Re: Timing changes???
 

Yes, with the POS Volkswagen that began the foreign car invasion.
And of course that little Nash Rambler that the TJ still uses their
engine, but the big three sold mostly V8s and a family would be laughed
at if they bought something that wouldn't turn sixty in nine seconds.
Most of us locked the distributor in at thirty eight to forty
degrees total. Running over three hundred thirty degrees duration we had
no problem starting them: http://www.----------.com/iskenderian.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------

Steve G wrote:
>
> Not all cars were quicker or more economical in the sixties. Some were real
> slugs. But the point is that it was not whether it had manifold vacuum to
> the advance or ported vacuum to the advance that made some slugs and others
> not. Total timing advance was probably very similar, just different methods
> of getting there. BTW, with knock sensors in cars today timing is running
> much more advanced than it ever has.

Re: Timing changes???
 

Yes, with the POS Volkswagen that began the foreign car invasion.
And of course that little Nash Rambler that the TJ still uses their
engine, but the big three sold mostly V8s and a family would be laughed
at if they bought something that wouldn't turn sixty in nine seconds.
Most of us locked the distributor in at thirty eight to forty
degrees total. Running over three hundred thirty degrees duration we had
no problem starting them: http://www.----------.com/iskenderian.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------

Steve G wrote:
>
> Not all cars were quicker or more economical in the sixties. Some were real
> slugs. But the point is that it was not whether it had manifold vacuum to
> the advance or ported vacuum to the advance that made some slugs and others
> not. Total timing advance was probably very similar, just different methods
> of getting there. BTW, with knock sensors in cars today timing is running
> much more advanced than it ever has.

Re: Timing changes???
 

Economics, we didn't need no economical Nash. Gas was twenty six
cents a gallon. And I still feel the same way at two bucks a gallon,
it's the cheapest product we may buy. That's we still drive life saving
trucks. Name me something that's cheaper, you might suggest it to:
http://www2.inhis.com/HumorNew/humor.asp?id=2784
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Steve G wrote:
>
> Not all cars were quicker or more economical in the sixties. Some were real
> slugs. But the point is that it was not whether it had manifold vacuum to
> the advance or ported vacuum to the advance that made some slugs and others
> not. Total timing advance was probably very similar, just different methods
> of getting there. BTW, with knock sensors in cars today timing is running
> much more advanced than it ever has.

Re: Timing changes???
 

Economics, we didn't need no economical Nash. Gas was twenty six
cents a gallon. And I still feel the same way at two bucks a gallon,
it's the cheapest product we may buy. That's we still drive life saving
trucks. Name me something that's cheaper, you might suggest it to:
http://www2.inhis.com/HumorNew/humor.asp?id=2784
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Steve G wrote:
>
> Not all cars were quicker or more economical in the sixties. Some were real
> slugs. But the point is that it was not whether it had manifold vacuum to
> the advance or ported vacuum to the advance that made some slugs and others
> not. Total timing advance was probably very similar, just different methods
> of getting there. BTW, with knock sensors in cars today timing is running
> much more advanced than it ever has.

Re: Timing changes???
 

Economics, we didn't need no economical Nash. Gas was twenty six
cents a gallon. And I still feel the same way at two bucks a gallon,
it's the cheapest product we may buy. That's we still drive life saving
trucks. Name me something that's cheaper, you might suggest it to:
http://www2.inhis.com/HumorNew/humor.asp?id=2784
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Steve G wrote:
>
> Not all cars were quicker or more economical in the sixties. Some were real
> slugs. But the point is that it was not whether it had manifold vacuum to
> the advance or ported vacuum to the advance that made some slugs and others
> not. Total timing advance was probably very similar, just different methods
> of getting there. BTW, with knock sensors in cars today timing is running
> much more advanced than it ever has.