TheAMCForum.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > The Garage > AMC 6 Cylinder Engine Repair and Modifications
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 258 / 4.0 Head / 260H Cam
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Click for TheAMCForum Rules / Click for PDF version of Forum Rules
Your donations help keep this valuable resource free and growing. Thank you.

258 / 4.0 Head / 260H Cam

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
Message
Heavy 488 View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted


Joined: Apr/27/2019
Location: In the
Status: Offline
Points: 3552
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Heavy 488 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul/01/2020 at 10:46am
Yeah, costs a few $ up front but not all that bad when you consider how much time spent that you'll never get back from trying to wrestle the pig to the floor. I put one in my daily driver (injected). If I don't see 14.7 rolling or 12.8 working it, I know theres a problem.
Back to Top
tloftus View Drop Down
AMC Nut
AMC Nut
Avatar

Joined: Mar/18/2008
Location: Sioux City, IA
Status: Offline
Points: 296
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tloftus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul/01/2020 at 2:59pm
Originally posted by Heavy 488 Heavy 488 wrote:

Yeah, costs a few $ up front but not all that bad when you consider how much time spent that you'll never get back from trying to wrestle the pig to the floor. I put one in my daily driver (injected). If I don't see 14.7 rolling or 12.8 working it, I know theres a problem.

I have seen those wideband O2 sensors.. definitely something to consider.  Pulled the lid off the carb today -- floats are close, but slightly off.  Primary jets are larger than factory settings.  Assuming the secondary jets are also, although I can't see a number on them to confirm so may just get a set of those also to be sure.

On one hand I'm glad to have found something wrong, hopefully it explains my flooding issue.  On the other hand if a guy tells you a carb is new when you buy it, it should be new (no one on this forum).

The question about fuel pressure... it is widely accepted that 5.5 is the absolute max for an Edelbrock.  When my fuel pressure gets above 4.5 is begins to bounce, so I turned it down to 4.  In troubleshooting this issue I turned it down to 3.  I will probably turn it back up to 4 as it doesn't seem to have affected the issue.

Also something I read is that the fuel filter with the return line -- the return line should be clocked to the 12 o'clock position.  Mine is not, but I will do that when I get everything put back together just to be sure.

After the idling I've done (cam break in, troubleshooting, etc) I did pull plugs and it is certainly running rich.  I cleaned them off and re-installed them.

Hopefully this jet, metering rod, spring issue takes care of things.  If not, I have not had exhaust work done yet so maybe I will have them weld in a bung for a wideband.

Thanks,
Tom


1966 AMC Rambler American Rogue - 232 I6
http://theamcforum.com/forum/1966-amc-american-rogue_topic20995.html

1978 AMC AMX - 258 I6
http://theamcforum.com/forum/1978-amc-amx_topic62333.html
Back to Top
Heavy 488 View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted


Joined: Apr/27/2019
Location: In the
Status: Offline
Points: 3552
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Heavy 488 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul/01/2020 at 3:07pm
Are you absolutely sure it's flooding? Black smoke?
Drop the largest metering rod you have in the hole and leave the springs out. Now you have no enrichment to interfere besides the pump shot.
FWIW, summit lists the Eddy carb as 6.5 max.
Back to Top
Greyhounds_AMX View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Nov/14/2009
Location: Kansas City
Status: Offline
Points: 1268
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Greyhounds_AMX Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul/15/2020 at 7:21am
I feel like there should be more than 11"-13" of manifold vacuum, even with the 260H cam. Maybe something more on the order of 16"-18"? Does anyone else around here run that cam that can chime in on what kind of vacuum reading they see? 
1968 AMX 390 w/T5
Back to Top
232jav3sp View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Jan/09/2013
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2451
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 232jav3sp Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul/15/2020 at 7:58am
I have that cam in the 232, in my Javelin, with a Clifford single plane, 500 Eddy, and a homemade header. From memory, idle RPM is 750 and vacuum is 16. Been quite a while, but I think that's pretty accurate.
Back to Top
tloftus View Drop Down
AMC Nut
AMC Nut
Avatar

Joined: Mar/18/2008
Location: Sioux City, IA
Status: Offline
Points: 296
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tloftus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul/15/2020 at 8:07am
I have the dual plane, I'm not sure if that makes a difference.  In any case, I replaced the jets with the factory spec defaults and it is running pretty good now.

I did order a wideband O2 to play with so we'll see what that says, but first order of business is getting it to the exhaust shop to have a new exhaust system put on -- no more muffler hanging from clothes hanger!
1966 AMC Rambler American Rogue - 232 I6
http://theamcforum.com/forum/1966-amc-american-rogue_topic20995.html

1978 AMC AMX - 258 I6
http://theamcforum.com/forum/1978-amc-amx_topic62333.html
Back to Top
billd View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Forum Administrator

Joined: Jun/27/2007
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 30894
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote billd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul/15/2020 at 8:42am
Originally posted by tloftus tloftus wrote:

Originally posted by Heavy 488 Heavy 488 wrote:

Is your advance connected to manifold?

Correct -- the distributor vacuum advance is connected to the manifold vacuum source on the carb.  Nothing else in between.  Ported source on the carb is capped off.

