Author Topic: timing vs overheating problem  (Read 1538 times)

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
timing vs overheating problem
« on: July 31, 2022, 11:43:05 AM »
So I have the timing of my 75 pontiac 400 set at about 13. (Irrelevant I think, but it's in a 79 TA) The service manual says to set at 16. I have trouble with it heating up, (about 220 on the gauge) going up steep hills or sitting in traffic on hot days. Cooler days and just cruising the temp is fine. Would setting the timing at 16 help that do you think?
Thanks,

Joe

71455formula

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 878
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2022, 12:51:54 PM »
Is the vacuum advance disconnected when the timing is being set? What is your total timing at about 2800rpms? What is your compression ratio? What octane of fuel are you running?
1971 LS5 Formula. It's on the road finally!
2013 GMC Sierra 5.3l 6 speed Diamond White(sold)
2013 GMC Sierra Denali 6.2 6 speed AWD (sold)

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2022, 01:17:20 PM »
Yep, vacuum advance disconnected and plugged. I use middle grade gas, I think 89 octane. No idea what the total timing is. Not sure of compression ratio either. It's been rebuilt once pretty much stock without emissions stuff if that helps. Runs really good other than heating up when stressed. Thanks for the quick reply.

Joe

b_hill_86

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2135
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #3 on: July 31, 2022, 04:10:37 PM »
Short answer, ~ timing can cause hotter engine temps but 13° initial I wouldn’t think would cause that. My 69 400 is set at 14° initial and around 34° total. What kind of carb are you running? Lean condition can cause overheating but how much? I don’t know. What’s the age and condition of the rest of your cooling system? Is this a new issue or been this way for a while?
-Brian-

1977 Trans Am 400 4 speed

79GoldnTan

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 597
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2022, 06:28:09 PM »
Mine is a 75 400 block, bored 30 over, 4.25 crank, been a while so don't remember everything off top of my head but had the same problem, 18 btdc  at idle, no more overheat and runs strong
79 solar gold    
461.   Factory 4 speed
PTFB SFC
PTFB 1LE
3.08 rear  for now
Lots O Fun

Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2022, 06:28:09 PM »

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #5 on: August 01, 2022, 09:01:44 AM »
My carb is a rebuilt quadrajet out of a 77 TA. I turned both screws in some because I thought I could smell gas. The issue has been there since I put the motor in. Forgot to mention I put one of those flowcool, I think, high flow water pumps and that helped some. Also put a stainless divider plate in. Tried to compress it a little to close the gap but that stainless steel is too tough. The radiator is newer, from autozone I believe, just stock design. Can't remember off hand which thermostat I have in, think it's whatever the recommended one is, but I remember when I started having the problem switching thermostats and nothing seemed to help. Maybe I'll try upping the timing to 16 and see how it sounds and if it helps. Do you think I can do any harm going that route?

tajoe

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5264
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #6 on: August 01, 2022, 04:51:40 PM »
I could never understand why people disconnect their vacuum advance, on a street motor. They run so much better hooked up. There is absolutely no gain to having it plugged. I'll even take the ported canisters on the mid 70s cars, and put them to vacuum. Course, you need to keep your ear out for detonation, if the carb metering is lean.
As for the 79 comment, I also had a 79 with a 350, then a 400, and it too would heat up at hi-way speeds. Cool right down when slowed. It had 3.42s in the back, (st-10, no OD). I don't think the 79-81 grills allow enuff airflow to keep them cool. Maybe other modifications can help. Such as a monster radiator. I don't think upping the initial timing a few degrees will do much on the hiway. Maybe in town, if you can keep pistons in it.
"You can sell an old man a young mans car,
but you can't sell a young man an old mans car"
                                       Bunkie Knudsen
<

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #7 on: August 01, 2022, 05:04:30 PM »
I only disconnected and plugged the vacuum advance to adjust the timing, then hooked it back up. I wondered about the front end not flowing enough air, nothing I can do about that i guess.
Thanks,

NOT A TA

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3705
    • Laboratory Fourteen
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2022, 10:20:11 AM »
Fan clutch operating properly? Ever been replaced?
John Paige
Lab-14.com

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #9 on: August 02, 2022, 11:00:57 AM »
Sorry, forgot to mention, yes fan clutch was replaced when engine was rebuilt. Fan turns constantly. Lots of air movement. Also, the fan sticks out the appropriate distance from the shroud.

