No Ignition Advance

[SpitNoir]

And now, for my next trick...

Been trying to work the bugs out of this '65. Recently changed the points out to a Pertronix Ignitor and came across an issue while trying to adjust the timing.
With a timing strobe, I see absolutely zero change in the ignition advance as the carbs are opened up and the revs climb. The only change is a slight oscillation of the timing mark as we get into the mid-range.
Didn't really rev it up high because I could see the obvious trend.

The next interesting thing about this is that, if we are to believe the timing mark, the ignition is set at 35� BTDC. I determined this by using a dial-back function on my timing light to get the mark to fall back and line up with the timing pointer.

Other observations:

Turning the vernier adjuster on the distributor (AC Delco evidently?) nets approximately a 3 to 5 degree change total.

Very little vacuum signal is felt through the vacuum advance tube. Tube and fittings are new. I have a vacuum test gauge, but have not dug it out yet to measure the actual value.

No change in vacuum signal between idle and open throttle.

No change in timing is visible between vacuum tube connected or disconnected.

Distributor seems tight and clean (other than a dusting of surface rust) with no discernible play at the shaft. Gripping it and pushing back-and-forth netted no un-expected movements.


I have not loosened and rotated the distributor body yet, because I ran out of daylight. I hesitated anyway, since it just didn't act like it was sitting at 35� advance. I know that every engine type acts differently to different settings though, so I may be putting too much weight on other experiences.

1. So first question is, would a Spit engine start easily and run decently if it was indeed running at 35 degrees advance?

2. Should I look for another mark hidden somewhere on the pulley? The existing one seems painted on, but has been there a long time.

3. Is it relatively easy to pull the distributor apart to access it's advance weight mechanism? Any pitfalls to watch out for? Not unfamiliar with pulling and servicing dizzys of the American variety, but this will be my first Sptifire Delco.

4. When installing the ignition, I did not see any signs that I'm running a resistor wire. Nothing in the diagrams anyway. I did not verify ohms over the circuit, but the previous coil looked to be a 12v coil. Do these have a resistor wire?

5. Any other pointers?

Sorry for the long post with so many questions. At least they're all related!

thanks


PaulB

[CHRIS211083]

Hi from the top a 65 should be a mk2 spitfire.  Does it have the 1147cc engine with the FC prefix engine number? If so then the ignition timing should be set to 17deg btdc. Secondly for your timing your mark is actually a hole in the pulley and not the mark/score!!!! Finally the way to test your vacuum unit is to connect the tube to the dizzy advance unit and then suck on the other end of the tube if it moves till it hits the stop then fine if not its buggered. You can get the dizzy rebuilt by H&H ignition solutions, this will also make sure the weights are free. Finally if this is a 65 car and a mark 2 spitfire then you will have no resistor as this was only used on later late 70's onwards.

Hope this helps.

Chris.

[lancepar]

Paul,
This may not fit in with what you have or have changed to, but.......
A std dizzy will have an automatic advance and retard unit (weights and springs under the points plate).
The springs can be missing or stretched and the bob weights seized on their pivots, hence the oil hole in the points plate.
The vacuum unit on the outside of the body is an aid to economy and not all Spitfires had them, so you could blank it off if you want to.

8)

[lancepar]

Had to go and check,

To test the advance and retard unit with the engine at rest remove the dizzy cap and rotate the rotor arm by hand, it should move one way and spring back when released.

Here is an image of a Delco with no vacuum unit from new and a new take on the Spitfire(air plane) avatar.

8)

[SpitNoir]

2402 wrote:

Hi from the top a 65 should be a mk2 spitfire.  Does it have the 1147cc engine with the FC prefix engine number? If so then the ignition timing should be set to 17deg btdc. Secondly for your timing your mark is actually a hole in the pulley and not the mark/score!!!! Finally the way to test your vacuum unit is to connect the tube to the dizzy advance unit and then suck on the other end of the tube if it moves till it hits the stop then fine if not its buggered. You can get the dizzy rebuilt by H&H ignition solutions, this will also make sure the weights are free. Finally if this is a 65 car and a mark 2 spitfire then you will have no resistor as this was only used on later late 70's onwards.

Hi Chris. Thanks for the info. Yes, a '65 Spit (see my signature) with original FC coded engine. I should have specified in the text to be more clear.
I had seen reference to the timing hole, but didn't see one initially. Very possibly it's covered in 40+ years of build-up, so I'll go digging in a bit. It's been kept rather clean though, so I didn't expect to find anything at first. You've just cemented my resolve to get my hand in there and poke around.

I'll test the vacuum advance. Is the vacuum tube connected to constant vacuum, or "ported" so as to only come on as the carbs are opened up? And what should signal read on a healthy engine?
Glad it doesn't have a hidden resistor somewhere. Thanks for that tidbit.

Letcha know what I find.


Paul

[SpitNoir]

1704 wrote:

This may not fit in with what you have or have changed to, but.......
A std dizzy will have an automatic advance and retard unit (weights and springs under the points plate).
The springs can be missing or stretched and the bob weights seized on their pivots, hence the oil hole in the points plate.
The vacuum unit on the outside of the body is an aid to economy and not all Spitfires had them, so you could blank it off if you want to.

