Thank you for testing with a scientific method
Everything I test seems to conflict and confuse,it's hard to take what works on one saw and have it work the same on another.Thank you for testing with a scientific method
I ran a .045 key with M-tronics. The same key was spark knocking after a long cut with a 25"/404 setup with Euro coil and WJ69 carb. I tried .050 and still heard it after a long cut with s 36"/404 setup.Would be curious if there were any gains on a manual carb and euro coil on the 661
Yeh but I checked the same ones.There are three different 064 flywheels even without variations in those three. It can get confusing.
By euro coil do you mean a non mtronic coil or a differently programmed mtronic one?
How many degrees of advance does each key represent? I have done some experimenting with a new, box stock 661, and it runs best at about 10 degrees advance; a ported one would likely be different. I simply spin the engine up against a piston stop, pull the flywheel and key, turn the flywheel forward 10 degrees and lock it back down.
Randy is there a paticular way u figure that?In a flywheel that size, .020" is about 8° of rotation.
I partially agree with you. I do the think it's necessary to remove the human factor but instead control the amount of load on the saw. Rpm in the cut can be used as the primary indicator of load on the engine. If he can sustain xx,xxx rpm during the cut for each test then the saw is loaded the same for each. The time in the cut will vary based on more/less efficient engine performance. Having a large chunk of wood with a long cut time also would help reduce uncertainty because entering and exiting the cut varies a lot so that variable is reduced as compared to the actual loaded cutting time. Just my 2c.This is all nice, and you put a great deal of effort into it, but if you want truly meaningful results, you must devise a way for the saw to be held not by a human being. You need a fixture to hold the saw, then let it fall through the wood on its' own. In this fashion each successive cut is exactly the same except for those factors you introduce; chains, bars, or oils.
Yes, that works well. What I do is scribe flywheel at tdc in relation to coil pole, and then scribe every two degrees from there using a degree wheel. The scribes are real handy for future timing experiments, don't have to put a degree wheel back on.Id say find TDC with piston stop and degree it, cut the key and retighten against stop and read degree wheel again would be my guess
Great idea. ThanksYes, that works well. What I do is scribe flywheel at tdc in relation to coil pole, and then scribe every two degrees from there using a degree wheel. The scribes are real handy for future timing experiments, don't have to put a degree wheel back on.
I like the timing light method, but have never used it yet. It will let you see what the advance curve is, if any.
Randy is there a paticular way u figure that?