SoupMan

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 541
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2022, 12:49:58 PM »
Jk79Ta,

Maybe I missed it but what is the total timing with no vacuum advance?

I'm assuming you are NOT using an Air/Fuel ratio indicator. In my opinion having a O2 is a must in easing the process of engine tuning. As others mentioned, lean mixture could be an issue here.

Another potential issue is the transmission causing excess heat. Are you sure everything is in order in that department?  Fluid levels are good?  Oil color appears correct?

« Last Edit: August 02, 2022, 02:45:24 PM by SoupMan »

nUcLeArEnVoY

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 702
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2022, 02:16:45 PM »
More ignition timing actually COOLS a motor, especially at idle. Low ignition timing will cause it to heat up since the delayed spark causes incomplete evacuation of exhaust gases during the exhaust stroke, leading to accumulation of heat. I've seen headers start glowing orange at idle due to low timing.

First thing is first, as stated, you want vacuum advance for a street motor. Race motors don't use vacuum advance because they usually operate at WOT (wide open throttle) at which point vacuum advance is irrelevant, anyhow.

Think about a bone stock 1978 or 1979 Trans Am w/ a 400 W72. These motors made low compression, and also used EGR which actually cools combustion temps due to the introduction of inert gas into the combustion mixture - these engines had a lot of timing to make them livable and so they would not overheat with all the emissions crap. Base ignition timing was 18 degrees, on top of that you have vacuum advance cans that added up to 25 degrees of advance all in by 12" of vacuum. The advance cans were originally hooked up to vacuum modulator valves calibrated to provide 9" of manifold vacuum at idle, adding on average 17 degrees of additional timing at idle, making a total timing at just IDLE around 37 degrees. That's around what my '79 400 is at, and I'll idle at thermostat temp all freakin' day. This is also why the mechanical advance setups on these cars were for slow and gradual with heavy springs - you would only get an additional 18 degrees or so by near redline RPMs. If your car has a big camshaft in it, it's going to like more idle timing, anyway so maybe up your initial timing a bit more. Unless you're making  mondo compression (unlikely for a '75 400, even when "built up"), I doubt you're going to detonate. 14 degrees initial is about average for any engine, much less a Pontiac, and the fact that you're getting hot during inclines would lead me to believe that it's detonation, but with 14 degrees initial, I doubt that, and when going up inclines, the engine is under a pretty decent load which will rule out vacuum advance.

But you say you have vacuum advance on, so maybe that is not your issue. Running lean is sometimes a reach, I doubt that's why you're running hot. It's usually a lot more simple and obvious. How's your radiator? You said it's new, but is it sufficient? My 1979 with a 400 had a cool aluminum Champion radiator in it when I got it, but whoever bought it did not do their research. It was a 3 row radiator, when the original factory was a 4-row copper/brass, which would have cooled much better and had more coolant capacity, so they technically DOWNGRADED. I switched to a thick oversized 2-row Cold Case and haven't looked back. You said you took care of the water pump, but did you make sure to keep the clearance between the divider plate and impeller as tight as possible? Are your belts slipping? You can't always hear them slip, and a slipping belt essentially causes the water pump to just freewheel and not pump water as efficiently. You said you replaced your fan clutch, so you should be alright there. Next time you start the car up cold, remove your radiator cap before you start the car (have a rag ready, because the initial spooling of the water pump will cause the coolant to splash out). Keep the cap off while the car warms up and the thermostat opens and look for excess bubbles in the radiator. Maybe there is just air in the system and it needs burping. These 400's take a LOOOOOOONG time and repeated heat-up and cool downs to eliminate all the air in the system. I'll have mine idling for up to 45 minutes, even then, it takes several drives for the coolant level in the expansion tank to stop lowering and achieve equilibrium. If the bubbles never do seem to stop, though, or if the engine quickly overheats in conjunction with the bubbles, it may be time to purchase a combustion leak tester and check to see if you have a blown head gasket. Losing coolant is also a sign of a head gasket failure. Also, what temp thermostat do you have? These cars came with a 195 degree thermostat from the factory, and seeing temperatures of 205-210, even as high as 215  is not unheard of in the heat of summer. People  make fun of them all the time, but sometimes ignorance really is bliss with idiot lights - they don't even go off until 240, and GM documentation of the time has verified that actual damage is not likely until coolant temps reach 260 or beyond. We freak out so much seeing temps past 200+ when in reality, that's the norm. And then most simple of all... are you actually running those temperatures? Get an infrared thermometer or a mechanical gauge; verify the temps.

