QUOTE(bbrock @ Aug 14 2019, 01:14 PM)
I'm a little confused here. First, Jake Raby has written that the vacuum retard significantly reduces emissions so I'm a fan of them. I've also read the retard can give a smooth, lower idle but don't know if that is true. That said, if your advance port is holding a vacuum and you are thinking of just dropping the retard, I don't see the problem just using the canister you have. If the diaphragm was leaking, you wouldn't be able to hold a vacuum on either side (advance or retard). Sounds like yours is more likely leaking at the port fitting. I have two that are leaking the same way. You should be able to just plug the vacuum port on the throttle body if you are willing to give up the benefit of the retard. What am I missing?
You are probably pretty close to correct.
The system was designed around having a functioning vacuum retard.
So the time curve is probably different overall.
The system may not idle as low as it is suppose to without retarding the timing at idle.
With the time manually set retarded at idle to compensate for the failed retard canister, you may not be able to get the proper advance.
From what I recall, the canister has 2 diaphragms, one for the advance and one o for the retard. One is leaking and the other should work normally.
The canister has springs in it and should always return to the same starting point regardless on whether it was advanced or retarded by vacuum.
NOTE: The vacuum advance/retard is separate from the mechanical advance. The 2 types of advance work in a cumulative manner, meaning they add or subtract to/from each other.
I would plug the hose or port at the throttle body and reset my total advance and see how it runs.
Jim
Jim