88 351 w timing rpm and setting

[88BroncoBlack]

what is my timing rpm and degrees supposed to be on my 88, the sticker in my engine compartment is gone

 

[Broncobill78]

I can look up something from the manual later on but for a quick off-the-cuff answer I'm happy with mine when I get it somewhere between 8 & 11 degrees at idle. To be honest, more often than not once it's set I just I just nudge the dizzy a bit one way or the other every day or so until the thing seems to pull strong and doesn't skip or pop. I'm sure there are plenty of other guys who have different methods, this is just mine. Remember that you don't want to time it with the vacuum advance connected.

 

[BroncoJoe19]

I can look up something from the manual later on but for a quick off-the-cuff answer I'm happy with mine when I get it somewhere between 8 & 11 degrees at idle. To be honest, more often than not once it's set I just I just nudge the dizzy a bit one way or the other every day or so until the thing seems to pull strong and doesn't skip or pop. I'm sure there are plenty of other guys who have different methods, this is just mine. Remember that you don't want to time it with the vacuum advance connected.

that sounds like the old... advance it until it pings, and then back it off a little bit.

OK.. so that's how I did it til I bought myself a timing light. /emoticons/[email protected] 2x" width="20" height="20" />

 

[88BroncoBlack]

does anyone know that actual ford specified settings, mt service manual says look at my sticker under the hood, but that is long gone

 

[Shadow_D]

I think it's supposed to be 10* BTDC

 

[crazyhorse85]

YEAH SHADOW_D IS CORRECT 10 DEGREES BTDC IS ABOUT RIGHT + OR - A DEGREE....LIKE BB78 I STILL KINDA DO IT THE OLD WAY LIKE MY DAD TAUGHT ME...HEY IF IT WORKS RUN WITH IT....BUT A LIGHT IS MORE ACCURATE....

 

[BLADE262US]

An 88 would not have a vacuum advance either . To time the EEC IV controlled ones you must remove the spout connector which is the little black square cap looking thing very close to the distributor TFI module plug . If you dont remove it the EEC will keep trying to compensate the timing while your moving the distributor . Somehow Im thinking mine was 12 BTDC but cant really remember its been awhile since I had to mess with it . Once you set it plug the spout connector back in and check it with the light again you will see what Im talking about . /emoticons/[email protected] 2x" width="20" height="20" />

 

[Broncobill78]

does anyone know that actual ford specified settings, mt service manual says look at my sticker under the hood, but that is long gone

Well, yes, I do. I believe that what I said before was 8-11 degrees at idle and if you needed to see it that I would find and scan it for you & here it is. This is a scan of the 88' underhood sticker from the 88' factory manual. If you look closely you'll see that it specifies 10 degrees at 900rpm.

If your sticker is AWOL then you might want to print & save this one for future reference, especially for the vacuum routing info if nothing else since that can be hard to track down.

As for the *other* comments, please note what the sticker states is:

"IGNITION TIMING- Disconnect and plug distributor vacuum hose, put transmission in neutral. Adjust to 10* BTDC at 900RPM max. Reconnect vacuum hose."

No mention of EEC IV or spout connectors and it sure makes it sound like the timing advance & vacuum are somehow related. While I agree that later models are different, the 88' sticker & factory manual seem to be pretty specific on this point.

Now for reasons that only Ford can explain (I can only guess someone got lazy, the info was unchanged or they were simply ahead of the curve with respect to recycling data) the sticker shown in the 88' manual seems to carry an 85' date but just to reassure anyone who's unsure I included a scan of the manual cover. If there's anyone *else* out there with an 88' Vol.B engine manual I'd appreciate it if you'd ck your page 21-21-43 and confirm that MY manual is not some bizarre anomaly. I have the 87' & 88' Body, Chassis & Electrical manuals but not the 87' Engine manual so I have nothing to compare it to.

 

[Broncobill78]

that sounds like the old... advance it until it pings, and then back it off a little bit.OK.. so that's how I did it til I bought myself a timing light. /emoticons/[email protected] 2x" width="20" height="20" />

I do actually own & use a light. I use it to time to the factory spec. However, it's been *my* experience at least that engines tend to get more & more individual as they rack up the miles so I use the light to set factory spec timing & then adjust it from there by hand until it runs well. If it's happy & purring at spec then great, I'm done, but more often than not the clunkers *I* wind up with usually need a bump in one direction or the other before they're happy.

 

[BroncoJoe19]

I do actually own & use a light. I use it to time to the factory spec. However, it's been *my* experience at least that engines tend to get more & more individual as they rack up the miles so I use the light to set factory spec timing & then adjust it from there by hand until it runs well. If it's happy & purring at spec then great, I'm done, but more often than not the clunkers *I* wind up with usually need a bump in one direction or the other before they're happy.

I vaguely remember reading that the base timing should be changed a little depending upon altitude and temperature at the time and location it was set. Once set, the newer computer controlled engines should be able to make the necessary changes to timing should the driver take his vehicle to a different altitude, or should the barometric pressure change. WIth the older vehicles, one may need to bump the timing a little bit.