Heating up at highway speeds is normal since the engine is operating at a higher RPM, meaning more work and heat produced. But then, it should also eventually stop and level out not too far past the thermostat temp rating. If it keeps rising and rising and rising, then it's usually a radiator or coolant flow problem. I'm guessing you have the chin spoiler installed correctly, right? Because that piece serves a second purpose besides just looking cool - it diverts ram air into the radiator to dissipate heat from the coolant.

« Last Edit: August 02, 2022, 02:25:39 PM by nUcLeArEnVoY »
1979 Trans Am 400/4-Speed W72/WS6 - Starlight Black Hardtop

SoupMan

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 541
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2022, 02:46:19 PM »
Nuclear,

You are correct. What I was trying to say is that detonation early or late can cause overheating and that too much timing can also be an issue.

tajoe

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5264
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2022, 02:48:18 PM »
Lots of good info above, but the last comment is one I forget to mention, but the "Nuke" didn't miss. The chin spoiler underneath "might" help guide some of that air up into the radiator. Altho my 79 had the T/A spoiler treatment, and it didn't do much to keep mine cool on the free-way. And it did have a big brass 4 row radiator. Not sure if your car has the spoilers or not.
"You can sell an old man a young mans car,
but you can't sell a young man an old mans car"
                                       Bunkie Knudsen
<

nUcLeArEnVoY

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 702
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #14 on: August 02, 2022, 05:54:44 PM »
Nuclear,

You are correct. What I was trying to say is that detonation early or late can cause overheating and that too much timing can also be an issue.

Very true. Detonation caused by overly advanced timing can definitely cause overheating.
1979 Trans Am 400/4-Speed W72/WS6 - Starlight Black Hardtop

Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #14 on: August 02, 2022, 05:54:44 PM »

nUcLeArEnVoY

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 702
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #15 on: August 02, 2022, 06:05:42 PM »
Lots of good info above, but the last comment is one I forget to mention, but the "Nuke" didn't miss. The chin spoiler underneath "might" help guide some of that air up into the radiator. Altho my 79 had the T/A spoiler treatment, and it didn't do much to keep mine cool on the free-way. And it did have a big brass 4 row radiator. Not sure if your car has the spoilers or not.

Has your original rad been recored or refurbished? The stock rads are great since technically brass and copper conducts heat better than aluminum, but at 45+ years old, there's no way they haven't lost some of their heat exchanging ability. Maybe that's your issue?
1979 Trans Am 400/4-Speed W72/WS6 - Starlight Black Hardtop

BlueBaron762x39

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 174
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #16 on: August 02, 2022, 06:53:32 PM »
More ignition timing actually COOLS a motor, especially at idle. Low ignition timing will cause it to heat up since the delayed spark causes incomplete evacuation of exhaust gases during the exhaust stroke, leading to accumulation of heat. I've seen headers start glowing orange at idle due to low timing.

First thing is first, as stated, you want vacuum advance for a street motor. Race motors don't use vacuum advance because they usually operate at WOT (wide open throttle) at which point vacuum advance is irrelevant, anyhow.

Think about a bone stock 1978 or 1979 Trans Am w/ a 400 W72. These motors made low compression, and also used EGR which actually cools combustion temps due to the introduction of inert gas into the combustion mixture - these engines had a lot of timing to make them livable and so they would not overheat with all the emissions crap. Base ignition timing was 18 degrees, on top of that you have vacuum advance cans that added up to 25 degrees of advance all in by 12" of vacuum. The advance cans were originally hooked up to vacuum modulator valves calibrated to provide 9" of manifold vacuum at idle, adding on average 17 degrees of additional timing at idle, making a total timing at just IDLE around 37 degrees. That's around what my '79 400 is at, and I'll idle at thermostat temp all freakin' day. This is also why the mechanical advance setups on these cars were for slow and gradual with heavy springs - you would only get an additional 18 degrees or so by near redline RPMs. If your car has a big camshaft in it, it's going to like more idle timing, anyway so maybe up your initial timing a bit more. Unless you're making  mondo compression (unlikely for a '75 400, even when "built up"), I doubt you're going to detonate. 14 degrees initial is about average for any engine, much less a Pontiac, and the fact that you're getting hot during inclines would lead me to believe that it's detonation, but with 14 degrees initial, I doubt that, and when going up inclines, the engine is under a pretty decent load which will rule out vacuum advance.

