Cliff's Quadrajet Parts and Rebuild Kits
General Category => Quadrajet Carb Talk and Tips => Topic started by: bruno on April 03, 2023, 03:20:15 PM
-
i’m looking for some guidance in getting this carb and my ignition set up correctly.
carb-17082224, rebuilt by me with cliffs kit, about 7-8 years ago. finally getting time to fire it up. idle tubes are .036, DCR .055, discharge holes are .086, UIAB=.068, LIAB=.077. primary jets are 73 with 51M rods.
engine is ‘68, 396(325hp) with stock pistons and 215 heads. engine has been freshened up with new rings and bearings, and fel pro head gaskets that came in the kit. also an unknown cam, which i attempted to measure today, and came up with 205/215@.050”and 274/293 lift. i’m not entirely sure of the ICL or lobe separation, but i do have the opening and closing point of both valves if that helps. i just not sure how to interpret the numbers.
Th400, with 3.31 gears. just want to be able to cruise, no racing or daily driver.
distributor is 1111196, dwell is at 30,
just working on the vacuum advance, as i was only getting 5 degrees. then i discovered it was adjustable, but haven’t got to fit it back up yet. haven’t checked centrifugal yet. base timing calls for 4, i had it set at 8. seemed to work okay.
questions:
looking for timing recommendations, high idle rpm’s and then i can start trying to tune carb. i have cliffs book, and will read it again, but want to get distributor set up first.
i haven’t tried driving yet, just running in garage.
any more info that will help, let me know.
-
possibly an XE 250 cam? only thing i know is it was bought from performance auto warehouse in the 80s. the bill just lists it as CHE 396.
-
Not sure if they made XE cams that far back. Most of the Comp stuff used to be single pattern and nearly if not all of it on 110LSA's. Far from ideal but they did that to put enough overlap in the deal so your engine had some "attitude" at idle when you went to a car show or cruise in.
The XE256 specifically would be a very poor choice for a 396 unless is was very low compression. a cam like that wouldn't even come close to taking advantage of good flowing heads used on most big block Chevy engines from that period.
My cam of choice for most of those builds is the GM Marine cam or Melling 22216. It's pretty much identical to the original 396 and 427 cams from the late 1960's used in the lower performance engines. Ground on a 115LSA it idles well and produces a very broad/smooth/flat power curve which really helps manage pump fuel at the higher compression ratios many of those engines used.....
-
well i must have measured something wrong, cause i’m getting an LSA of 133 degrees. will look at my numbers again, but i came up with an ICL of 104, and an exhaust ICL of 237 degrees.
keep in mind i was using a dial indicator on the end of a pushrod, so definitely could have gotten skewed!
-
and i should mention i’m running the factory iron manifolds.
-
so i re measured the cam again today, and can’t make sense of the numbers. i’ll post them here and maybe someone can decipher them or tell me what i’m doing wrong.
measurements are in this order- first movement of needle( very tough to catch),0.006”, and 0.050”
IO- 35btdc,20btdc,0(tdc)
IC- 105btdc,130btdc,156btdc
EO- 90atdc, 108atdc, 130atdc
EC- 50atdc, 25atdc, 15btdc
as far as i could measure, max lift occurred at 110atdc for intake, and 120btdc for the exhaust.
this is with a degree wheel on the crank, and a dial indicator on the pushrod, with just the spring pressure of the dial indicator pushing on the pushrod. it seemed like it was working correctly, i just can’t figure out the numbers. the lift numbers i posted above i actually measured off the cam, so they are correct. i didn’t know about the other measurements back then.
again, any suggestions or info about this cam would be appreciated!!
-
well it turns out i can’t get a smooth enough rotation of the engine to measure exact enough.
pretty confident in the duration @.050” numbers, and the lift, but the LSA is not exact enough to be confident. dad always just said it was a “towing” cam.
for now i’m stuck with whatever cam this is, so hopefully it will work okay.
-
If you are "stuck with the cam" then measuring to find out what it is really isn't important.
Get the engine running and see what kind of vacuum it makes at idle speed with reasonable timing in it. If it's idles well and makes good vacuum without running the timing clear off the scale you should be fine.
Timing is equally as important as idle fuel delivery when it comes to tuning. Most well thought out engine builds will make good vacuum at idle and not need a lot of initial timing. If that ends up being the case you will also find you don't have to bring in a lot of idle fuel either.
