<VV> Effect of Reduced Quench on Jet Size and Timimg

[Mikeamauro at aol.com]

I've recently modified a 110, whereas the compression ratio remained stock, 
but the quench height was reduced to .032. The purpose of this work was not so 
much for added HP, but for the ability to run the car without destroying the 
engine due to detonation. The work has been successful: the vehicle (a PG with 
327 rear and hi-stall converter) is operated in Florida; now, with A/C on, 
running 18-degrees of initial advance and premium fuel, knock and/or ping is 
nearly nonexistent. This much advance was not possible prior to the head 
modifications...with anything past 12-degrees, engine produced the "bunch of marbles" 
sound. I'm now on a quest to improve gas mileage from the current 15-mpg. The 
car is equipped with a Safeguard (with remote knock display) and dual O2 
sensors (with fuel ratio display...car has dual exhausts). I've progressively moved 
down to .049 jets with no apparent negative effects on performance or knock 
resistance (the Safeguard sensitivity is set high, yet only barley comes into 
play even on the hottest day with A/C on full blast). Gas mileage has improved 
from 11 to 15-mpg. The A-F ratio, as the jets have been leaned, has gone from a 
very "fat" 11-1 down to about 12-1. I'm considering continuing to reduce jet 
size, but am worried a bit about going below a size ever used by GM in any 
Corvair (I believe .049 was the smallest ever applied by the General.). Question: 
does the more homogeneous mixture, due to the now tight quench height and 
related turbulence, make higher A-F ratios possible? Also, because of the more 
compact combustion chamber, cannot/should not the ignition timing be backed off 
somewhat from stock? Thanks in advance for any opinions given.
Mike Mauro