But you say you have vacuum advance on, so maybe that is not your issue. Running lean is sometimes a reach, I doubt that's why you're running hot. It's usually a lot more simple and obvious. How's your radiator? You said it's new, but is it sufficient? My 1979 with a 400 had a cool aluminum Champion radiator in it when I got it, but whoever bought it did not do their research. It was a 3 row radiator, when the original factory was a 4-row copper/brass, which would have cooled much better and had more coolant capacity, so they technically DOWNGRADED. I switched to a thick oversized 2-row Cold Case and haven't looked back. You said you took care of the water pump, but did you make sure to keep the clearance between the divider plate and impeller as tight as possible? Are your belts slipping? You can't always hear them slip, and a slipping belt essentially causes the water pump to just freewheel and not pump water as efficiently. You said you replaced your fan clutch, so you should be alright there. Next time you start the car up cold, remove your radiator cap before you start the car (have a rag ready, because the initial spooling of the water pump will cause the coolant to splash out). Keep the cap off while the car warms up and the thermostat opens and look for excess bubbles in the radiator. Maybe there is just air in the system and it needs burping. These 400's take a LOOOOOOONG time and repeated heat-up and cool downs to eliminate all the air in the system. I'll have mine idling for up to 45 minutes, even then, it takes several drives for the coolant level in the expansion tank to stop lowering and achieve equilibrium. If the bubbles never do seem to stop, though, or if the engine quickly overheats in conjunction with the bubbles, it may be time to purchase a combustion leak tester and check to see if you have a blown head gasket. Losing coolant is also a sign of a head gasket failure. Also, what temp thermostat do you have? These cars came with a 195 degree thermostat from the factory, and seeing temperatures of 205-210, even as high as 215  is not unheard of in the heat of summer. People  make fun of them all the time, but sometimes ignorance really is bliss with idiot lights - they don't even go off until 240, and GM documentation of the time has verified that actual damage is not likely until coolant temps reach 260 or beyond. We freak out so much seeing temps past 200+ when in reality, that's the norm. And then most simple of all... are you actually running those temperatures? Get an infrared thermometer or a mechanical gauge; verify the temps.

Heating up at highway speeds is normal since the engine is operating at a higher RPM, meaning more work and heat produced. But then, it should also eventually stop and level out not too far past the thermostat temp rating. If it keeps rising and rising and rising, then it's usually a radiator or coolant flow problem. I'm guessing you have the chin spoiler installed correctly, right? Because that piece serves a second purpose besides just looking cool - it diverts ram air into the radiator to dissipate heat from the coolant.

I've heard from several people now that temperatures over 200 degrees were not unheard of on these cars during the summer.  Is it really true that it's nothing to worry about?  I daily drive one of mine all the time and it's running about 220 on the highway now with the air conditioning running.  Temperatures here have been over 100 degrees during the day lately.  Maybe that's normal and I shouldn't be worried about it running so hot this time of year in these weather conditions?

tajoe

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5264
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #17 on: August 02, 2022, 08:26:55 PM »
Has your original rad been recored or refurbished? The stock rads are great since technically brass and copper conducts heat better than aluminum, but at 45+ years old, there's no way they haven't lost some of their heat exchanging ability. Maybe that's your issue?

That car went away about 10 yrs ago, but when I did the car over, (20 yrs B4 that) it was recored. I think BluB hit the nail on the head, when he said these cars, (79-81) always ran over 200°. Mine did it on the hi-way when driven in the summer, on trips over an hr. Which it didn't see very often. I never let it get the best of me, so it wasn't anything that warranted any further investigating. 
"You can sell an old man a young mans car,
but you can't sell a young man an old mans car"
                                       Bunkie Knudsen
<

SoupMan

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 541
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #18 on: August 02, 2022, 10:16:00 PM »
I've heard of guys running their motors in the 220 range. The iron block/head can take a lot of heat. I personally still don't like it to go above but I don't stress it if it's not climbing quickly after 200.

FYI, last year my electric fan relay burned out and the fan stopped running (unknown to me). I heard a hissing and realized the temp was 245. I quickly stopped with the engine running and swapped the relay. Started hearing some detonation which I assume I reached at least 250 and then the temps dropped quickly as the fan caught up. I've driven over 3000 miles since that incident so I'll put that in the "lucky it was iron heads" column.