I like to see at least 12" vacuum at 700-750rpm's with about 10-12 degrees initial timing. Much below that and we start having to add both timing, idle fuel and idle bypass air to make things happy.
Your current carbs idle set-up is pretty lean so may need a bit more idle fuel if this engine/cam combo isn't making decent vacuum at idle speed......
-
pretty sure vacuum was around 16”, but will double check that next time i get a chance. it developed a “pop” through the exhaust on high idle when i started it after trying to measure the cam. possibly i overtightened a valve, but don’t think so. i also turned the vacuum advance canister a bunch, and haven’t checked it yet, so thinking i have way to much timing right now. wait her one is easy fix, just have to find the time. i’ll post again when i am able to check those.
the manual calls for 2000rpm high idle, which seems high to me. i was thinking 1400ish? any suggestions there? no winter driving, and all the time in the world to let it warm up before driving it.
-
so this is what i got today, car fired up great with single pump of pedal to engage choke.
high idle is 1470, with 18.5” vacuum.
mid idle is 1150, with 17.5” vacuum.
curb idle in park is 750, with 14” vacuum.
those were with vacuum advance disconnected
base timing is set @5 degrees.
VA adds 19” of vacuum, starting at 5”, and total at 10”(manual calls for 15 from VA) haven’t tried any adjustments there yet. idle timing seems pretty solid.
with VA connected, idle went to 1000, so adjusted it back to 750. idle timing with VA connected is 24 degrees.
then i tried adjusting the idle mixture screws, which were set at 3 turns out. right side seemed to make jo difference when seated. left side definitely had effect, regardless of where the right side was.
i covered the carb loosely with my hand and the idle speed climbed immediately, so i assume it wants more idle fuel?? also thinking due to right side not having any effect, possibly that side is got some crap in it? that would account for wanting more fuel too right?
looking for suggestions on what to do next. it has been a few years since i rebuilt this carb, so it has sat on the car for a while. idle tubes were new from cliff when rebuilt, so they “were” clean then, and all passages were clean then too. very possible the right side got some crap in it though.
-
placed an order for a new carb kit from you, with some extra gaskets incase i rip one of them while figuring this out. i also put a note about distributor springs for the centrifugal advance. haven’t got there yet, but i assume these are original. but not knowing for sure, i’d rather get some good new ones to be sure. i will try to figure out the centrifugal advance numbers tomorrow, and i’ll post them here if i can.
-
pulled carb today, luckily the gaskets came apart easily!! used a .030” mig wire to poke through the idle tubes, and blew out the passage as best as possible. i didn’t pull the tubes, hoping the poke and air would dislodge anything in there. i removed the idle screws while doing this.
float height is set at 9/32”, not sure where it should be, as i no longer have the rebuild instructions. i’ll leave it there for now. throttle plates look good, a tiny bit of light around the primaries, but i think it’s okay? secondaries are excellent, no light. will put it back together and see what happens.
cliff, i’ll still take that kit i ordered just to have the gaskets for future use. thx.
-
fired right back up after putting carb back on. think i misread vacuum gauge last test, as i’ve got 16.5” of vacuum know. think i was thinking the needle moved the other way!!
i also just checked the pcv valve, and it is sucking air at idle. just for clarification, that should not be the case right? it should only be operational at part throttle? it it hooked to manifold vacuum on front of carb.
still have almost no effect with mixture screws, and can’t see any nozzle drip.
-
can’t seem to upload pics from my iphone. says it won’t accept that file type, and i don’t know how to change it!!
-
pics
-
mods feel free to move this post if it should be in another topic.
-
I've been away for a few days, BURIED in orders and trying to finish up a few things.
Do you have control with both mixture screws after the clean-up?
I'd also make sure you don't have any leaks at the exhaust "channel" under the carb. That looks like one of those older intakes with the "hot-slot". There can be issues using a later carb on those intakes not sealing at the "U" shaped channel in the baseplate.....
-
it is a “hot slot” manifold, but i did follow your directions a few years ago and plugged the holes at the ends of the slots with pipe plugs. i do have a metal spacer with a thin gasket under it, then the 1/4” gasket above.
i currently do not have control with the idle screws, or atleast very little. it will run decent with both seated. checked for coil bind, and that’s not an issue. will double check for vacuum leaks with some propane shortly.
