A short study on ignition timing and combustion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jim, while you have been working through adjusting timings on the dyno looking for torque improvement, have you tried a variety of different shaped carb. needles ? It seems to me that the shape (changes in taper) of the needles affects the optimum advance curve needed to give max. torque. An improvement in midrange acceleration out of corners is reflected in higher top speed towards the ends of the straights. I suggest the transition between the idle circuit and the main jets is the major factor. If you get the optimum jetting at all throttle openings between those two points, as well as the best ignition advance to suit those jetting across the rev range - haven't you got the job skinned ? To my mind the size of the main jets is much less important as long as they are rich enough.
 
Carburetor needles -how quaint.

I have boxes and boxes of carburetor needles. Jim
 
Are you using Mikuni needles in Amal carbs ? And have you ever needed to use recessed needle jets ?
 
acotrel said:
Are you using Mikuni needles in Amal carbs ? And have you ever needed to use recessed needle jets ?

I have used Mikuni and Keihin needles in Amal carbs.

I have only needed recessed needle jets with two strokes. Jim
 
Snorton74 said:
acotrel said:
Are you using Mikuni needles in Amal carbs ? And have you ever needed to use recessed needle jets ?


The only carbs Jim uses comes in his food.
Yep, but I bet he doesn't count his carbs, :D, he is one immaginative innovative & industrious son of a gun though!
 
Do Amal petrol needles come in a variety of tapers these days or are they still one size fits all? I bought a pair of alcohol kitted Amal Mk2s and the needles and needle jets were absurd. I made my own needle jets and found a pair of rich Mikuni needles of the correct length. If you go through the maintenance manuals of 70s Japanese bikes, you will find that almost every model has different needles.
I've read a lot of comments on this forum about jetting carbs, most of them are about main jets and idle - that is the easy stuff. The throttle range from 1/4 to 3/4 is much more important, and never seems to be mentioned. With alcohol fuel it makes a big difference if you get it near right. Petrol is usually twice as critical in every way. That is one of the reasons I never race using it. The other is the variations in composition you can get with petrol. It was OK when we were allowed to use Avgas, what do the big boys use these days - Elf ?
 
Amal is very limited in there needle choices.

I use Phillips b32 or Sunoco 110 fuel. It makes more power than av gas. Jim
 
Jim, where do you get that stuff when you are out on the road? Is 110 octane necessary for your bike? You and I talked about non-ethanol fuel down a Barber last year and you mentioned what else they put in the fuel instead of the alcohol. Stuff like benzene or ???. I still run it just because it has more BTUs per gallon than ethanol fuel and wont mess up my lined tank. Any way, maybe I missed something that has already been said in this thread but how much octane is everyone needing and/or getting away with? (I use 93 octane non-ethanol with good results.)
 
motorson said:
Jim, where do you get that stuff when you are out on the road? Is 110 octane necessary for your bike? You and I talked about non-ethanol fuel down a Barber last year and you mentioned what else they put in the fuel instead of the alcohol. Stuff like benzene or ???. I still run it just because it has more BTUs per gallon than ethanol fuel and wont mess up my lined tank. Any way, maybe I missed something that has already been said in this thread but how much octane is everyone needing and/or getting away with? (I use 93 octane non-ethanol with good results.)

I only use race gas in race bikes.

I just use whatever is sold at the station for my streetbike. I look for 93 octane when I get to lower altitudes but 91 is as high as it gets in my area.

Who knows what is in it. Non-alcohol fuels use other light end products to raise the octane that may or may not be better than alcohol. Jim
 
Another nice thing about the Sunoco 110 that I've found is that it gives a good color reading on the plugs for tuning, this has been a busy topic on the forum lately about plug color and EtOH / unleaded gas not giving typical (old school) color readings.
Lance
 
This whole thread is really interesting, like all of the ones that Jim starts. What I would like to know from Jim is by how much his timing figures would deviate from fixed ignition timing? Especially once above about 3000 RPM. How many more degrees of advance would occur at higher levels of RPM?

I am very used to the idea that most motorcycle engines will run very well if once above about 2000-3000 RPM the timing is fixed at a certain figure. For my Norton 850 that is standard apart from running a single 38mm Amal carb I have been using 28 degrees. For Triumphs I have always used 38 degrees.

On the Norton I have a Lucas Rita ignition that is supposed to have a curve that suits the Norton quite well. On the Truimphs I have, I mainly use Boyers, the advance curve they have does seem to take a bit of the snap out of the engines, but it does reduce the tendency towards detonation. I have run Triumphs also with fixed magnetos, and mags with a centrifugal advance. There seems to be very little difference in operation really as most of the time once you are riding the mag is at full advance anyway
 
tricatcent said:
This whole thread is really interesting, like all of the ones that Jim starts. What I would like to know from Jim is by how much his timing figures would deviate from fixed ignition timing? Especially once above about 3000 RPM. How many more degrees of advance would occur at higher levels of RPM?

