Bumping the IP timing one tooth

[theman53]

I would bump up the boost to what you are going to run normally. My opinion so take it with a grain of salt.
I would be careful with the pointer and make sure it cannot fall out. Also I think you should take a punch and make a solid line through white paint. A few blasts of brake clean can make your paint go away but a mark won't. It will also make it easier to see with your timing light.

[Mark(The Miser)UK]

I assume that you had the pump set to 0.125mm, and then moved up t o 0.95mm. I'd try somewhere in between 0.8 and 0.9mm to reduce EGT's and be closer to book timing.

Can you elaborate how before you 'correctly' marked the flywheel, the position of the cam verified the timing?

I might try the tube method, as I'm entirely open to innovation. The smaller the bore the better I should think.
I still feel that play in the bearings and  relatively stationary region of the piston is working against you. Testing on a standard flywheel will resolve this...

[Gizmoman]

I would bump up the boost to what you are going to run normally. My opinion so take it with a grain of salt.
I would be careful with the pointer and make sure it cannot fall out. Also I think you should take a punch and make a solid line through white paint. A few blasts of brake clean can make your paint go away but a mark won't. It will also make it easier to see with your timing light.

Thanks theman, I'll up it to 15 tomorrow - man this thing flies compared to what it was like (and it wasn't too bad considering its a still a Vanagon.  As for the pointer, Its stainless steel and goes into the case an inch. I also "knurled" it with the cutters on the pliers, coated it with epoxy and really had to work hard to get it home - it's not coming out. I'll punch the center of my white mark as you suggested.

 

I assume that you had the pump set to 0.125mm, and then moved up t o 0.95mm. I'd try somewhere in between 0.8 and 0.9mm to reduce EGT's and be closer to book timing.

Can you elaborate how before you 'correctly' marked the flywheel, the position of the cam verified the timing?

I might try the tube method, as I'm entirely open to innovation. The smaller the bore the better I should think.
I still feel that play in the bearings and  relatively stationary region of the piston is working against you. Testing on a standard flywheel will resolve this...

).

I was doubting it would work but considering the source(s), I did it anyhow. I couldn't find hose that fit the hole for the GP well enough for my liking so I took a brass barbed fitting and turned it to 12mm in the lathe and cut 1.25 threads into the brass - screwed right in. Then I took about 2 feet of clear hose and stuffed it on. I let it droop below the barbed connection and put some oil in it (could be any fluid I spoze) and let the oil settle in the bottom of a loop.

I already had set the cam to TDC and sure enough, when I rotated the crank, the fluid began to drop. Rotating the crank back made it rise again. It was pretty amazing - almost like watching the piston move.

I'll up the boost tomorrow and do a run to see if it lowers EGT's. If there's not much change, I'll probably wait till my pulse sensor comes in before I mess with the timing again.

So your'e saying that moving closer to .8 may reduce EGT's?

BTW, I agree that smaller would be better - it's all about ratio I believe.

[fatmobile]

Right, retarded timing will cause higher EGTs.
 If you make a mark where the pump meets the bracket you will know how much turning the pump = how many mm on the dial gauge.
 Then you won't need the gauge to tell you how far you turned the pump, eventually you will wonder why you used it.
 If you are tuning it to run good who cares what number it ends up at.
 Adjusting it to run best is hillbilly tuning, wether using a mark or a gauge,...  but a mark is easier.

[Gizmoman]

Right, retarded timing will cause higher EGTs.
 If you make a mark where the pump meets the bracket you will know how much turning the pump = how many mm on the dial gauge.
 Then you won't need the gauge to tell you how far you turned the pump, eventually you will wonder why you used it.
 If you are tuning it to run good who cares what number it ends up at.
 Adjusting it to run best is hillbilly tuning, wether using a mark or a gauge,...  but a mark is easier.

Thanks Fatmobile, I did make a mark when it was at 1.25 so I do have two reference points now. I'd rather not touch the fuel screw as the last screwdriver that was on it belonged to Giles

I have to drain the cooling system today and replace a reducer sleeve I made from PVC (dumb). The Gee-Bee silicone hoses are for a later model van with 1-1/2" diameter pipes. Mine are 1-1/4". The PVC can't take the heat and started dripping last night after my last run. I got lucky on that one.

[libbydiesel]

0.8 is more retarded than 0.95 and so would most likely result in higher EGTs.