-
just confirmed there is not any vacuum leaks i can find. sprayed carb cleaner all around base of carb, throttle shafts, and intake. no reaction. i do get an immediate reaction with a tiny shot over the primaries though, so i assume i’d get same reaction if there was a leak somewhere.
vacuum at idle now is 16.5”. timing is set at 5 degrees btdc, and VA is adding 19 more for total of 24 at idle. seems to idle very smooth, but still only get about a 30 rpm drop with both mixture screws seated. when i cover the air horn, it does sound better. if i pull off a vacuum line, it immediately revs up 100 rpm. so maybe i’m closer than i thought?
still have no idea where timing “should” be.
-
sorry for all the questions, but wondering about my throttle angle. i can turn down the idle to 450 ish, then any lower and it won’t stay running. is it possible too much of the transfer slot is exposed, not giving me control with the idle screws? i have the idle set at 750 in park right now. i don’t see any nozzle drip, but also have never seen it before, so maybe i’m missing it?
-
well i’m almost certain there is no nozzle drip, i used my inspection camera to watch, and the nozzles are dry.
i also tried leaving a manifold vacuum open and lower the idle speed back to 750, i still had no control with idle screws, and it ran much worse. put it back to where it was. so i’m thinking it wants more idle fuel, and by covering the air horn, i’m acting like a choke, and causing the fuel to come from the main at that point?? as in “shifting the vacuum signal above the throttle plates”?
-
Double check the gasket being used under the carb to make sure it seals off the "U" channel on top of the steel shim gasket. I've seen problems there with using those carbs on the early intakes.
I'm not fond of that much timing at idle and very seldom use MVA on engines like you are tuning. High compression engines don't need nearly as much timing at idle unless the cam has a LOT of overlap.
My last 455 in the Ventura was a perfect example of not wanting, needing or responding well to a lot of timing at idle speed. The idle was simply more stable with improved control using the mixture screws with 10 degrees initial timing. If I tried to hook up the VA using manifold vacuum engine RPM's increases slightly but the idle just wasn't a stable in and out of gear and I lost some sensitivity with the mixture screws. It also developed a very light "skip" in the idle note that you could hear in the exhaust. Ran OK like that but not nearly as solid as it did with less timing in it.
Your idle fuel set-up is a tad lean for what you are doing and that shows up if it likes a lot of timing at idle and any engine speed increase tipping in the choke flap or cutting off some air to it with your hand at idle speed......
-
i installled threaded pipe plugs in the ends of the exhaust slot in the manilfold, so “shouldn’t” be any exhaust gases there to leak into carb. it doesn’t leak to the exterior, as i sprayed all around the base of the carb. unless i’m missing something else there?
should i open up the idle tubes, or DCR? or both?
-
Installing plugs at each end of the exhaust channel was a good move.
However, you still need to use a later model gasket UNDER the carb to seal off the "U" channel. If you remove the carb and flip it over you will see that the factory steel shim gasket BARELY covers the channel and if positioned incorrectly there can be a small vacuum leak there. Same thing IF you use an early style (pre-1972) carb to intake gasket under the carb.
Many of those gaskets are NOT long enough in the front to seal off the channel in the baseplate. That channel often supplies "weak" ported vacuum to a tube in the front of the baseplate to route vacuum to the EGR. It's still a leak either way but may not show up at idle speed.....FWIW
I would reduce the lower IAB's to .067-.070" and do nothing else and see how it responds......
-
sounds good. i don’t believe this ever had an egr, but i’ll take some pics when i take the carb off. pretty sure i made a metal plate to go between the gaskets. either way i’ll take pics, and i’ll try your recommendation, and post the results.
there is a possibility you sent me the metal spacer to go there when i ordered the original kit.
-
cliff, i took the carb part to close up the LIAB, and decided to remeasure everything as best as i could. i used my drill bit set, but it is a cheap one, and after verifying the sizes with calipers, it seems i have a bit of a gap in sizes that i need. so here are the sizes:
UIAB- .066-.071
LIAB- .066-071
MAB- .085
DCR- .051-.058
idle tubes- .034-.037(think you sent .036”)
idle discharge holes- .085
idle bypass air- .093-.095
i have not put anything back together yet, waiting to hear your suggestion if i should still close up the LIAB or not. also i’m thinking it needs more idle fuel, so was thinking of taking idle tubes to .038”. again, will wait to hear what you have to say. more questions in next post!
