Manifold vs Ported Vacuum

1967JMG

Well-known member
I hope some people that really know there stuff will chime in on this. It's long, but i feel it is a good read and a pretty important subject.
Thanks,
JMG

I did not write this article, it is written by a retired GM/Chrysler Engineer, goes by JohnZ on another forum.


As many of you are aware, timing and vacuum advance is one of my favorite subjects, as I was involved in the development of some of those systems in my GM days and I understand it. Many people don't, as there has been very little written about it anywhere that makes sense, and as a result, a lot of folks are under the misunderstanding that vacuum advance somehow compromises performance. Nothing could be further from the truth. I finally sat down the other day and wrote up a primer on the subject, with the objective of helping more folks to understand vacuum advance and how it works together with initial timing and centrifugal advance to optimize all-around operation and performance. I have this as a Word document if anyone wants it sent to them - I've cut-and-pasted it here; it's long, but hopefully it's also informative.

TIMING AND VACUUM ADVANCE 101

The most important concept to understand is that lean mixtures, such as at idle and steady highway cruise, take longer to burn than rich mixtures; idle in particular, as idle mixture is affected by exhaust gas dilution. This requires that lean mixtures have "the fire lit" earlier in the compression cycle (spark timing advanced), allowing more burn time so that peak cylinder pressure is reached just after TDC for peak efficiency and reduced exhaust gas temperature (wasted combustion energy). Rich mixtures, on the other hand, burn faster than lean mixtures, so they need to have "the fire lit" later in the compression cycle (spark timing retarded slightly) so maximum cylinder pressure is still achieved at the same point after TDC as with the lean mixture, for maximum efficiency.

The centrifugal advance system in a distributor advances spark timing purely as a function of engine rpm (irrespective of engine load or operating conditions), with the amount of advance and the rate at which it comes in determined by the weights and springs on top of the autocam mechanism. The amount of advance added by the distributor, combined with initial static timing, is "total timing" (i.e., the 34-36 degrees at high rpm that most SBC's like). Vacuum advance has absolutely nothing to do with total timing or performance, as when the throttle is opened, manifold vacuum drops essentially to zero, and the vacuum advance drops out entirely; it has no part in the "total timing" equation.

At idle, the engine needs additional spark advance in order to fire that lean, diluted mixture earlier in order to develop maximum cylinder pressure at the proper point, so the vacuum advance can (connected to manifold vacuum, not "ported" vacuum - more on that aberration later) is activated by the high manifold vacuum, and adds about 15 degrees of spark advance, on top of the initial static timing setting (i.e., if your static timing is at 10 degrees, at idle it's actually around 25 degrees with the vacuum advance connected). The same thing occurs at steady-state highway cruise; the mixture is lean, takes longer to burn, the load on the engine is low, the manifold vacuum is high, so the vacuum advance is again deployed, and if you had a timing light set up so you could see the balancer as you were going down the highway, you'd see about 50 degrees advance (10 degrees initial, 20-25 degrees from the centrifugal advance, and 15 degrees from the vacuum advance) at steady-state cruise (it only takes about 40 horsepower to cruise at 50mph).

When you accelerate, the mixture is instantly enriched (by the accelerator pump, power valve, etc.), burns faster, doesn't need the additional spark advance, and when the throttle plates open, manifold vacuum drops, and the vacuum advance can returns to zero, retarding the spark timing back to what is provided by the initial static timing plus the centrifugal advance provided by the distributor at that engine rpm; the vacuum advance doesn't come back into play until you back off the gas and manifold vacuum increases again as you return to steady-state cruise, when the mixture again becomes lean.

The key difference is that centrifugal advance (in the distributor autocam via weights and springs) is purely rpm-sensitive; nothing changes it except changes in rpm. Vacuum advance, on the other hand, responds to engine load and rapidly-changing operating conditions, providing the correct degree of spark advance at any point in time based on engine load, to deal with both lean and rich mixture conditions. By today's terms, this was a relatively crude mechanical system, but it did a good job of optimizing engine efficiency, throttle response, fuel economy, and idle cooling, with absolutely ZERO effect on wide-open throttle performance, as vacuum advance is inoperative under wide-open throttle conditions. In modern cars with computerized engine controllers, all those sensors and the controller change both mixture and spark timing 50 to 100 times per second, and we don't even HAVE a distributor any more - it's all electronic.

