I mentioned in a previous post that I've been running 0 TDC on my 84 Westy
for 10 years now without ill effects.

VW/Bosch introduced the 5 ATDC timing specifications in 1971 model year
(Bugs, Buses, Type 3, 411/412) and only models equipped with a dual
diaphragm (also called a push-pull or DVDA) distributor vacuum can,
primarily for 71-73 USA emissions, 74-83 for California emissions specs and
then on the 83.5-85 Vanagons back to all of USA.

On 86-91 2.1 Vanagons, the advance/retard (if any) is controlled by the Fuel
Injection ECU as there is no Vacuum Can or Mechanical Advance mechanism in
the distributor.
--
Jim Thompson
84 GL 1.9 "Gloria"
84 Westfalia 2.1 "Ole Putt"
73 K Ghia Coupe "Denise"
72 411 Station Wagon "Pug"
oldvolkshome@gmail.com
http://www.oldvolkshome.com
***********************************

On 10/30/07, Geza Polony <gezapolony@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> Folks, volks,
>
> Correct if wrong, but conventional wisdom says VWOA specified ATDC timing
> in
> the early 1980s ONLY to meet pollution control standards. Is that right?
>
> It then follows that we can run these engines at other settings without
> any
> harm, and perhaps more power, if we don't care about destroying the only
> environment we have and causing mass extinction in an apocalyptic heat
> wave
> combined with unending hurricanes and general annihilation.
>
> OK, that means we can run our waterboxers at TDC, 5 BTDC, or even more, to
> good effect, except for the minor environmental probs mentioned.
>
> What I want to know is: who here are running at TDC or BTDC? How long have
> you been doing it? Has there been any identifiable engine damage? Better
> power? Better or worse fuel economy?
>
> I ran my 1.9 at around 5 BTDC before I got chicken and set it back to
> ATDC.
> It's less peppy, but there isn't really a huge amount of difference. I had
> an idea in my head that I'd burning a piston or a valve and didn't want to
> risk it. Is that right?
>
> Anybody been running BTDC for years and years?
>
> thanks
>
>
> Geza