-
are baseplate numbers supposed to match main body numbers? my base plate number is 17060558. everything seems to line up correctly, but thought i’d check, as i have no idea the history of this carb before i rebuilt it. there are no “rebuilder tags” or anything on it though.
i also have a question about throttl blade angle. i will add some pics showing where the blades sit at my current idle setting(750 in park), and fully closed. I assume because i do not have any nozzle drip(i think!) this is fine. but i assume lower would be better?( in which case i would need more bypass air? thoughts?
-
throttle angles
-
base gasket stack. Metal spacer is homemade from sheet metal.
-
I like to see exact precision with these things, it does make a difference.
The hot slot is still open on one end with your gasket arrangement. It still should seal off since you are using the 1/4" thick open gasket in there but for sure I'd put the stock gasket down correctly first, then a metal one over it to completely seal things off, then the others on top of that deal. Currently you are relying on a very small amount of sealing surface just in front of the primary bores to seal things off.....
-
i will make a new spacer to cover the slot completely. and find the missing numbered drill i need to measure. thx. will post more questions later i’m sure!!
-
okay, i made a new spacer for under the carb, but the 1/4” gasket above the spacer doesn’t cover the slot in the manifold. the thin gasket under the spacer does, as does the new spacer, but the carb won’t put any pressure on the spacer on that end of the slot. is this an issue? i bought a cheap carb kit for the original carb just to get the thin gasket for under the spacer, and it also has thicker gaskets similar to the 1/4” one i got from you, but none of them cover the slot either. i could use another thin gasket above the spacer, if that would be better. or is there a 1/4” gasket that has the little. kick out on the side to cover the slot? hope that question makes sense.
i also shrunk the LIABs to .068” to see what difference it makes. i’ll let you know that part after i fire it up, hopefully tomorrow.
-
fired up the car today, here is where it stands: all specs the same as before, except for LIAB are .068”, and idle tubes are .038.
idle is great at 750, no nozzle drip. engine slows down when idle screws are turned in all the way, with both having effect. my idle vacuum at 750(with VA connected to manifold), is 17.5-18”. idle screws don’t seem to change vacuum, until idle starts to fall off. currently set at 3.5 turns from seated. tried all the way to 6 turns out, no noticeable difference in vacuum. it does pick up about 60 rpm when i pull a vacuum line off. no real change if i cover primaries, unless i cover them almost completely, then i wants to die.
timing is set at 8 degrees base, plus 17 from VA, for total of 25 degrees. haven’t checked mechanical yet, but none in at idle. (i lowered idle to 550, no change in timing).
still need tires before i can road test. i’m not familiar with knowing where the timing needs to be, so advice there would help. i think the carb idle is where it needs to be, but i’ll take suggestions there too.
not sure what to do next, until road test.
-
should add idle doesn’t burn the eyes near as bad now!!
-
Late to the party, but the cam sounds like a typical generic "RV" grind that has been sold under numerous brands over the years. I have one in a '69 396 sold by Blue Racer (wolverine gear - used to be owned by crane). Specs are 204/214 @ 0.050, .476"/.501" lift, 112 LSA. Allowing for some cam grinding inaccuracies, wear, and measurement error, those published specs almost perfectly match what you've measured.
-
Sounds like you've made progress. I'd do some road testing and go back and make adjustments if/as needed.....
-
that’s my plan, although i’m having some issues with tires and wheels!! can’t seem to get much up here. may have to run a used set for a bit. the ones in there now are 40+ years old!! they will turn to dust if i hit the throttle to hard!
cliff, do you have any suggestions on a timing curve to start with? from reading a ton of posts here, it seems you have a slightly different opinion that the “timing 101” article, so i figure i’d ask for your advice. think i have a bit too much centrifugal currently, and possibly a bit too much Vacuum advance as well.
from what i can gather from reading the internet(i know, don’t believe it), but it seems everyone wants as much initial as possible, 34-40 total, and around 10-15 from the vacuum. i am unsure how to determine the best initial. centrifugal i can figure out by driving the car, same for vacuum. just the best initial is confusing me. thx
-
For most engine builds, at least those that are well thought out and good choices made for compression and camshaft events they will like around 10-12 degrees initial timing, about 10-11 (20-22 at the crank) from the mechanical advance, and another 10-14 from the vacuum advance.