1704 wrote:

Had to go and check,

To test the advance and retard unit with the engine at rest remove the dizzy cap and rotate the rotor arm by hand, it should move one way and spring back when released.

Here is an image of a Delco with no vacuum unit from new and a new take on the Spitfire(air plane) avatar.

Thanks for that lancepar. I did do the twist-test in fact, back when I first started working on it, and don't remember it being particularly resistant to movement. I do remember wondering though, at how solid it all felt. I'm fairly certain it's the original, and as such I expected a lot of slop in the mechanism. Felt pretty good at the time though. Guess initial impressions are not always accurate, eh?
I'll do it again of course, but I think I'm just going to follow your lead and dig down into it to see what I can see. I like vacuum assists (when they work!) so I'll leave that and try to make sure it's functional.

Here's what I'm working on. Without the additional Amber Spitfire unfortunately.

Cheers again to you both.

[SpitNoir]

Hmm, looking at my pic, I'm remembering that others have said that the normal position for #1 plug wire is in the 7 o'clock position. That correct from the factory?
Pretty certain that it's all still aligned correctly and in the right order, which would mean that it's ok to have it anywhere you want as long as things are synchronized with TDC. But...  It might also mean that someone has had it apart in the past and not put things back together quite correctly either.
Time to dig deeper.

Paul

[lancepar]

BTW from your picture you have a Lucas dizzy not a Delco and it is in the normal position, but I don't think mine is however.


8)

[mikeyb]

I would agree that the dizzy looks to be in roughly the correct orientation but as others have said no.1 lead should be at around 7 o clock.

The fact that it is not implies that the skew gear at the base of the pedastal may have been incorrectly fitted. Pull out the dizzy and check in relation to the pics in the workshop manual.

[SpitNoir]

Will do. Thanks. Looks like it's a straightforward job anyway, so in I go.

Hmm, so that's a Lucas jobby, eh? I would have sworn from the descriptions I've read here, and even from images in the books I have, that it was a Delco/Remy unit instead.
I think I was going by the shape/size of the rotor arm for one thing, but don't remember the criteria with 100% certainty.
Based strictly on pictures in my book, it's finer details really don't match either type 100%. It seems to have characteristics of each.

What are some telling points that make it a Lucas?

I did just twist the rotor again today. Rotates a modest amount, and does spring back. Doesn't seem as easy to turn as others I've worked on though. And though it did return under it's own spring pressure, it didn't do it with much gusto. Perhaps just a good cleaning will get me down the road for awhile.

To be continued....


Paul

[drofgum]

Paul,
The easiest point to tell a Lucas from a Delco is; the Delco is pressed steel the Lucas is die cast pot metal. Another easy difference is Lucas has a sprung contact in the distributor cap Delco has the sprung contact on the rotor.
                                                                                                       Cheers,
                                                                                                       Paul

[Nick Jones]

No, that is NOT a Lucas dizzy - Delco of some kind although does look unusual - may have been adapted from something else and thus have totally the wrong curve.  Probably worth dismantling, cleaning and lubricating the mechanical advance mechanism - should spring back to the stop without hesitation.  You may also find markings inside that indicate total advance.

Would be surprised if the static advance is really 35º BTDC - I think it would try to start backwards if it was.  Maybe all the advance is coming in at very low rpm?

Cheers

Nick

[SpitNoir]

Hi Nick
I thought the same thing about it perhaps advancing too quickly (once running) due to ultra-weak springs.
That timing mark may have been someone's way of indicating the point of maximum advance. I've done it myself a time or two.
Though 35 degrees seems a bit high from what I've just been reading. It's always possible too, that my timing light is out of whack. It's worked fine up to now, so wouldn't that just be my luck to have it go all wonky on me just when I need it on a car with questionable parts!

Worth pulling the distributor apart just to look for any identification. I'll pop on out right now to look for that hole in the edge of the pulley. At least I can put that to rest.

Cheers.

Paul

[SpitNoir]

4043 wrote:

Paul,
The easiest point to tell a Lucas from a Delco is; the Delco is pressed steel the Lucas is die cast pot metal. Another easy difference is Lucas has a sprung contact in the distributor cap Delco has the sprung contact on the rotor.
                                                                                                       Cheers,
                                                                                                       Paul

Hi Paul
Yes, the style of rotor was one of the things I originally used to determine that it was a Delco unit.
Here's a pic with the Pertronix Ignitor I installed.

Have a look-see and, if you see any other tell-tales, let me know what you think.

Cheers


PaulB

[SpitNoir]

Oh, and I just looked, and did not find any hole along the back rim of the pulley wheel. Neither visual or continued touchy-feely methods turned up anything.
Was I looking/feeling in the correct place?

Thanks

PaulB

[drofgum]

Paul,
The hole should be about 3/16" from the rim. Looking into the belt groove it looks as if it is very near the middle of the depth of the groove. A 7/64"drill bit slips in.
                                                  Cheers,
                                                  Paul

[Steve Cureton]

It's not a very good shot but you can see the position of the hole with a length of wire through it -

[lancepar]

With the latest pictures it does look more Delco than Lucas I must say.
Prior to that the method of securing the cap made me say, Delco.