Currently I'm running a Champion 3 row radiator. My build is not stock and in traffic the car with the fan I'm running is staying in the 180 to 190. On the highway it climbs slowly. Today I actually tested without the fan one while on the highway and the car cools better with the fan on. It actually didn't cool enough with just highway speed.

nUcLeArEnVoY

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 702
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #19 on: August 03, 2022, 04:12:34 AM »
More ignition timing actually COOLS a motor, especially at idle. Low ignition timing will cause it to heat up since the delayed spark causes incomplete evacuation of exhaust gases during the exhaust stroke, leading to accumulation of heat. I've seen headers start glowing orange at idle due to low timing.

First thing is first, as stated, you want vacuum advance for a street motor. Race motors don't use vacuum advance because they usually operate at WOT (wide open throttle) at which point vacuum advance is irrelevant, anyhow.

Think about a bone stock 1978 or 1979 Trans Am w/ a 400 W72. These motors made low compression, and also used EGR which actually cools combustion temps due to the introduction of inert gas into the combustion mixture - these engines had a lot of timing to make them livable and so they would not overheat with all the emissions crap. Base ignition timing was 18 degrees, on top of that you have vacuum advance cans that added up to 25 degrees of advance all in by 12" of vacuum. The advance cans were originally hooked up to vacuum modulator valves calibrated to provide 9" of manifold vacuum at idle, adding on average 17 degrees of additional timing at idle, making a total timing at just IDLE around 37 degrees. That's around what my '79 400 is at, and I'll idle at thermostat temp all freakin' day. This is also why the mechanical advance setups on these cars were for slow and gradual with heavy springs - you would only get an additional 18 degrees or so by near redline RPMs. If your car has a big camshaft in it, it's going to like more idle timing, anyway so maybe up your initial timing a bit more. Unless you're making  mondo compression (unlikely for a '75 400, even when "built up"), I doubt you're going to detonate. 14 degrees initial is about average for any engine, much less a Pontiac, and the fact that you're getting hot during inclines would lead me to believe that it's detonation, but with 14 degrees initial, I doubt that, and when going up inclines, the engine is under a pretty decent load which will rule out vacuum advance.

But you say you have vacuum advance on, so maybe that is not your issue. Running lean is sometimes a reach, I doubt that's why you're running hot. It's usually a lot more simple and obvious. How's your radiator? You said it's new, but is it sufficient? My 1979 with a 400 had a cool aluminum Champion radiator in it when I got it, but whoever bought it did not do their research. It was a 3 row radiator, when the original factory was a 4-row copper/brass, which would have cooled much better and had more coolant capacity, so they technically DOWNGRADED. I switched to a thick oversized 2-row Cold Case and haven't looked back. You said you took care of the water pump, but did you make sure to keep the clearance between the divider plate and impeller as tight as possible? Are your belts slipping? You can't always hear them slip, and a slipping belt essentially causes the water pump to just freewheel and not pump water as efficiently. You said you replaced your fan clutch, so you should be alright there. Next time you start the car up cold, remove your radiator cap before you start the car (have a rag ready, because the initial spooling of the water pump will cause the coolant to splash out). Keep the cap off while the car warms up and the thermostat opens and look for excess bubbles in the radiator. Maybe there is just air in the system and it needs burping. These 400's take a LOOOOOOONG time and repeated heat-up and cool downs to eliminate all the air in the system. I'll have mine idling for up to 45 minutes, even then, it takes several drives for the coolant level in the expansion tank to stop lowering and achieve equilibrium. If the bubbles never do seem to stop, though, or if the engine quickly overheats in conjunction with the bubbles, it may be time to purchase a combustion leak tester and check to see if you have a blown head gasket. Losing coolant is also a sign of a head gasket failure. Also, what temp thermostat do you have? These cars came with a 195 degree thermostat from the factory, and seeing temperatures of 205-210, even as high as 215  is not unheard of in the heat of summer. People  make fun of them all the time, but sometimes ignorance really is bliss with idiot lights - they don't even go off until 240, and GM documentation of the time has verified that actual damage is not likely until coolant temps reach 260 or beyond. We freak out so much seeing temps past 200+ when in reality, that's the norm. And then most simple of all... are you actually running those temperatures? Get an infrared thermometer or a mechanical gauge; verify the temps.

Heating up at highway speeds is normal since the engine is operating at a higher RPM, meaning more work and heat produced. But then, it should also eventually stop and level out not too far past the thermostat temp rating. If it keeps rising and rising and rising, then it's usually a radiator or coolant flow problem. I'm guessing you have the chin spoiler installed correctly, right? Because that piece serves a second purpose besides just looking cool - it diverts ram air into the radiator to dissipate heat from the coolant.

