really good ignition, the plug fouling was usually not as
>>big a problem, often with a bypass to go back to stock to make it easier
>>to read the plugs for tuning the gas/air flow.
09-08-2006, 09:02 PM
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
Alfa Romeo have been using "twin spark" engines as they call them, since the
60's (and still use them today).
I had the 3.0 v6 hemi which was conventional - they only did them on the 4
cylinder models which ran up to 2 litres.
Dave Milne, Scotland
"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:a5CdnXQWXs0PTp3YnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
> them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
60's (and still use them today).
I had the 3.0 v6 hemi which was conventional - they only did them on the 4
cylinder models which ran up to 2 litres.
Dave Milne, Scotland
"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:a5CdnXQWXs0PTp3YnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
> them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
09-08-2006, 09:02 PM
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
Alfa Romeo have been using "twin spark" engines as they call them, since the
60's (and still use them today).
I had the 3.0 v6 hemi which was conventional - they only did them on the 4
cylinder models which ran up to 2 litres.
Dave Milne, Scotland
"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:a5CdnXQWXs0PTp3YnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
> them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
60's (and still use them today).
I had the 3.0 v6 hemi which was conventional - they only did them on the 4
cylinder models which ran up to 2 litres.
Dave Milne, Scotland
"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:a5CdnXQWXs0PTp3YnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
> them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
09-08-2006, 09:02 PM
#58
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
Alfa Romeo have been using "twin spark" engines as they call them, since the
60's (and still use them today).
I had the 3.0 v6 hemi which was conventional - they only did them on the 4
cylinder models which ran up to 2 litres.
Dave Milne, Scotland
"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:a5CdnXQWXs0PTp3YnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
> them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
60's (and still use them today).
I had the 3.0 v6 hemi which was conventional - they only did them on the 4
cylinder models which ran up to 2 litres.
Dave Milne, Scotland
"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:a5CdnXQWXs0PTp3YnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
> them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
09-08-2006, 09:24 PM
#59
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
Don't foerget the Mazda Wankel rotary:
http://www.rotaryengineillustrated.com/animations.php
"Dave Milne" <whoneeds@toknow.com> wrote in message
news:SooMg.16060$r61.2875@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
> Alfa Romeo have been using "twin spark" engines as they call them, since
> the
> 60's (and still use them today).
> I had the 3.0 v6 hemi which was conventional - they only did them on the 4
> cylinder models which ran up to 2 litres.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
>
> "Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:a5CdnXQWXs0PTp3YnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
>> Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
>> them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
>
>
http://www.rotaryengineillustrated.com/animations.php
"Dave Milne" <whoneeds@toknow.com> wrote in message
news:SooMg.16060$r61.2875@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
> Alfa Romeo have been using "twin spark" engines as they call them, since
> the
> 60's (and still use them today).
> I had the 3.0 v6 hemi which was conventional - they only did them on the 4
> cylinder models which ran up to 2 litres.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
>
> "Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:a5CdnXQWXs0PTp3YnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
>> Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
>> them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
>
>
09-08-2006, 09:24 PM
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '79 304 Edelbrock carb problems vs Holley carbs?
Don't foerget the Mazda Wankel rotary:
http://www.rotaryengineillustrated.com/animations.php
"Dave Milne" <whoneeds@toknow.com> wrote in message
news:SooMg.16060$r61.2875@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
> Alfa Romeo have been using "twin spark" engines as they call them, since
> the
> 60's (and still use them today).
> I had the 3.0 v6 hemi which was conventional - they only did them on the 4
> cylinder models which ran up to 2 litres.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
>
> "Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:a5CdnXQWXs0PTp3YnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
>> Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
>> them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
>
>
http://www.rotaryengineillustrated.com/animations.php
"Dave Milne" <whoneeds@toknow.com> wrote in message
news:SooMg.16060$r61.2875@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
> Alfa Romeo have been using "twin spark" engines as they call them, since
> the
> 60's (and still use them today).
> I had the 3.0 v6 hemi which was conventional - they only did them on the 4
> cylinder models which ran up to 2 litres.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
>
> "Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:a5CdnXQWXs0PTp3YnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
>> Dual points worked, dual plugs worked even better but dunno anyone using
>> them since the old straight 8 Nash engines of the late 30's.
>
>