Hi all.....2.1 running log and carb. I have a vacuum line from dizzy to carb. The other vacuum line at carb is blocked off. But I have another vacuum connection at the dizzy. It's on the big disc attached to the dizzy and faces towards the back of the bus
Where should this go?
There is one that goes to the left hand side connector as you look at it behind the carb from the back of the dizzy. Is that right?
Not sure if there should be an unconnected vacuum line at the dizzy?
There's another vacuum connector on the black plastic air intake stuff...but have been told don't need that.
Any pointers?
Thanks folks
Em x
Vacuum lines confusion
Moderators: User administrators, Moderators
- ermie571
- Registered user
- Posts: 4970
- Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 11:11
- 80-90 Mem No: 2129
- Location: Minster-on-Sea, Kent: Member 2129 07784052288
Vacuum lines confusion
2.1 DJ 1990 Caravelle (died and gone to heaven)
2.0 AGG (1997 ish) 1984 transporter LPG
2.0 AGG (1997 ish) 1984 transporter LPG
- Aidan
- Trader
- Posts: 7099
- Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 19:21
- 80-90 Mem No: 742
- Location: Llanfyllin, mid Wales : )
- Contact:
Re: Vacuum lines confusion
Emma twin vacuum disi is 2.1 disi, the second line would be plumped into the plenum chamber and fuel regulator but that stuff is no longer there - I think you would be best with a 1.9 single vacuum disi, but others with 2.1 running carb may say otherwise, I don't run carb so not sure with this 2.1 as carb set up
the second outlet on the carb is for the air intake gubbins which is blanked off
the second outlet on the carb is for the air intake gubbins which is blanked off
- ermie571
- Registered user
- Posts: 4970
- Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 11:11
- 80-90 Mem No: 2129
- Location: Minster-on-Sea, Kent: Member 2129 07784052288
Re: Vacuum lines confusion
Thanks Asian. Went to 2.1 dizzy at recommendation of club for correct advance curve lol x
Should I block second vacuum outlet?
Should I block second vacuum outlet?
2.1 DJ 1990 Caravelle (died and gone to heaven)
2.0 AGG (1997 ish) 1984 transporter LPG
2.0 AGG (1997 ish) 1984 transporter LPG
- ghost123uk
- Registered user
- Posts: 6855
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:15
- 80-90 Mem No: 2585
- Location: John in Malpas, in the very S. W. part of Cheshire.
- Contact:
Re: Vacuum lines confusion
ermie571 wrote:Thanks Asian



ermie571 wrote:Went to 2.1 dizzy at recommendation of club for correct advance curve lol x
Ah but it won't be the correct curve without the second vac pipe, and you can't just add it (tis a bit more complicated).
ermie571 wrote:Should I block second vacuum outlet?
Not necessary to do so as it is doing nothing at present.
Background = the disk you refer to is the advance/retard diaphragm, One of the pipes, when it has a vacuum on it (from the inlet manifold) "sucks" on the diaphragm and advances the timing (of the spark) to improve engine efficiency. The other one (now not in use on yours) does the opposite and counters the advance under certain circumstances (full engine load) to both prevent pinking and also to improve the emissions from the exhaust. As said by "Asian"


Aside(ish) - I wonder how much the timing curve differs on a 2.1 compared to a 1.9 ? Then we have the different compression ratios of the various WBX motors from 8.5:1 to 10.5:1 ummmm.
Got a new van, but it's a 165bhp T4 [shock horror] Accurate LPG Station map here
- ermie571
- Registered user
- Posts: 4970
- Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 11:11
- 80-90 Mem No: 2129
- Location: Minster-on-Sea, Kent: Member 2129 07784052288
Re: Vacuum lines confusion
fat fingers..so sorry...could have been worse...Aslan from CS Lewis' Narnia is pretty close too!
Apologies Aidan - it was early and on my phone (autocorrect needs to be introduced to the 80-90 user list....lol)
ok....will leave alone then. Its been like that for years
and as for how much it differs.....we put a 2.1 dizzy on the other engine I believe when we upgraded from the 1.9...I didn't notice any difference at all...
thanks for the info ghost on my advance/retard unit. At least I know what it is called now...and if its not sucking air that can harm the running of the engine, all is good.
Em
xx
Apologies Aidan - it was early and on my phone (autocorrect needs to be introduced to the 80-90 user list....lol)
ok....will leave alone then. Its been like that for years

and as for how much it differs.....we put a 2.1 dizzy on the other engine I believe when we upgraded from the 1.9...I didn't notice any difference at all...
thanks for the info ghost on my advance/retard unit. At least I know what it is called now...and if its not sucking air that can harm the running of the engine, all is good.
Em
xx
2.1 DJ 1990 Caravelle (died and gone to heaven)
2.0 AGG (1997 ish) 1984 transporter LPG
2.0 AGG (1997 ish) 1984 transporter LPG