Steves Buick

Thanks for that, Looking fwd to the challenge. Dean Tryon has a very well done chapter in his book that I may replicate in my car for fun. To me it seems like it may be easier to just raise the compression ratio than blend the fuel. 60 degrees of total advance seems like a lot, what rpm were you turning? Did you get the 60 degrees by going past it until the engine pings under load then retarding it to eventually find 60?

Beautiful pair of cars there Em Tee, well done. Str8 Dave hit the nail on the head I believe with the slow burn rate of 90 oct fuel. I have also had the same issues with after burn off the exhaust valve with 87 Oct ethanol free fuel, I advanced my initial timing 3 degrees and it did seem to run better but occasionally would back fire on shut down. My water temp never got above 145 until the engine is loaded going up a long hill and my high temp paint is still there. I’ll start experimenting with bringing down the Oct rating to something less than 80. Not sure just how but what could possibly go wrong? Right. I’ll send a shot of my secondary temp set up that shows water temp before and after it enters the engine.

Thanks I had the same thought, i might even drive the car with it installed, I’m searching for the perfect F/A setting on the Buick. I’m close, car run great but I have to crack a little choke if I need the power for a hill climb etc. Just fine tuning the Marvel has been a small challenge in its own right. Did you know Bill Antelli Finger lakes area?

Well it was an interesting experiment for a rainy Washington day, anybody need a used A/F ratio gauge?

Warm idle was 18-19.to one. Im not banking much on the accuracy of the gage as again the sensor is at the tailpipe not closer to the eng. But pretty big dif from the cold Idle. This was a rainy day project and thats about it. Cheers,

Got it ...this sensor sets off an alarm at 18.5 :1 no drama..attached is my 1996 Ford 150 cold start ..it leans out as the idle kicks down. Ill try leaning the marvel just a few notches at a time to see if I can bring it a bit closer to 14:1 and report back. Thanks for the interest..

Thanks for the replies, I tested my 1950 Chevy truck with a 235, to my surprise it read a solid 12 to 1. Again I suspect the location so far aft contributed to the result. The sensor was inserted only 20” into the tail pipe.. I’ll check a couple other cars for a comparison value. Thanks Mark for the link.

I knew the Marvel ran rich, but how rich. I slipped a fuel air ratio sensor up the tail pipe, softer than last prostate exam. I found it ran between 11.5 and 12.5, the accuracy is most likely off due the location of the sensor being so far aft. Has any one else experimented with this? I'm just curious what others have found.

Thanks for the info, I’m out of town with a family emergency, and will dig out the fuel pumps next week. Sorry for the delay. Steve

Looks great, do you have a contact email or # for Jeff? I have a few spare fuel pumps if you need one.. Steve

Thanks, I’ll keep it in mind. steve

Love it, I have a 32 buick 96s, not many of those either, are parts tough to find?

Wow nice car!

I’m a little late to the party here but I noticed a few things, my data plate for my 32 96s is 32108 yours is 31108, so I’ll bet its a 31. As for the Wizard, mine works .. sort of .. it was hanging up between 1st and 2 nd gear leaving the car stuck in first. But it does work. Easy fix just remove the link on top of the trans and you disable the Wizard. I also capped the vacuum line to the diaphragm to ensure I had no vac leaks.. it pulls about 19 inches. In the photo you’ll see also the wiper line is disconnected, disregard that. I’ll look for your body number and see what I can come up with.. Cheers Steve

Simple, a broken motif bar off a 1930s car. I'd guess a 32.