I've heard from several people now that temperatures over 200 degrees were not unheard of on these cars during the summer.  Is it really true that it's nothing to worry about?  I daily drive one of mine all the time and it's running about 220 on the highway now with the air conditioning running.  Temperatures here have been over 100 degrees during the day lately.  Maybe that's normal and I shouldn't be worried about it running so hot this time of year in these weather conditions?

I think what matters most is, does it stop going up at 220? The only way to drop your temps from there may be to get an overdrive Trans to lower your highway RPMs, or look into other aspects of your cooling system that need upgrades. Vacuum advance is also helpful at cruise since it adds more timing, but that treads a thin line between just right and pinging.
1979 Trans Am 400/4-Speed W72/WS6 - Starlight Black Hardtop

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #20 on: August 03, 2022, 10:56:03 AM »
Wow guys! Thanks for all the info! Some of it is over my head, but I think I'm understanding most of it. Total timing I don't get. I only comprehend using the timing light to adjust the initial timing I guess. Here is a summary of what I have:
75 pontiac 400 rebuilt about 2008 to stock
new 4 row, I believe, stock type radiator
I think it's a 195° thermostat
new clutch fan
cooling system was burped when engine was installed
aluminum water pump (flowcool brand maybe)
stainless steel divider plate that I couldn't bend to reduce gap
front spoiler attached
vacuum advance connected
rebuilt carb from a 77 TA. screws adjusted for good idle
timing about 13

When cruising the temp pretty much hangs around the line below 220° on the gage. Don't know what that number is but that's where it usually stays approximately. On warmer days going up hills goes up to 220°. Gradually goes down to that line after reaching the top of the hill. Same when in stop and go traffic or idling for a while on hot days. I have an IR thermometer. I think I'll check the rad hose and next to the temp sensor next time I drive it to see how it compares to the gage in the car.

Maybe I'm worrying about nothing. Sounds like these engines run hot normally and going up to 220 when under stress might be the norm. I think I will try adjusting the timing up a little though.
Thanks everybody for the good info

Joe



b_hill_86

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2135
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #21 on: August 03, 2022, 11:14:10 AM »
If your engine was rebuilt it’s possible the temp sending unit was also replaced. That said, MOST aren’t set correctly as they can be a one-size-fits-most. The sender in my engine when I bought it was one of those and read higher than the actual temp. If you’re lucky, they could be your case also. As nuke mentioned, try an IR thermometer on the water neck and/or on the crossover though that won’t be dead on. Your best bet would be a mechanical gauge that’s been tested to be correct or you can pull and test your sender but being electric it will be a little more involved than testing a mechanical gauge in a pot of boiling water.

If you determine somehow that your sender isn’t correct check out https://www.lectriclimited.com . They advertise that their senders are correctly calibrated. As you may notice, there are different ones after 78 for firebirds because the values for the gauges to read correctly changed. I replaced mine with a lectric limited one and compare against my tested mechanical and it reads more accurately now.

Just a thought before you get too involved.

One last thought. Changing a thermostat to one that opens sooner WILL NOT help a cooling system that is inefficient due to another underlying issue. That said, if your cooling system is up to snuff, a 180° could allow you to run a little cooler but again, that’s assuming your cooling system has the capacity to cool efficiently anyway and doesn’t have another issue that’s causing overheating.
-Brian-

1977 Trans Am 400 4 speed

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #22 on: August 03, 2022, 01:10:48 PM »
Just went for a 40 mile cruise. The last 20 mi about 65mph. After I got home I made some measurements with my IR thermometer. Here are my observations:
Air temp 90
Gage temp in car 220
thermostat housing 176
upper rad hose 152
lower rad hose 163
temp where sensor goes in 190
water pump housing 174

Only way to get high readings was to measure the outside of the block, where no water circulates.

Looking at this data it appears that my gage isn't correct. That's good news I guess. I still may increase the timing a little though I think.


nUcLeArEnVoY

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 702
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #23 on: August 03, 2022, 01:47:39 PM »
Just went for a 40 mile cruise. The last 20 mi about 65mph. After I got home I made some measurements with my IR thermometer. Here are my observations:
Air temp 90
Gage temp in car 220
thermostat housing 176
upper rad hose 152
lower rad hose 163
temp where sensor goes in 190
water pump housing 174

Only way to get high readings was to measure the outside of the block, where no water circulates.