I try to avoid all the manifold vs ported vacuum advance debates, but for most engines tuned here I do NOT add any additional timing at idle speed and use a ported source to the VA. Of course saying that on most Forums is a good way to cause a bunch of folks to get their panties all wadded up. Almost immediately you'll get a link to or copy/paste some LONG lengthy VA article in your face. It will be followed by stories of how your engine will overheat if you don't use MVA, or it will use more fuel, not make as much power, or even detonate at high RPM's when the ported source applies the VA at WOT.
ALL of those responses are from very poorly informed sources with little to no experience at all doing this sort of thing, but that's the World we live in today and sadly WAY too many folks have opinions about topics based mostly if not all on Internet Google searches instead of actually doing it for a living or at least having a LOT of hands on experience with these things.
I've lost count as to how many of those aftermarket spring/weight "kits" I've removed from distributors over the years, then hooked the VA back up and to it's original ported source on the carb. I'll go into the distributor and set up the advance curve so no timing is added at idle speed and it advances smooth and steady with increasing RPM's just like the factory set them up.
This "all-in" right off idle NEVER works well and not sure why despite the fact that it's now 2023 and we should be a LOT smarter these days that folks till tune with those JUNK parts. The fact of the matter is here that the better you do with your choices for the engine build, optimum compression, cam events, tight squish, efficient combustion chambers, etc, the LESS timing and fuel the engine will like, want, need and respond well to once placed in service.
The super-quick timing curves and "all-in" right off idle plus running initial timing WAY off the scale at idle are in most cases "crutch" fixes for other issues, like WAY too much duration, LSA too tight, compression ratio too low for the cam, or not nearly enough idle fuel available to the mixtures screws for the engine combo.........
-
It has to be added that most pre-1968 engines uses full manifold vacuum for the ignition vacuum advance. Are all of these engines poorly thought-out? Of course not. The timing set up is a natural part of the design and due to the principles of the combustion engines. For 1968 the goverment decided to reduce the amonts of certain emissions and to accomplish this the engineers reduced timing at idle speeds using a ported source for the vacuum advance. This heated up the cylinder heads for reduced emissions, but engine effiency suffered, dieseling (run-on) occured and idle-stop solenoids became mandotory, and most cars got a fan shroud. So would you use ported or full vacuum for the vacuumadvance? Use what the engine likes the best, there are really no absolute rules to be obeied, the only difference for the function is at idle speeds, and going from full to ported vacuum requires modifications (enrichening) of the carburetor low speed circuit to have an as complete combustion as possible, and possibly adding an idle solenoid.
And, "if everything else fails, follow the manual."
FWIW
-
Yep, I forgot about folks reminding me that engines prior to the late 60's used MVA.
I'd add here that most of if not all of those engines used very low initial timing numbers, then added some additional timing via manifold vacuum advance, but typically not very much. The early engines also had pretty high static compression, and small cams in them on wide LSA. They are making a LOT of vacuum without a lot of initial timing.
Those VA cans for the most part didn't add a lot of timing so they were NOT really using much at idle speed and didn't need to.
This is where the water starts to get muddy with this topic. Folks make POOR choices for these engine builds, following some stupid proverbial "brick wall" of not being able to run more than 9.5 to 1 compression on pump gas, and installing these "modern" profile whiz-bang short seat timing cams on tight LSA's to try to salvage some seat of the pants power. Then they find that with "low" compression and all that overlap that the engine REQUIRES a lot of timing at idle speed. So basically what happens is that they must tune with pretty high initial timing on many of these new builds because they didn't use enough compression, or bought into the BS that tighter LSA and more overlap is somehow going to work better.
Combine that with the resident Forum experts, guru's and "trolls" surfing around on the Internet finding long lengthy articles telling us that we MUST use manifold vacuum advance and butt-loads of initial timing or we're STOOPID. So the water is muddied pretty quickly.
I've finish with a story, as I have lots of them. Decades ago before I knew much about all of this I built a 406 SBC for my K-5 Blazer. I ordered flat top pistons for it not knowing that the compression ratio would be well over 10 to 1 with the heads I was using. I put a stock 350/300hp cam in it topped with stamped steel 1.6 ratio rocker arms. That engine didn't like, want, need or respond well to any timing anyplace. I spent months tuning it, varying the initial timing, total timing, how fast the mechanical curve came in, and varying how much VA was added and went back and forth between ported and manifold vacuum. It HATED manifold vacuum and INSTANTLY developed a slight skip/miss in the idle note if you hooked it up that way. I also had to lower the throttle plates some and mixture screws started to be unresponsive/lacking sensitivity (sound familiar).