I think to be sure you will need to remove it and see if there are any ID markings on the body and make a note of the part number and run a check to see exactly what you have got.

8)

[SpitNoir]

Agreed. Will do as time permits (as in, the next couple of days).

Thanks for the detailed descriptions and image of the timing hole gents. That's where I was looking and didn't come up with anything.
I know the routine though. If at first you're sure something is not there, look again and again, until it eventually rears it's ugly head. Laughing of course.

I'll set it up to where I believe TDC to be, then go about scraping the surface and poking around a bit. Might help myself by just removing the radiator and sending it out to have it gone through.
While it's away, I can sit in front of the engine and not have to do any acrobatics to get to the pulley.

Just for clarification, aren't there pulleys (or "pullies", as I used to write, before spell-check was foisted upon us) out there that do not have the hole?


Paul

[nang]

My Mk 4 has the "standard " ;D grooves on the pulley and plate fixed to the timing cover. Until I took the radiator out, couldn't see them until I cleaned and dropped a bit of white paint on them. I've got a Delco and Pertronix fitted. My vacuum advance doesn't but looking at the cost of repair/replacement I've blanked the pipe off at the carb. and will see how it goes.

[SpitNoir]

Well finally had time to re-visit this and did find the hole. Now that the rad is out and at the shop for a quick clean-and-seal, it's much easier to see. As expected.
The hole is there, right where the painted mark is. So someone tired of trying to find the hole at one point in it's past and put a nice little easy-to-read dab adjacent to the hole.

So I am at least reading the timing correctly. Haven't puled the distributor yet, in spite of my best intentions. Let you know what I find when I do.

Paul

[Pete Lewis]

if you get silly advance readings and no response check the polarity of your strobe pick up  most have an arrow on the underside of the HT clipover  if reversed you can get some alarming readings that overide common sense .
arro should point to the spark plug.

also make sure the contact or elec unit screw is not too long and is locking the moving top plate against the lower one ???

sorry if thats a bit wide but it happens  

Pete

[SpitNoir]

Cheers Pete.
You're right, I did not actually verify the direction. Though I do think I remember flipping it around a few ways on the number one wire, and reading from all other plug wires, I don't remember actually looking for the arrow. Will do that when I re-install the distributor.
I checked the other wires just in case I was not reading the number one plug. Which I was of course, but at that point I was grasping for anything that would make sense.

Got the radiator back today, looking nice and new-ish, so will be putting that back on tomorrow. Start playing with the dizzy again after that.
I'd do it with the radiator out (making it easier to maneuver around the place), but I don't have any more room for parts just laying around.

Thanks

Paul

[SpitNoir]

A little update.
I did get the distributor out a couple of days ago and it's in surprisingly clean condition inside, in spite of the rusty exterior appearance. A bit of old oil and some gunk, as is to be expected from something this old. But after a few shots of Berryman's Chemtool and some WD-40, things look all sparkly again.
Everything is clean and tight and the weights appear to be free and easy to move. However, I'm thinking that the springs are just a touch weak right now. Hard to tell without a way to actually test them, but the initial movement is sloppy, while the greater movements are pulled tight by the springs.
I have not pulled the guts out completely though, so this is all by touchy-feely methods through the top shield. I believe that to take out the shaft and weights I actually have to dismantle the tachometer's drive gear assembly. Just didn't want to fight with it just yet. So first thing I'm going to do is try to retrofit some brand new springs from my kits for Ford distributors and see if they fit. They look close from memory, but I'll have to see. Don't know if you can still purchase the Spit springs new, but I assume you can.

Anyway. More this weekend as I play around with it. At least it's painted with a rust-converting primer now, so looks quite spiffy for the moment.

Paul

[SpitNoir]

A little update.
I did get the distributor out a couple of days ago and it's definitely of AC Delco manufacture. Drawn and stamped steel with ident numbers in the body.
And, it's in surprisingly clean condition inside, in spite of the rusty exterior appearance. A bit of old oil and some gunk, as is to be expected from something this old. But after a few shots of Berryman's Chemtool and some WD-40, things look all sparkly again.
Everything is clean and tight and the weights appear to be free and easy to move. However, I'm thinking that the springs are just a touch weak right now. Hard to tell without a way to actually test them, but the initial movement is sloppy, while the greater movements are pulled tight by the springs.
I have not pulled the guts out completely though, so this is all by touchy-feely methods through the top shield. I believe that to take out the shaft and weights I actually have to dismantle the tachometer's drive gear assembly. Just didn't want to fight with it just yet. So first thing I'm going to do is try to retrofit some brand new springs from my kits for Ford distributors and see if they fit. They look close from memory, but I'll have to see. Don't know if you can still purchase the Spit springs new, but I assume you can.

Anyway. More this weekend as I play around with it. At least it's painted with a rust-converting primer now, so looks quite spiffy for the moment.

Paul