Looking at this data it appears that my gage isn't correct. That's good news I guess. I still may increase the timing a little though I think.

Glad to know. Those numbers indicate you're actually running pretty cool. I have a 160 degree thermostat in my '79 and I may have to switch to a 180, since my temp gauge needle seldom goes past the first "tick" on the gauge, which is around 160 - my cooling system is beefed up enough to actually maintain that stat temp for the most part. I can straight up grip my hand around the upper radiator hose after driving for over an hour and hold it there without getting burnt or injured.

You say your car is a '79 T/A? That would mean it has a '79 gauge cluster (I'll assume). Did your car originally come with the Pontiac 400 motor? If so, do yourself a favor and get a temp sending unit from Lectric Limited. It's the one I use. It is accurate and is specifically calibrated for the resistance values meant for the 1979 temp gauge. https://www.lectriclimited.com/catalog/product/view/id/103592/s/temperature-sending-unit/category/734/

If your car came with the Olds 403, then you may have inaccurate readings. The gauges I believe starting in '79 are calibrated differently from prior years in accordance with resistance values from the temp sending unit, and they also differ among engine families. The temp gauge and sender doesn't know what engine is in the car, but they do work together to provide an accurate display. You need the right sender for the right gauge.

Oh, and if and when you do replace your sender, wrap a couple turns of teflon tape just around the top of the threads. Even though they're NPT, they almost always weep/leak trace amounts if you just install them bare. It's said that teflon tape disrupts the ground, but the cutting action of the threads will slice through the teflon tap at the peaks of each thread to restore ground, not to mention you don't need to cover all the threads in tape. Just toward the top.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2022, 02:00:04 PM by nUcLeArEnVoY »
1979 Trans Am 400/4-Speed W72/WS6 - Starlight Black Hardtop

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #24 on: August 03, 2022, 04:07:27 PM »
Boy, that's a good point. The car was originally a 301! I put the 400 in when the block bit the bullet. It does have the rally gauges. Just looked through my catalogues. Man I don't know what I need! A 75 pontiac 400 in a 79 TA with gauges. Any suggestions?

Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #24 on: August 03, 2022, 04:07:27 PM »

b_hill_86

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2135
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #25 on: August 03, 2022, 05:05:16 PM »
“my temp gauge needle seldom goes past the first "tick" on the gauge, which is around 160“

That may be debatable fyi hence the need for a verified correct mechanical gauge. I too have a LL sender in my 77 but my “first tick” seems to indicate 200° compared to my mechanical gauge.

This is what you’d need for a 79. https://www.lectriclimited.com/temperature-sending-unit-117411
-Brian-

1977 Trans Am 400 4 speed

nUcLeArEnVoY

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 702
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #26 on: August 04, 2022, 03:40:18 AM »
Boy, that's a good point. The car was originally a 301! I put the 400 in when the block bit the bullet. It does have the rally gauges. Just looked through my catalogues. Man I don't know what I need! A 75 pontiac 400 in a 79 TA with gauges. Any suggestions?

Just get the same sender that me and Brian linked. It works for the 301 and 400. Most people don't know about LL, odds are good the sender that's currently in your motor is just a generic parts store one which are usually not that accurate.

And Brian, wow that's a big difference in temp. I agree that there's no way to know for sure if my gauge is exactly right, but I can tell just by feel and touch that my motor may be a little too cool. Like I said, after an hour of driving, I can grip the upper rad hose and not get burned, this is even right after I shut the car off and coolant is no longer flowing. It feels hot, but not hot enough to hurt my hand, which it would if it has 180-200 degree coolant flowing through it. Sure does hurt my hand on my daily driver car. I can even press my finger toward the top of the cylinder head and not get burned after 4 seconds or so - again, this is after 30 minutes to an hour of driving. But maybe some day I should get one of those mechanical gauges or even an infrared gun, if for no other reason than to just satisfy my curiosity.   :?
1979 Trans Am 400/4-Speed W72/WS6 - Starlight Black Hardtop

b_hill_86

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2135
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #27 on: August 04, 2022, 05:35:11 AM »
My mistake Nuke, I didn’t realize you liked the same sensor. And yea you probably are running cold then based on what you said. Mine ran too cool with a 160° thermostat also which would’ve been fine but I drive my car in cold weather as long as there isn’t any salt on the road.
-Brian-

1977 Trans Am 400 4 speed

81Blackbird

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1364
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #28 on: August 04, 2022, 08:29:11 AM »
ON A/C cars there is a hood to radiator core support seal the help direct air through the condenser and radiator and not over it.
Do you have that seal?