[Gizmoman]

0.8 is more retarded than 0.95 and so would most likely result in higher EGTs.

Thanks for clearing that up libby,
If I were to change the timing to reduce EGT's, I would head back towards the .125 - possibly .1?

[dieseljunkie69]

On a metric indicator, 0.125mm would be almost nill.

0.125mm, 0.225mm, 0.325mm, 0.425mm, 0.525mm, 0.625mm, 0.725mm, 0.825mm, and finally to roughly where you have it set now 0.955mm.

If you moved it away from the head to approach 0.95mm than you were at 1.25mm, one full millimeter of advance past 0.125mm as you had thought previously.

[libbydiesel]

0.8 is more retarded than 0.95 and so would most likely result in higher EGTs.

Thanks for clearing that up libby,
If I were to change the timing to reduce EGT's, I would head back towards the .125 - possibly .1?

I would leave the timing alone until your pulse adapter arrives.  With a pre-turbine fast-acting thermocouple I would be fine with sustained EGTs of 1200-1250.  If your EGTs are above that, I would adjust boost higher to lower them. 

With your new rings, I would drive conservatively until normal operating temperature and then do short pulses of higher power not exceeding 3-4 seconds.

On a metric indicator, 0.125mm would be almost nill.

0.125mm, 0.225mm, 0.325mm, 0.425mm, 0.525mm, 0.625mm, 0.725mm, 0.825mm, and finally to roughly where you have it set now 0.955mm.

If you moved it away from the head to approach 0.95mm than you were at 1.25mm, one full millimeter of advance past 0.125mm as you had thought previously.

I assume Gizmo was misplacing the decimal point but that is a good question.

[Gizmoman]

Correct, misplaced decimal point

[Gizmoman]

Just an update; I raised the boost to 15 PSI and I'm still getting EGT's in the 12-1300 range if I keep the pedal down. The 15 PSI seems tougher to achieve than it used to. It also used to cruise on the freeway around 10 PSI, now it's around 7. Possibly the intercooler isn't efficient enough, I'm fuelling too much, or just need to keep my foot out of it. This is the first time I have had an EGT sensor so possibly I was getting even higher than that before - just didn't know it till I roasted #4 piston.

At low RPMs, like staring up from a light, it's really gutless. Then, after about 20 feet, bam, the boost comes on and it starts moving real well.

[bbob203]

18psi man!! I run my k14 there and it likes it.

[Gizmoman]

18psi man!! I run my k14 there and it likes it.

Maybe it's that simple, but I already raised it from 12 and see no significant lowering of EGT's. Something else is going on but not sure what it is.
It's been a year since I last drove it but I don't remember it being so gutless at low rpms. Oddly, though, the previous engine had shorter rods - apparently an industrial engine. Could that produce a bit better grunt in the low end?

I cant say what the EGT's were as I mentioned, but there is some possibility I ran it that hot all the time without knowing it.
I have both a water temp gauge and an EGT now. Before I had EGT, I watched the water temp (after turning up the fuel). When it started to get hot, I backed off.
Now that I have both readings, it's no wonder I fried the piston. The water temp does rise, but so slow compared to EGT temps, it ain't pretty.

[Mark(The Miser)UK]

Gizmo good you've sorted out your decimal point . 

Re rising  EGT's; there seems to be some misunderstanding by your advisers.

The purpose of measuring EGT's is to get an indication of engine temperature rise after an increase in loading be it fast driving or hill climbs, so that you can back it off .

Retarding an engine, ie going from 1mm to 0.8mm;
1)DOES NOT result in a warmer/hotter/melting engine which is what you are guarding against.
2)IT DOES increase turbo response, which is a good thing.
If you want engine temperature measurement, then use the very clever Hill-Billy method of a thermocouple in the glowplug hole, ie a glowplug [not sure about 'Duraterms']

[Gizmoman]

Thanks Mark.
If I want to lower EGT's radically I think I only have two choices, back off the fuel screw or my right foot.
The turbo is a K14. I know there are other smaller turbos that spool faster but I need this thing pumping still at around 4K - smaller turbos generally can't sustain that (from what I've read).
Based on what libby suggested, I should have seen a reduction in EGT's with the increase of boost (makes perfect sense).

Heck, maybe I should finish that water/meth injection chingus - I was almost done with it. That would cool things off.