BTW... I used to have a timing light, it was a pretty blue one. It got mixed in with my dad's tools years ago, and since then we both moved. Someday I'll get it back or a new one. My truck isn't pinging so I am hoping that it's base timing is properly set.

 

[BLADE262US]

Taken from WIKIPEDIA "In 1987, the body and drivetrain of the fullsize Bronco changed, as it was still based on the F-Series. The new aero body style reflected a larger redesign of many Ford vehicles for the new model year. By 1988, all Broncos were being sold with electronic fuel injection (first introduced in 1986 with the 302). In 1990, Ford started offering the heavy duty E4OD transmission. In 1991, a special Silver 25th Anniversary Edition was sold featuring a gray leather interior. All Broncos were built at the Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, Michigan on the same line as the F-150."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Bronco

Heres some info , never seen anything with a 351 after 86 with a carb . And there is no EECIV distributor with a vacuum advance , Would kinda make the computer useless . Take a pic of the front of your motor that would make it easy to identify . /emoticons/[email protected] 2x" width="20" height="20" />

 

[Broncobill78]

Well, what an impressive reference. Me, personally, I'll stick with what Ford has to say on the matter. There's not a school in the Country that will accept a Wikipedia reference in any graded paper & that's because anyone & everyone is allowed to jump on in and post what they want. Anyone with a School-age child knows this already.

A Wikipedia reference doesn't really pass muster. How 'bout something directly from Ford or maybe from an 88' manual ? Oh, wait, I already posted that.

You want photos, then go out, get & post them. I have an 88' of my *own* in the driveway and have better things to do. My patience with childish silliness has limits (it ended when my youngest got into his teens).

Keep it up, we'll get THIS topic closed out too.

I've done *exactly* what I told you I would, I've made every effort to distance myself from ANY topic in which you chose to comment. If providing me with the same respect isn't something you're able to do then so be it.

I've edited this post about as much as I'm going to.

 

[BroncoJoe19]

Heres some info , never seen anything with a 351 after 86 with a carb . And there is no EECIV distributor with a vacuum advance , Would kinda make the computer useless .

Taken from the Haynes manual page 5-17

Initial timing check and adjustment

1. Apply parking brake...

2. Start engine and warm it up...

3. If the vehicle is an early model equipped with a Duraspark II ignition system, mark and disconnect the vacuum hose(s) from the distributor vacuum advance or combined advance/****** unit and plug the hoses(s).

4. IF the vehicle is an early California model with an inline six-cylinder with MCU-controlled Duraspark, disconnect the vacuum advance hoses...

Unfortunatley the Haynes manual does not give a definitive year as to when Ford made the change over from one ignition system to another, other than to state early and newer. Could an '88 have a Duraspark II ignition? It seems to me that the Ford documentation says that it does.

 

[BLADE262US]

WOW Bill seems you do have a real issue with me I wasnt even refering to you about the pics that was for 88BroncoBlack so that we could determine without doubt what ignition system he has so we could furthur help him with his issues . The wikipedia is a good reference for sure but yes you are allowed to edit it so heres what I have . I dont have hanes manuals or chiltons . I have the factory electrical prints that show everything for every vehicle they made in a specific yr . Sadly I dont have the 1988 model yr I do have the 1989 though and I am 100% sure they are the same . The print books I have are from 1989 to 1994 theyve saved me a couple times especially when swapping motors of different yrs with the EECIV . Ive included pics of the print book and I took pics of my 89 to show the TFI and the spout conector . And Bill you dont have to stay out of post that I post in that in itself is childish and I too have no time for that .

 

[BLADE262US]

The duraspark ignition died when EFI came in . It was replaced with the EECIV well there was an EECIII but not for long . There can be no vacuum control of the distributor on an EFI the EEC must have control of the timing for it to work correctly . Everything 1987 and up until they quit useing the EECIV will have a distributor that looks like the one in the pics I posted aside from that one in particular being an MSD . They will all have the TFI module mounted to the side of them like that one unless it was a remote mount unit in which the TFI module will be mounted on the drivers side fender . It is much smaller than the old duraspark box . /emoticons/[email protected] 2x" width="20" height="20" />

 

[BLADE262US]

Looking around I did find referance to carbs being used on some 1988 models although electrical prints from that yr show no mention I guess some crossover yr stuff it could have happened but I have never seen a carb after 1987 in a truck . If its got a dizzy like the one in the pic in previous post its definately TFI if it does have a vacuum diapragm hanging on the side of it then its duraspark more than likely TFI /emoticons/[email protected] 2x" width="20" height="20" />

http://fordfuelinjection.com/?p=3

 

[Broncobill78]