Now, to the widely-misunderstood manifold-vs.-ported vacuum aberration. After 30-40 years of controlling vacuum advance with full manifold vacuum, along came emissions requirements, years before catalytic converter technology had been developed, and all manner of crude band-aid systems were developed to try and reduce hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust stream. One of these band-aids was "ported spark", which moved the vacuum pickup orifice in the carburetor venturi from below the throttle plate (where it was exposed to full manifold vacuum at idle) to above the throttle plate, where it saw no manifold vacuum at all at idle. This meant the vacuum advance was inoperative at idle (retarding spark timing from its optimum value), and these applications also had VERY low initial static timing (usually 4 degrees or less, and some actually were set at 2 degrees AFTER TDC). This was done in order to increase exhaust gas temperature (due to "lighting the fire late") to improve the effectiveness of the "afterburning" of hydrocarbons by the air injected into the exhaust manifolds by the A.I.R. system; as a result, these engines ran like crap, and an enormous amount of wasted heat energy was transferred through the exhaust port walls into the coolant, causing them to run hot at idle - cylinder pressure fell off, engine temperatures went up, combustion efficiency went down the drain, and fuel economy went down with it.

If you look at the centrifugal advance calibrations for these "ported spark, late-timed" engines, you'll see that instead of having 20 degrees of advance, they had up to 34 degrees of advance in the distributor, in order to get back to the 34-36 degrees "total timing" at high rpm wide-open throttle to get some of the performance back. The vacuum advance still worked at steady-state highway cruise (lean mixture = low emissions), but it was inoperative at idle, which caused all manner of problems - "ported vacuum" was strictly an early, pre-converter crude emissions strategy, and nothing more.

What about the Harry high-school non-vacuum advance polished billet "whizbang" distributors you see in the Summit and Jeg's catalogs? They're JUNK on a street-driven car, but some people keep buying them because they're "race car" parts, so they must be "good for my car" - they're NOT. "Race cars" run at wide-open throttle, rich mixture, full load, and high rpm all the time, so they don't need a system (vacuum advance) to deal with the full range of driving conditions encountered in street operation. Anyone driving a street-driven car without manifold-connected vacuum advance is sacrificing idle cooling, throttle response, engine efficiency, and fuel economy, probably because they don't understand what vacuum advance is, how it works, and what it's for - there are lots of long-time experienced "mechanics" who don't understand the principles and operation of vacuum advance either, so they're not alone.

Vacuum advance calibrations are different between stock engines and modified engines, especially if you have a lot of cam and have relatively low manifold vacuum at idle. Most stock vacuum advance cans aren’t fully-deployed until they see about 15” Hg. Manifold vacuum, so those cans don’t work very well on a modified engine; with less than 15” Hg. at a rough idle, the stock can will “dither” in and out in response to the rapidly-changing manifold vacuum, constantly varying the amount of vacuum advance, which creates an unstable idle. Modified engines with more cam that generate less than 15” Hg. of vacuum at idle need a vacuum advance can that’s fully-deployed at least 1”, preferably 2” of vacuum less than idle vacuum level so idle advance is solid and stable; the Echlin #VC-1810 advance can (about $10 at NAPA) provides the same amount of advance as the stock can (15 degrees), but is fully-deployed at only 8” of vacuum, so there is no variation in idle timing even with a stout cam.

For peak engine performance, driveability, idle cooling and efficiency in a street-driven car, you need vacuum advance, connected to full manifold vacuum. Absolutely. Positively. Don't ask Summit or Jeg's about it – they don’t understand it, they're on commission, and they want to sell "race car" parts.
 
Thats the way I understand it and those methods have worked very well for me and my friends the work on cars.

One thing that really helped me wrap my mind around the vacuum function is to call it a vacuum retard. Since most of the time (on a street engine) the vacuum is high the vacuum can keeps things normal. When the engine is under load that means throttle is open which means vacuum drops so the vacuum retards to match the conditions. Advanced idle or cruise. Retarded under load.

I would also add that most people with non factory setups seem to run rich to really rich (proved that since I bought a wide band) so perhaps that is why they can get away without a vac advance and still have reasonable performance?