When it was all said and done I ended up running zero degrees initial, 26 degrees mechanical and 10 degrees from the vacuum advance. Yep, it ran flawlessly with very little timing added anyplace. I set up the advance curve with pretty heavy springs so all-in was about 3400rpm's.
That engine made so much power I could ROAST all four tires right off the rims. It pulled my race car and trailer like it wasn't even back there, and got WAY better fuel economy than the anemic dished piston 400 engine with crappy smog heads it replaced. You couldn't pour enough timing to the original engine to get it to ping and it didn't make chit for power anyplace, just like all those mid to late 70's Chevy 350 and 400 engines GM put in their trucks and Blazers.
.......continued
-
It was one of my first experiences with high compression on pump gas and that engine ran flawlessly for well over 100,000 miles before I sold the vehicle.
I did a second high compression pump gas engine shortly after, to power my 1967 Impala SS. It was the original 327 using flat top pistons .015" in the holes at TDC, .020" steel shim head gaskets, 350/300hp cam and the stock 291 casting 327 heads. Just like the previous 406 build it ended up at zero degrees initial timing, short timing curve and 10 degrees from the VA (ported source).
I backed the little 327 with a 4L60 overdrive trans and 3.31 rear gears. It also made enough power to ROAST the rear tires right off the rims, idled dead smooth with 18" vacuum, and excellent street manners. It also delivered 18mpg's city and mid 20's highway.
So come on here and tell me that these engine MUST have all this advance in them, and that you need to run the timing clear off the scale at idle speed, bring ALL the mechanical advance in by 1500rpm's, and put another 20-30 degrees timing in from the VA via manifold vacuum and it's absolutely got to be that way or you are missing out on something someplace......I'm all ears folks....
-
Before I forget I'll add in here that both of the engines mentioned above, the 406 and 327 never even thought about running hot, overheating or pinging anyplace, and managed currently available pump fuel w/o any issues anyplace. So there is a lot to be said for tight quench, high compression, well chosen camshafts and turning the heat produced into making power vs putting a butt-load of quench and a lot of overlap into the equation, then dumping all the heat into the cooling system.....FWIW.....
-
that’s why i wanted to hear!! thanks very much cliff. you have been an amazing help with getting this car running. i will leave the timing where is for now, and see how it goes down the road. just waiting for tires to show up.
I wish i had the time to obtain all your experience, but sadly, very few people around here are into cars, let alone race them. most don’t even run carbs anymore. i love working on them, just don’t have enough experience. but i have learned a ton from you and your book. and even just reading your responses to other questions has answered questions i didn’t even know i had. !!
-
Thanks.
One thing is for certain there are a LOT of opinions when it comes to tuning, much like anything else. I really don't have an "opinion", just facts based on decades of actually doing this for living, running the gauntlet, winning some battles, loosing others and improving my knowledge and skill sets the entire time.
I was actually asked to write another book a few years ago on custom tuning these engines, but sadly I had to decline. Just don't have enough time or energy for it.......
-
Back in the early seventies, I picked up a 64 Pontiac Grand Prix. It had a factory 421 4 bbl (real Carter AFB) with a Roto Hydromatic (Slim Jim).
The Slim Jim transmission had no stator / torque converter. L was a vertiable ratio 3.03:1 range. Then when it shifted into S (1.58 ratio), it would couple hard with allmost zero slippage. D range was 1:1 and also coupled hard with all most zero slippage.
The transmission worked well when it felt like it, looking back I think it was tempature sensitive. One time I stayed side by side with a brand new Kawasaki Crazy KZ motor cycle. Don't get my wrong, he beat me but he couldn't loose me..
The only car I can remember from the sixties, that used Ported Spark advance, was was Roto Hydramatic (Slim Jim) equiped 61 to 64 B body Pontiacs with the Trophy Series 389 and 421 engines. If you look at the front, bottom, left corner of the Carter AFB equiped Trophy motors, they had a vacuum outlet for the vacuum advance.
I don't remember if the Tri Power versions came with this feature.
I know the 1958 to 64, four speed Super Hydramatic equiped Bonnevilles and Star Chiefs came with regular manifold vacuum advances. Note that the 4 speed Super Hydramatic transmissions were light years stronger and better performers than the Roto Hydramatics...