I am very used to the idea that most motorcycle engines will run very well if once above about 2000-3000 RPM the timing is fixed at a certain figure. For my Norton 850 that is standard apart from running a single 38mm Amal carb I have been using 28 degrees. For Triumphs I have always used 38 degrees.

On the Norton I have a Lucas Rita ignition that is supposed to have a curve that suits the Norton quite well. On the Truimphs I have, I mainly use Boyers, the advance curve they have does seem to take a bit of the snap out of the engines, but it does reduce the tendency towards detonation. I have run Triumphs also with fixed magnetos, and mags with a centrifugal advance. There seems to be very little difference in operation really as most of the time once you are riding the mag is at full advance anyway

Most Nortons work well if the advance is "all in " by about 3500 rpm. If the advance stays steady beyond 3500 then about 28 or 29 degrees is about right.
If you have an ignition that can be programmed to retard at higher rpm then you can get a little more midrange by advancing to 32 degrees at 4500 and then retarding back to 28 degrees by 6000 rpm. The high swirl at higher rpms means you need less advance as the rpm rises. Staying at 32 degrees at 6000 rpm on a performance motor is tough on pistons and cases. Jim

I might add that this is for engines with near stock porting and squish. If the ports have been modified or the combustion chamber has been changed then the timing requirements will change also.
 
comnoz said:
Who knows what is in it. Non-alcohol fuels use other light end products to raise the octane that may or may not be better than alcohol. Jim

This is interesting. There is a 90 grade no ethenol fuel down the road from me and I wonder if it is better or worse than 93 grade ethanol blend. I ran a tankful of the puregas 90 a while back and it seemed fine but over a long time who know what it will do. And It's not inexpensive either.

I have been mixing a 50/50 blend of 110 leaded and 93 ethanol for 6 years. I feel this may be a bit overkill and not really needed. I think I'm ready to ween the bike off this blend.
 
If there is anything harder on a fiberglass tank than alcohol it's probably toluene -a fairly common octane booster. Jim
 
I plan on replacing the alcohol sensitive components [aluminum and magnesium] in my fuel system this winter and adding a flex fuel sensor. Then I will be looking for E85 -great octane and cooling ability. Jim
 
pete.v said:
comnoz said:
Who knows what is in it. Non-alcohol fuels use other light end products to raise the octane that may or may not be better than alcohol. Jim

This is interesting. There is a 90 grade no ethenol fuel down the road from me and I wonder if it is better or worse than 93 grade ethanol blend. I ran a tankful of the puregas 90 a while back and it seemed fine but over a long time who know what it will do. And It's not inexpensive either.

I have been mixing a 50/50 blend of 110 leaded and 93 ethanol for 6 years. I feel this may be a bit overkill and not really needed. I think I'm ready to ween the bike off this blend.

You know this already but it bears saying, that's likely close to 100 octane and to obtain its benefits, your engine has to be running high compression or lots of ignition advance or both.
 
' The high swirl at higher rpms means you need less advance as the rpm rises. Staying at 32 degrees at 6000 rpm on a performance motor is tough on pistons and cases. Jim'

In reading the Dynatek 2000 literature, they achieve retard at high revs by using a VOES vacuum switch to change from the high advance curve to one with less advance. I thought that the reason less advance was needed was because there is less depression over the jets in the mixing chamber of the carburettor, i.e. under the slide, if the throttle is wide open at high revs. Do you have much experience with tuning commandos that have had the head fully hemisphered, or varying the ports which has indicated the swirl effect has a major effect on the need to retard the timing ? In Nortons you rarely have a high piston dome stuffing up the flame front.
I think there are two things which affect the required advance at mid throttle openings, if the comp. ratio, and fuel composition are constant. That is the jetting (needle shape) and the change in the time the piston takes to rockover TDC as the revs rise because the piston is experiencing a change in acceleration, and the time taken for the entire combustion event is almost fixed, being a chemical reaction. It would make more sense to me to estimate the time the combustion takes from the standard timing of 28 degrees at 3000 revs and relating the deceleration of the piston to it as the revs rise by calculation, the algorithm would give the shape of the curve needed purely to compensate for the geometry of the situation. Then you could simply jet to that, and change the static advance if the fuel altered.
I don't know whether the Dynatek 2000 system of retarding when there is little vacuum actually works. On reading their stuff, it seems they sometimes earth the wire that goes to the VOES switch, so the advance curve does not change if they lose vacuum.
I have never worried much about trimming the main jets as long as they are rich enough and the needle doesn't obstruct at full throttle. To my mind what is important is that you have the optimum of jetting and timing as you wind the throttle on coming out of corners, and that would be particularly so if you are using petrol to race. With methanol, you can get away with a lot, however even there if you raise the needles one notch on my bike there is a considerable drop in performance as you come out of corners.
When I practise, I do a lot of laps and there is one hairpin bend in particular which I use as a measure, and I know if the bike is going quicker or slower at the end of the straight after it. The trick is to know when you can raise the overall gearing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top