I would really like to go to a hot rod show and see how many folks have their 350's with 900cfm holley carbs that have so little vac they are pretty much running off the power valve all the time. Makes your eyes water when they drive by but like the writer says its all racing stuff so its got to be better!
 
Very very interesting. Makes a lot of sense. Its an area I've very confused on to be honest.

Makes me wonder if I should hook my DS2 back to manifold vacuum. My only problem when I do that, my initial timing goes up a bit as does my idle RPM. But that is likely then a function of the carb and would allow me to back off my idle mix some.

THe only thing that seems contradictory is this:
This requires that lean mixtures have "the fire lit" earlier in the compression cycle (spark timing advanced), allowing more burn time so that peak cylinder pressure is reached just after TDC for peak efficiency and reduced exhaust gas temperature (wasted combustion energy). Rich mixtures, on the other hand, burn faster than lean mixtures, so they need to have "the fire lit" later in the compression cycle (spark timing retarded slightly) so maximum cylinder pressure is still achieved at the same point after TDC as with the lean mixture, for maximum efficiency.

If that's the case, why is my WOT advance higher than idle, even with a manifold vacuum source? Or am i missing something? Or should my idle be higher?

I see the connection and benefit from using manifold vacuum versus ported. I've typically only used manifold until I went to my current set up, and that was only because it was easier to go with the ported vacuum. I may have to re-examine that and see what the results are.
 
Most stock vacuum advance cans aren’t fully-deployed until they see about 15” Hg. Manifold vacuum, so those cans don’t work very well on a modified engine; with less than 15” Hg.
This seems to differ from the information I have from the Motor Manual, which has specifications for vacuum cans. I don't know that I've seen a spec that high at all for Ford cans. I realize an engine is an engine, but this guy is a GM guy and Chevy 350's are the "standard" measuring stick for them.
 
Makes me wonder if I should hook my DS2 back to manifold vacuum. My only problem when I do that, my initial timing goes up a bit as does my idle RPM. But that is likely then a function of the carb and would allow me to back off my idle mix some.
Emissions era distributors can be a poor match on some engines if you have a high compression ratio. It can lead to pinging. Because more of the timing is dialed into the vacuum advance, you might have to back off of the initial timing or centrifugal timing to keep it from pinging. Then you suffer off the line performance and will see higher temps due to the retarded timing at idle. But it can be fixed if the distributor is recurved. On our 6 cyl engines with mild compression, the DS2 may not be hurting as much.

As you noted manifold vac raises the idles speed. Ported vacuum on some engines caused other problems as the article noted and the engine did not idle as well. Some emission era cars worked around that by opening the throttlle plates more to stabilize the idle. Some even had idle speed solenoids that raised the idle speed to stabilize it since they had the engine running so lean. They later installed EGR systems that leaned out the mixture even more and it seems the cars required more solenoids, switches and vacuum tubes in order to keep the car running at idle and meet the emission standards.

If that's the case, why is my WOT advance higher than idle, even with a manifold vacuum source? Or am i missing something? Or should my idle be higher?
The WOT timing is taking into account the higher rpm's that the engine will be turning. Higher rpm's means there is less time to complete the burn cycle so the ignition timing is advanced or started earlier in order to complete the burn cycle and maximum pressure at the optimum time in the power stroke. WOT is usually reported to be in the 32 to 36 deg range, but that is usually stipulated at a certain engine rpm. In practice, when the throttle is Wide Open, the total timing will be less than 36 deg at those rpms that are less the the rpm at which maximum advance is achieved by the centrifugal advance.

This seems to differ from the information I have from the Motor Manual,
Many stock vacuum cans bring the timing all in at 12 to 14". I tried the Echlin 1810 vacuum can on a Pontiac that I have that has low vacuum due to a lumpy cam. It worked well at idle but at cruise condition (40 to 50 mph on a flat road), my engine pulls about 14" of vac. The problem I had with the Echlin 1810 was that light throttle acceleration did not drop the engine vacuum enough to reduce the vac advance enough, so the engine pinged. By hooking up a vacuum gauge to the engine, I could see where the vacuum level dropped under light throttle and was able to use a vacuum cannister with the appropriate vacuum operating range.
Doug
 
I'm going through this process right now with my new engine. I have a DUI distributor and a couple of vacuum cans they sent me, but with my high compression and low vacuum cam it is hard to strike a balance between having a strong idle and not getting a bit of pinging when I lightly accelerate at cruise speeds. I am getting there, and here is my process:

First, I got an adjustable vacuum canister.
Second, with the vacuum disconnected, advance the timing until I get pinging under full throttle load. I have a long hill here I can climb in second gear. Once you get the pinging, back off about three degrees.
Third, re-attach the vacuum can with the spring set at the lightest setting, and begin doing load tests and tightening the spring until you get no pinging. There you go!