WOW Bill seems you do have a real issue with me

Well, yeah, I kinda do. You know it and so do I. To pretend otherwise is a bit foolish don't you think ? I believe it started back here: http://broncozone.com/forums/index.php?sho...c=13279&hl= when you said "here is a link to the CORRECT way to install an edelbrock intake directions STRAIGHT from edelbrock not someone that has seemingly decided to be the definative source on everything that rolls on wheels" and yeah, I took that as a fairly personal comment since you certainly intended it as one. Anyone who questions it is free to read the full text of the thread and decide for themselves. When I find a moderator who chooses to *repeatedly* make personal attacks on me and at the same time REFUSES *multiple* requests to deal with the issue privately then YUP, I have a problem. My Email address is no State secret and not only have I requested that you & I deal with our issues privately SEVERAL times but you have chosen to continue to take public jabs at me at ever turn. If you choose to deal with this publicly rather than privately then so be it. I'm DONE asking you to speak with me privately, if you're foolish enough to WANT this to be public then it will be. Just HOW many PM's have I sent you asking to deal with this one-on-one ? I've lost count. You want it, you got it. You *wanted* a public ******* match and now you have one. All you ever had to do was click on one of the several PM's I sent you and this would have been a private issue and over with. Do I really need to go back & post every point of contact or are you willing to simply concede that you and I have issues that you're aware of ?

If you're SO willing to bury the axe and put these issues to a rest then why have you *refused* to even once respond to me ? I've reached out several times and made the offer more than once but each and every time my E-mails & PM's go unresponded to. Did you maybe not see them in your mailbox ? If so then fine, I renew the request and suggest that you and I speak personally and deal with our issues. The last time around when you neglected to respond I simply advised you that in the interest of domestic tranquility I would make every effort to avoid threads in which YOU chose to participate. Unfortunately I never heard back from you and at any rate the somewhat strained respect between you & I lasted only a few weeks when you started to participate in threads in which *I* was active and once again started to poke at me publicly. I have reserved for you the same respect that I give to children, idiots & the socially challenged. If you cannot do the same then we have a problem.

Man Up and deal with me personally, delegate the responsibility to someone else or simply walk away from the issue. My intention was NOT to force Dana to make a choice and deal with this. Quite the contrary, running to Daddy was the LAST thing I wanted to do. If you *honestly* want for each & every thread that you & I become involved in to be closed out by someone else then sure, keep it up. Is it REALLY that hard to man-up ? I'm NOT as hard guy to find. You're the one who wanted this public & now it is. I've *already* apologized to the threadowner for all this blowby, have you done the same Mr. Moderator ? (I have also done the same for each & EVERY thread that you & I have fouled. Once again, can you say the same ? or do you simply BURN other peoples threads and walk away because someone prints YOUR name in red letters ?)

 

[BLADE262US]

Well Bill I suggest you do get over it quickly . The issue I had with you was where you made other members feel dumb for asking a question . That has never been tolerated here and never will be . As for not participating in a thread you posted in or vis versa that is childish and isnt going to happen , We should all be adults here . I only got 1 PM saved from you and I dont delete them so apparently I didnt get them . I dont feel I need to talk privately with you as you will probably have the same attitude you have in private as you do in public and I have nothing to hide . If you cant take someone posting another opinion to your answer then maybe you dont belong here . Everyone is entitled to their opinion even if it gets called BS . Im starting to see where you are skirting on the threatening side of your comments . Im only going to say this once threatening members here be it member or mod will not be tolerated you will get a vacation for that . Me and you dont agree on things I see that so you make your opinion and Ill make mine if I have a comment for a particular post . You seem to think I go looking for you . You post in many threads here that I have no input on do you see me there ? This will stop now one way or the other . Because your right we dont need to be trashing the board like this you said you had a similar problem at full size bronco.com . One more thing please quit poking at my moderator status . I dont abuse my privledge if I did you would have been gone a long time ago I think Im way more fair than that . Ive seen other sites where if you even said one thing the mod didnt like you were banned done deal no discussion . Its not like that here so let the MR Moderator thing go . Im done with the whole thing which started because I felt you were bashing members here by your replies to thier post which is my reponcibility here along with the other mods to keep things smooth . So Im saying now we dont agree thats that you dont poke at me I wont poke at you we will have differing opinions leave it at that , You will post info Ill post info thats that , Im sorry to all the people that had thier threads made a mess of by our strongly differing opinions . But I GUARENTEE it ends now . /emoticons/[email protected] 2x" width="20" height="20" />

 

[Redneck86]

Its just the internet, why does it really matter? If someone says something you dont like whys it matter? It not like you know who they are. And just throwin this out there BB78 has always helped me out on topics i posted, even if he might throw a little sarcasm in with it it still helped. From what ive seen he hasnt said anything to make someone feel like a idiot. Yall just have diffrent ways of doin things like that Edelbrock intake post, he liked usin the end gaskets instead of a silicone bead WOW that really matters doesnt it. I think if the gaskets were put there from the factory and EDELBROCK sells them to be used with there intake they must work if you put them on right. Thats all he said, im not takin sides thats just my point of veiw. I think both yall have alot of advice to offer.