Vacuum advance information and myths

Mattax said

So you admit that Chevy didn't do what you claim all GM did but you continue to beleive it.

Wait! You don't beleive anything I've posted but you want me to tell you why your car is setup differently than the Chevy?
:rofl:

Keep repeating it, but that won't make it true.

Post 100. Lots of Kool-aid in there. Tidbits of information in a gonzo-journalist writing style. We already have seen the evidence that the assertions are not true. If you want to continue beleiving the rest, that's on you. Yea maybe the author was a corporate engineer at GM. Or maybe he worked for GM the same way I worked for Jaguar, which is a half truth. He clearly didn't work at Chevy in 1965.

You all have a good weekend.

Click to expand...

No offense but you did not make any attempt to indulge any of the physics points in that last post from Bewy. If you are correct, you should be able to explain in detail why any of that is wrong. I was waiting for a response from your end to continue to provide thought provoking analysis of the conversation. The physics reasoning bevy provided in that post are correct from my experience. Rather than stomp and walk away because you think people don't BELIEVE you, you should be able to explain away any faults the post has.

I have already decided to test both theory for temp, mileage, fA ratio and manners this spring in a controlled study. As far as getting his Pontiac to run on new fuel with MV. My 67 300 10-1 runs perfect on today's fuel timed that way and I get over 17 mpg on the hwy.