Sounds good on paper and is easy to achieve in terms of WOT versus idle, but it is hard to get the following combination: Good idle with a lumpy cam, enough max advance to make power but not ping with the high compression, enough vacuum to idle well and provide advance at cruise, but not induce pinging when accelrating lightly at cruise.

P.S. that 264/274 cam does NOT make good vacuum at idle, regardless of what the description says. At least for use with a low stall torque converter. (But I still like it :eek: )
 
Adjustable in how far it moves (cam or washer) or just its response time (Allen in vac port)?

Most aftermarket cans seem to have a lot of advance in them. I suspect because at the peak of non computer emissions some applications called for 30* and they now just make a one size sort of fits all. Most of my non stock motors have run much better after I limited the travel. I have also heard that a valve for an aquarium can be a quick and easy way to tweak the response time although in this case it would seem like you need a quicker response.
 
P.S. - I have the same cam and have no serious vacuum issues. And I have a guage mounted on the steering column so I'm looking at it all the time. It's lower than stock but the transmission, power brakes, and HVAC all function well. It's installed straight up, no advance. But my CR is lower, probably around 9:1.
 
The can is adjustable for preload on the diaphragm spring. At the lowest setting it starts to pull at 7". you can tighten it up from there. It is also possible to limit the vacuum advance. Crane sold a little adjustable cam that you could screw in one of the canister mounting bolts and it would block the arm. They seem to have discontinued it. I suppose you could just but a little piece of metal there.

I'm getting about 7" or 8" at 650rpm, and the idle is way lumpy down there. At 900 rpm i can get around 13" - 14", which is fine, in neutral. Shift to drive and it drags the rpm down to about 700 which is right on the hairy edge of tolerable. At that speed i'm pulling enough vacuum (around 9" - 10") to advance the timing and all is well. However, if the rpms drop by 25 - 50 then the vacuum starts to drop and I lose advance and I'm in lumpy town.

I'll be dialing in a bit more mech advance, adding a hair of resistance to the vacuum canister, and probably limiting it as well (adds up to 16* right now). I'm very close to having the perfect balance already. Another go around and I should be golden. The only problem is at part throttle right at 3000 rpm, when full mechanical is all in. Then, as I explained, I get pinging at part throttle acceleration. Natural, becasue if my initial is at, say, 10* and I have 24* mech that's 34. Add another 16* or so under load and that's as much as 50*. If I floor it or back out the pining stops.
 
Sounds similar to the problem I had on the Pontiac. At what vac level is the vac advance maxed out? And what vacuum are you pulling at 3000 rpm when you get the part throttle pinging?
My problem was that part throttle at cruising rpm's did not drop the engine vac enough to drop out the vacuum advance component.
I have been advised that trying to dial in vacuum advance on a real lumpy cam is an exercise in frustration.
Doug
 
fordconvert":3dvh9bc4 said:
Got any actual numbers? High, low, and normal vacuum could be quite different to different people.
I'd like to map it out but right now there's more tuning to be done.
In fact I was just fiddling around tonight and was able to get a bit more out of it.
I think I'll get a buddy to sit in the back seat with a video camera over my shoulder while I drive.
(But I'll have to put the seat in! :LOL: )
It's not often that a moving vehicle maintains an absolutely steady state for very long, but at idle I'm getting around 6-7hg, at cruise in 3rd @ 1200rpm @ 30mph about 12-15hg. So it's low, but it's fairly normal for this grind I would think. I haven't spent much time at high rpms but it's got LOTS of vacuum in the 3000-5000rpm range.
 
THANK YOU 1967JMG!!! I have been :banghead: banging my head against the wall trying to tune my 300. I believe you have solved my problem! :nod:
 
Back
Top