MM seems to be quite an astute person from his posts.
The fools I refer to are galoots that reference unseen AMAL
documents yet never quite have an original thought.
I find your work very thorough and often refer to it. I also find it astounding that Mk1 AMALs have not been reverse engineered to improve the original design. The only improvements in 40+ years are to materials except for the adjustable pilot jet. While still 'good enough', I think they can be even better.
As all AMAL
documentation is in the public domain I struggle to understand how it can be referred to as "unseen" documentation.
Not sure who your name calling here, but I'd be quite happy to be called a galoot, I've been called much vulgar things and this at least has a 19th century upper class ring to it.
There is a reason why the mk1 is what it is, it was designed to a brief - like any engineered item, it has to meet a criteria, some of those things was it had to be Concentric
in design and it had to meet a certain cost. There is no reason to cry over a £100 carburettor when it wears out when it's alternative from Kehin or Mikuni ( which is a copy of the AMAL
mk2) are more expensive to buy. There is a good reason why GP carbs are about 5x more to buy than a Concentric
, there's also a good reason why many switch from earlier models to the mk1, the main reason is cost.
Without doing unnecessary mods to a mk1, they can be tuned to run on pretty much any vehicle, whether it be a jetting change or increasing the air bleed holes (or blanking them off) on the needle jet. This modification is one recognised by AMAL
The graph above made me chuckle, it all means sweet FA until it is put into practice, there are also other areas of the induction, ignition, combustion and exhaust system which would have a far greater impact before this carb modification you have made starts to take effect.
But I admire your enthusiasm, you seem to have read a book or watched a video on this, bought some fancy equipment and feel like you've invented the wheel.
Yet you fail to understand that rpms is not relative to throttle position, any load or increased load will have a bearing on this, riding up a hill in top gear will mean a greater throttle position than if your in a different gear doing the same rpms or even the same gear but going down hill. The load has changed and so has throttle position to maintain the same rpms.
The biggest thing I've learned when being on these forums is you never know as much as you think you do (there are some exceptions to the rule) and even when you do, you need to listen to others opinions of the matter, there is always someone more knowledgable and when on here you don't have the first clue who your talking too.
There is a good reason why I haven't tried to redesign the Mk1 Concentric
, if I want something better then I would buy a better instrument, however with a lot of road testing I am able to tune the mk1 to pull cleanly throughout the range and give good power and throttle response. On the occasions when I have not been able to tune out a flat spot or other issue, I've found adjusting the exhaust characteristics or cam timing has solved this problem. If you feel the urge to start hacking away at an instrument then you really don't have the first clue on how it works or how to tune it.
Reading this topic has given me and others a great sense of amusement but it's starting to get boring now.