Oh, no I did read the thread. I asked him whether he had ever done any real world data gathering to substantiate his 12* +/- .5* for all kraut diesels and he went off waxing about theory. In almost every case where someone states categorically that such & such is the case and presents unreasonably exact data there is a reason. Whether it is wishful thinking, or self deception, or fabrication, one can never be sure. In the real world the best empirical data has an error/noise rate of more than the 1/730 that he is claiming. (.138%)It is not believable that every diesel motor would run best when set at the same timing at idle. A motor with an IP with a faster advance curve will almost always run better if the timing at idle is retarded a bit from what most VW diesels come with. Conversely if the IP advance curve is slower, that motor will run way better with the timing at idle is more advanced, since that way the timing will be closer to optimum in the RPM range where most of the driving is done.LD claims that is not the case.
...BTW your Bieber avatar is awesome.-Malone
He stated several times that this is provided "an advance section that is functioning properly"....even so, if it wasn't no timing method would be ideal I wouldn't think.
Timing for performance is what works best on every single diesel or gasoline in real world time. Time it for what works best in your world. Is 12* best? I doubt it, none of the diesels I've ever timed were anywhere near the same. They all sound different, they all start differently, they all perform the same though. Butt-dyno at my 1000 foot elevation on all of them is the best real world for timing. Quote from: theman53 on February 17, 2014, 08:10:32 amHe stated several times that this is provided "an advance section that is functioning properly"....even so, if it wasn't no timing method would be ideal I wouldn't think.Yeah, but the amount of different advance systems out there.. I have seen personally like 7 different timing piston springs, across four completely different timing pistons. Would this then not mean that all those engines need a different static timing value to start from?
I also see how different engines in different states will have different sweet spots, making setting 'by the book', with either method above, of limited value. But, how close is the book value to the typical sweet spot?Toby, in the 100's that you've timed up, was the sweet spot always pretty close to the by the book setting, or could it be different by a fair margin? What range from extreme to extreme are we looking at?
Quote from: monkey magic on February 12, 2014, 12:27:34 pmI also see how different engines in different states will have different sweet spots, making setting 'by the book', with either method above, of limited value. But, how close is the book value to the typical sweet spot?Toby, in the 100's that you've timed up, was the sweet spot always pretty close to the by the book setting, or could it be different by a fair margin? What range from extreme to extreme are we looking at?Surely the answer to the above is central to the discussion? Only libby has answered the above (saying the sweet spot was usually withing half a degree of 12*).As far as I can make out, the pulse adapter may be the best method for static timing, and everyone elses argument is, essentially, AGAINST static timing being valid, not so much that the pulse adapter is junk. It seems to be obvious to me that some sort of static timing should be used to get near the mark, followed by some hillbilly tweaking either side, to find the sweet spot if the static timing isnt enough. So Toby, in the 100's that you've timed up, was the sweet spot always pretty close to the by the book setting, or could it be different by a fair margin? Anoybody else want to quote figures for same? Only libby has so far, people are talking about burden of proof but have offered nothing solid to counter libbys observations.
I don't wouldn't say this is just about static timing, nor that anyone has regarded the piezo as "junk". This has centered on whether a single absolute setting (e.g. 12o BTDC) can be best - across engines -... or if "best" varies by engine and can only be determined by performance.
It's doubtful that anyone has recorded a dial-position after setting an IP by performance, because it wouldn't be particularly relevant to another engine.
Setting "Best" by performance is often regarded as unique to any engine and a measurement of static timing is moot - reference marks scribed on the IP and bracket are faster/easier to use as relative reference (faster than a piezo).
Was your initial timing hillbilly or dial gauge?