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #29 on: August 04, 2022, 08:54:15 AM »
Forgot to mention, no A/C. I'll look into that sensor.

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #30 on: August 04, 2022, 09:06:16 AM »
So I assume I would order one of those sensors for the 79 TA, since that's what the car is? Not for the 75 engine that's in it. Right?

SoupMan

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 541
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #31 on: August 04, 2022, 09:45:34 AM »
Jk79ta,

For reference, when my motor goes above 200 my feet/legs can feel the heat coming through the firewall. This is with insulation on the firewall.

You made a comment "maybe it's just that they motor run hot". Do not dismiss the need to know the running temp. The iron heads/block can handle 220 as long as what you see at 220 is actually 220. With your stock setup I would not expect to see you anywhere near 210 unless you are doing high RPMs on the highway or mountain climbing.

Sounds like the guys have you covered on the gauge/sender unit validation ;)

b_hill_86

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2135
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #32 on: August 04, 2022, 11:24:56 AM »
ON A/C cars there is a hood to radiator core support seal the help direct air through the condenser and radiator and not over it.
Do you have that seal?

Hey that’s good to know. My car is an AC car that I reinstalled AC on and i have no seals and it starts warming up at idle which I assumed was an airflow issue. Not to sidetrack but do you know if there was any type of seal between the condenser and core support?

Jk79ta, yes you’d want the sensor for 79 since part of the difference between sensors is due to a change in how the temp gauge “interprets” the resistance altered  by the sensor.

Basically, as the coolant temp changes, the electrical resistance of the sensor changes in a set way. The gauge is then set to respond to the level of resistance in a particular way to provide you with your temp reading. I’m just making up numbers but say a coolant temp of 180° causes the sensor to provide 50 ohms of resistance then the gauge would have to read 180° at 50 ohms. If your sensor provided 70 ohms at 180° then your gauge will read high cause the gauge is set to display a higher value at 70 ohms. (I may have that backwards too fyi. Can’t remember off hand if resistance increases or decreases with them but you get the idea.)

The only think I wonder about is why the 403 gets a different part number. Possibly a different design slightly? The electrical values should be the same as I don’t believe, and doubt, the gauges are calibrated differently depending on what engine you order.
-Brian-

1977 Trans Am 400 4 speed

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #33 on: August 04, 2022, 12:05:20 PM »
Sensor has been ordered! Hopefully I'll get the kind of temp reading I want. Thanks to everyone for their help and comments.

Joe

ryeguy2006a

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6091
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #34 on: August 04, 2022, 01:28:03 PM »
The stock gauges back in the day weren't really known for their accuracy. How difficult would it be to temporarily hook up a trusted gauge to see if there is a difference?

1976 Trans Am LS1 and much more...SOLD
1968 Camaro LSA, T56 Magnum, and much more...SOLD

Current Project: 1955 Nomad LC9, 4L80e, C5 brakes and etc...

jk79ta

  • Active Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 354
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #35 on: August 10, 2022, 01:43:00 PM »
Just wanted to give an update. Checked the timing Sunday it was actually at 17, not what I originally said. I set it to 16 as the manual says it should be. Put the lectriclimited gauge in yesterday and went for a 10 mile or so ride. Not as hot here as it has been, only 81 compared to 90ish, but the gauge went up to that line between 100 and 220, I calculate it to be 190, and it held just a little above there. Probably about 192. Half the ride was at about 70 mph and the other half stop and go through town. So far it looks good. Checked several spots with my IR thermometer and all were 190 or lower. Hopefully continues, we will see when I get to the nationals in a couple weeks and drive in that heat.

Joe

tajoe

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5264
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #36 on: August 10, 2022, 03:06:34 PM »
I imagine you're sleeping better now. Thanks for the up-date.
"You can sell an old man a young mans car,
but you can't sell a young man an old mans car"
                                       Bunkie Knudsen
<

b_hill_86

  • Oracle Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2135
Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #37 on: August 10, 2022, 07:32:07 PM »
Glad to hear. I would agree, with my experience, that mark is probably 190-200ish taking into account ,as was mentioned, the factory gauges aren’t know for being super accurate. Glad that was all your issue seemed to be and thanks for the update.
-Brian-

1977 Trans Am 400 4 speed

Re: timing vs overheating problem
« Reply #37 on: August 10, 2022, 07:32:07 PM »
You can help support TAC!