Nope, go ported. That Edelbrock instruction is dead wrong. Whoever wrote that has no clue why or when it was even invented. It's ZERO to do with emissions - period. There were no emissions thoughts in the 1930s and 1940s when Chrysler, then Ford, came out with it. PERFORMANCE, correct timing at the correct times. I even studied it in college - the why and how it works and why ported.
You lose the impact of the vacuum advance, the WHOLE REASON for it to be there when you run manifold vacuum to the advance. 
Vacuum advance was originally INVENTED by Chrysler in the late 1930s to cover a stumble or loss of "umph" when taking off - you boost the timing when the mixture is lean to help compensate for the lag. 
So vacuum advance's whole purpose was to run with PORTED vacuum and help cover that lag. 
You negate the whole purpose of having it by running manifold vacuum to it. 
IGNORE what people say out there about it needing manifold vacuum and that it's for emissions and all of that BS - if you read the engineering behind it (and I don't mean that fake Chevy guy who says he was an engineer and talks about vacuum advance being for emissions - that's one of the biggest crocks I've seen related to timing) you'll see how it works, why it works, and why ported.



Edited by billd - Jul/15/2020 at 8:44am
Back to Top
billd View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Forum Administrator

Joined: Jun/27/2007
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 30894
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote billd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul/15/2020 at 8:47am
Originally posted by tomj tomj wrote:

Vacuum spark advance really helps with fuel mileage, but it confounds tuning. You might try plugging the hose, running no vacuum advance initially. THe downside is it will hurt your highway light-cruise mileage. 

"Too many variables" makes diagnosis hard.  YOu want vacc adv, for sure, but later. FOr now, run without.

See if you can separate symptoms and behaviors. For no reason I can articulate, I suspect a carb issue. So... is this a too-big carb? Bad accellerator pump issue?

What if you sloooowly crack the throttle, does it accell OK? Repeat until you are CERTAIN its behaving right.

Then try a "controlled' punch-throttle. cruise 30 mph in 2nd, whatever, press throttle. Does it do the right thing? Stumble? Bog?

I have no reason to think any of those things are the issue, but being methodical helps navigate the jungle.


It may help but that's NOT the purpose, that's not why it was invented or why it was used. NO ONE cared about MPG in the late 1930s. It was for performance, to help with in-town driving, stop and go, to help cover the lag when you take off - advance the timing just as the mix turns lean. 

Sorry, but I guess no one studies automotive history these days I guess - and there's no formal training on combustion, ignition timing, etc. 
Back to Top
tloftus View Drop Down
AMC Nut
AMC Nut
Avatar

Joined: Mar/18/2008
Location: Sioux City, IA
Status: Offline
Points: 296
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tloftus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul/15/2020 at 8:54am
Originally posted by billd billd wrote:

Originally posted by tloftus tloftus wrote:

Originally posted by Heavy 488 Heavy 488 wrote:

Is your advance connected to manifold?

Correct -- the distributor vacuum advance is connected to the manifold vacuum source on the carb.  Nothing else in between.  Ported source on the carb is capped off.

Nope, go ported. That Edelbrock instruction is dead wrong. Whoever wrote that has no clue why or when it was even invented. It's ZERO to do with emissions - period. There were no emissions thoughts in the 1930s and 1940s when Chrysler, then Ford, came out with it. PERFORMANCE, correct timing at the correct times. I even studied it in college - the why and how it works and why ported.
You lose the impact of the vacuum advance, the WHOLE REASON for it to be there when you run manifold vacuum to the advance. 
Vacuum advance was originally INVENTED by Chrysler in the late 1930s to cover a stumble or loss of "umph" when taking off - you boost the timing when the mixture is lean to help compensate for the lag. 
So vacuum advance's whole purpose was to run with PORTED vacuum and help cover that lag. 
You negate the whole purpose of having it by running manifold vacuum to it. 
IGNORE what people say out there about it needing manifold vacuum and that it's for emissions and all of that BS - if you read the engineering behind it (and I don't mean that fake Chevy guy who says he was an engineer and talks about vacuum advance being for emissions - that's one of the biggest crocks I've seen related to timing) you'll see how it works, why it works, and why ported.


Sorry I should have mentioned that also.  My initial timing is set to about 14 degrees.  I did move my distributor advance to PORTED vacuum.  With the mechanical advance in the distributor I got about 32 degrees at 2400 RPM.
1966 AMC Rambler American Rogue - 232 I6
http://theamcforum.com/forum/1966-amc-american-rogue_topic20995.html

1978 AMC AMX - 258 I6
http://theamcforum.com/forum/1978-amc-amx_topic62333.html
Back to Top
billd View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Forum Administrator

Joined: Jun/27/2007
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 30894
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote billd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul/15/2020 at 9:37am
"most engines" - and it varies "somewhat" depending on stroke, rod length and other factors, but most should see peak combustion pressures at about 14-16 degrees ATDC. My college texts and papers say 14, I've seen some say as late as 16. 
So whatever timing works to achieve that - because BURNING (and this is a controlled burn, not an "explosion" as people keep calling it) burning takes TIME. Higher RPM means less TIME to burn, since you want peak pressures at about 14 ATDC, you have to start the process sooner to be finished in time. 
Typically, total advance, everything all in - about 36 degrees total at 3,000 or so RPM. 
Sounds like you could be close to that - assuming the mechanical advance isn't yet all in at 2400 RPM. 
My 360's HP peaked out with a total advance of 38. I could see in the dyno sheets that they started with 36 degrees total and then later bumped up to 38 and saw more HP and torque - but if you achieve peak combustion too soon, you LOSE power. so those who say you need more timing - well, won't say what I may think of that because more timing can FIGHT you - you get too much pressure at the wrong time - even before the piston is all the way up to TDC, or even when it's just past TDC and has no mechanical advantage over the crankshaft. 
Think about cranking on a Model T - where do you have the best advantage to spin that engine using the crank on the front? With the crank at 12:00? 6:00? OR, is it somewhere closer to 12:10 or 6:37?


Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.
All content of this site Copyright © 2018 TheAMCForum unless otherwise noted, all rights reserved.
PROBLEMS LOGGING IN or REGISTERING:
If you have problems logging in or registering, then please contact a Moderator or