Sooo, . . . . . Has anybody tried replacing the . . .

[BC847]

Ok.... then this should be an easy thing to do.


What I plan on doing is making a block off plate that doubles as a timing spacer that is twice as thick as the M&H one. Then have an adjustment that has the has the ability to be turned in to where a stock truck and timing set up would be and then backed off up to a double the "normal" spacer distance.

Suggestions on that? Also on these regulators, if one were to just swap in a diff. would it throw off the case pressure from what it was stock (are these adjusted when the builder builds the pump)

Going double that of the M&H may not be feasible. Might consider ADDING a similar spacer to the opposite side of the case (now, one on each side).

I think the regulators are adjusted as the pumps are initially set up.


I got's to go to bed. We'll talk more.

[RCCUMMINS89]

So I"m gathering that at an idle position, the timing is not all the way to the low side? I assumed, probably a bad assumption, that at idle the piston couldn't be moved farther in the retard position. I sure hope that it can, because one can therefore gain more dynamic timing with also gaining more control.

One can then simply move their current timing spacer to the back side of the pump, then the new adjustable one goes on the front.

[BC847]

I've got to get out in the shop and play with some parts.

As an alternative, as has been pointed out in another thread here, there are shorter advance pistons to be had. Such would (on paper) have a similar result.

[RCCUMMINS89]

Correct.... but this idea came about because of the ease of setting the "pre load" on the timing spring. I am in dire need to add some timing shims in my pump because it advances too quick, yet is perfect at wot. If I could only go out and give it a .5 or 1mm tighter pre load it would make life so much easier, easier than even twisting the pump.

What I am hoping to come out of this is a way to retard the piston a few more degrees and then allowing at minimum the same advance as the spacer currently allows while also gaining a pre load adjustment. That way one can actually gain more control AND more dynamic timing and not just simply shifting the timing to the left or the right.

[oldestof11]

BC and RC, design a camplate type dealio like what the old 1.6, 1.5L IDI VW diesels had for cold start aids. Then a simple boost reference cylinder to rotate it.

[RCCUMMINS89]

See if you can find out if in the idle position the timing rod that runs through the piston is as far to the retard positon that the case allows, or if one were to add a timing spacer to the backside like you mentioned would allow the pump to be more retarded.

[RCCUMMINS89]

BC and RC, design a camplate type dealio like what the old 1.6, 1.5L IDI VW diesels had for cold start aids. Then a simple boost reference cylinder to rotate it.

a what? I know personally, I have also been thinking of an electrical adjustable timing spacer that works off of rpm... but boost works just the same. More info please.

[BC847]

BC and RC, design a camplate type dealio like what the old 1.6, 1.5L IDI VW diesels had for cold start aids. Then a simple boost reference cylinder to rotate it.

Talking about one of these (mechanical KSB) . . .

Correct.... but this idea came about because of the ease of setting the "pre load" on the timing spring. I am in dire need to add some timing shims in my pump because it advances too quick, yet is perfect at wot. If I could only go out and give it a .5 or 1mm tighter pre load it would make life so much easier, easier than even twisting the pump.

What I am hoping to come out of this is a way to retard the piston a few more degrees and then allowing at minimum the same advance as the spacer currently allows while also gaining a pre load adjustment. That way one can actually gain more control AND more dynamic timing and not just simply shifting the timing to the left or the right.

I'm definitely still with you.

[RCCUMMINS89]

When I look at the timing piston comparison that turboram put up. The one on the right appears (to me) that the timing rod hole is a little bit lower than our factory one.... this tells me that yes, in fact that the timing should be able to be moved a little bit to the retard position if one were to add a spacer.

[BC847]

I changed pics of the pistons above.

[RCCUMMINS89]

OOHHH.... yay. Is the difference above, by chance the same or as the normal timing spacer by chance? Reason I ask, is I feel it is easier to add spacers on both ends as opposed to take the whole pump apart to swap pistons.

[BC847]

In that pic above, I don't have the pistons positioned correctly so as to compare . . .

But ... .

- In the shorter piston, the center-line of the pivot is centered in the piston.
- In the longer piston, AS SEEN FROM THE LEFT END (spring end): the pivot is the same distance as the shorter. The extra length, is on the right end.

Make sense?

[RCCUMMINS89]

So the xtra lenght is on the ksb side or the back side?

[RCCUMMINS89]

After tilting my computer, I can see the associated hole. The shorter piston doesn't allow more in the advance position, it allows it to be less in the less department.

Running an associated spacer on each side of the pump, should do the trick. This way, one can slow down the advance curve, while still maintaining the same "throw".

Unless I'm missing something, this should work slick....especially those already running the spacer.

[BC847]

So the xtra lenght is on the ksb side or the back side?

Back-side (NOT the spring side).