Thanks for all the usefull input.
Some info I have found out, that may help others.
The gap under the fork for the float chamber is stated by many publications as 3/8" (9.5mm ish). This what I have been setting to. However, when I took my MC2 to Burlen fuel systems, I was given some hand written notes from 1956 on MC2 setup proceedures. (If I could find a way of attaching a copy of it to this forum to share I would)
And as always there is a one liner at the bottom that states " Fuel level should be within 3/16" (4.76mm) of the jet orifice".
Now, wIth a 3/8 test bar under the forks this gives a float level of approx 10-12mm below the orifice.
I checked again with Burlen Fuel systems who checked another MC2 from there refurbished stock and this gave a similar measurement of fuel under the orfice.
By trial and error, I adjusted the float chamber to give me approx 3/16" fuel level under the orrifice jet (Normal running position of Mixture lever), which gives a gap under the float forks of approx 5.5mm.
With this seeting the engine starts first or second kick when hot.
Additionally there is no tickler on the MC2, only the mixture lever which lowers the main jet in the fuel level and a thinner part of the needle, great once the the engine is running creating a partial vaccuum over the main jet to suck fuel up, but not much use when there is no air flow over the venturri bridge in the carb which can cause the very cold starting problems.
However, I found that if you lean the bike to the right hand side as far as you can with the fuel tap on for a second or two, this will artificially flood the main jet due to the float chamber being on the left hand side (float chamber fuel level is higher than the main jet orifice) . This I found aided the cold starting by effectively floading the venturi with fuel the same as tickling a good old AMAL carb.
With regards to the ignition timing, Points opening at TDC is the maximum retarded position. Does anyone have any info on the max advance position or at what RPM max advance should be reached?.
These modern ethanol fuels are here to stay I am afraid, and I have been reading about retarding the ignition slightly to compensate for the faster burn rate of ethanol. Has anyone any info or comments on this. I think this is going to be a pain in the preverbial for all us vintage bike nuts especially when they increase the amount of Ethanol in fuel the years to come !!!. For those that are technically minded here is a usefull link about Ethanol and how wonderfully good it is for the green policies but really bad for us vintage engine nuts, especially the water absorbsion, corrosion, and generally nasty nature of this stuff.http://ethanolrfa.3c...c_rbm6bdgh3.pdf
For those still awake thankyou for reading, I have now amassed a large amount of info on this, so if you need any help or advice, please PM me.