Support this anecdotal comment with actual data!

Like what?

I was trying to be supportive of your comments regarding inductive ignition systems. Guess I erred in doing so.....

Yes, I know. I just asked that you provide additional info with regard to this statement;

Right on!

To the OP, counterfeit MSD units have been a problem for years and there are many other manufacturers that will not warranty anything sold by Amazon.

Did you buy it from MSD? NO. Was it a third party vendor using Amazon platform you bought it from? Let us know. Anyone can list products on Amazon.... Careful who you criticize and who you think owes you something....

Lets not have yet another thread get derailed by posts about whether or not this product can work. It has been proven multiple times (too many to count) that it works....

Cheers

Really? What about motorcycles? They pretty much all still use CDI.

OEMs don't use CDI on mainstream cars because inductive is cheaper. That is (literally to the accountants) the bottom line. Another factor is that modern engines run lean mixtures which suits the longer burn of inductive. 911s do not.

In high revving, rich mixture and high cylinder pressure applications, CDI is favoured.

If you look at racing, high revving or high cylinder pressure is usually the driver, but in some cases plug fouling is the reason, see below:

Spark-plug

"Besides its tiny size, another interesting feature of the F1 plug is that there's no protruding hook on the bottom. That's because simply there is no room for one. A normal ground J shaped electrode doesn't have a chance of surviving in an F1 motor, It would get crushed by the piston or simply shaken loose by the intense vibration. When an F1 piston is at the top of its stroke, it just about touches the cylinder head. The combustion-chamber volume is mostly made up of the recessed parts in the piston tops that are there to provide room for the valves. Without that hook, the ground electrode is simply the bottom edge of the threads. This design is known as a surface-gap spark plug. Surface-gap spark plug is a spark plug designed to produce sparks along the isolator surface at the ignition end. This spark plug type is also classified as semi-superficial discharge type and superficial discharge type. This spark plug has a smaller heat exposed isolator, therefore, it gets dirty easily. To overcome dirt, a capacitor discharge system is used which reaches rapidly the required voltage to produce the sparks. It is used in engines of high performance like the engines of Formula 1."

What motorcycles other than single/dual cylinder, or two cycle? My GSX1000R doesn't use CDI. It uses COP (coil on plug).

That's one factor. Another is than CDIs have higher failure rates.

You are aware that Porsche produced air cooled engines after the 911SC (CDI), that no longer used CDI, e.g. 911 3.2, 964, & 993, right?


It's of little relevance to relate the air cooled Porsche cylinder head design to a F1 head design to rationalize use of CDI over an inductive discharge ignition.

The article relates to plug fouling, high revving, rich mixture engines from the 90s. We have a few customers running those flat plugs. . Closer to our engines than a modern lean burn motor.

I love my BF hammer but it is not always the right tool for everything. Others might disagree. :)

My 2003 Kawasaki ZX-6RR race bike had a coil on plug setup. So did my pit mates 2002 Yamaha R1 race bike.

My ZX-6RR revved to 15,500 RPM and had a 13:1 compression ratio using a single plug per cylinder. Oh, the ZX-6RR was a homologation special so if CDI were important, it would have had it. This was almost 20 years ago......

Sure. But your hammer is your CDI setup and you seem think it is always the right tool for the job.

My race engine uses a CoP (inductive) setup and makes 102.5 HP per liter at the wheels. Let me say that again: At the wheels!

And then there are ignitions that do individual cylinder knock retard. Like mine.

Anyone here running it? Remember, when you adjust timing for "no knock" you are adjusting it to keep the worst cylinder quiet, robbing power from the rest. Yes, you can say my system doesn't make power but it allows you to safely extract more power from the engine.

Then there is the question of how are you determining there is no knock when you are setting it? By human ear alone? A good knock detection system is trying to detect knock that you CAN'T hear, while ignoring engine noise that you CAN hear.

Some tuners use knock headphones, some use a purpose built knock detector like the Phormula or the Gizmo K-Mon, but they are almost as much as my system and they do nothing but provide a warning if for some reason the engine starts knocking. Also, these systems are typically removed by the tuner after adjusting timing, leaving the engine at risk.

Sorry for going off topic, but modern aircooled engines have this feature, why not add it to the older ones. Because it doesn't say Bosch on the box?

No, I think CDI is the right tool for 911 rich mixture engines. Which is what Porsche thought too and they held on to it for 20 years...

mysocal911 'Dave', however, thinks inductive is superior in every application. I cannot agree with that.

I think the perfect ignition system is going to take the input of several designers with different approaches that reach a compromise that fits all criteria and engine builds, but in the end is mediocre for what it can't do. Wait, that is why we have more than one design out there! Jonny's design really needs a low inductance coil to work properly while mine(really Lloyd Winterburn's) needs a higher inductance coil to make the extra sparks. Those two CDI designs will never mesh. Timing adjustments can be tailored to either type which your designs could do. Make it CDI and you will have a winner. Fred

I am using a MoTec M130 system with knock sensors on each bank. My setup is able to detect knock on each cylinder and adjusts timing and/or fuel on a per cylinder basis.

Anyone have a guess what this is?



http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1620600434.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1620600434.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1620600434.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1620600434.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1620600434.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1620600434.jpg

just spitballing: dizzy with individual vacuum advance?

Scott:

Shirley and I showed our unit to MoTeC USA in 1992. We had it on our 1981 Ford EXP. I was running about 10° too much timing with 87 octane. I had a switch that made it easy to disable the system, built into the knock retard display. Flip it one way to activate and watch the LED'S show it's retarding individual cylinders, flip it the other way and listen to it knock.

With that combination of fuel and timing, it was easy to induce knock. With the system activated, it controlled beautifully.

We arrived about 7PM I think, and they gave us the grand tour of JGM Automotive Tooling. Then I gave the keys to the two principles and they took the car out while Shirley and I waited.

When they returned we all went to a conference room to talk. They wanted it very badly. We wanted to sell complete systems, as we do today, they wanted to buy the microcontroller with my secured code. They wanted MoTeC in Australia to design a new board to accept my chip. Shirley said "That's the heart of our system, and you wouldn't sell your heart, would you?"

They made a very generous offer, but Shirley was kicking me under the table not to accept, so I offered to make a small module with the chip and supporting hardware (crystal, etc), fully encapsulated in epoxy but with pins to plug into a socket. They insisted on the bare chip, so no deal was made.

I think MoTeC released their knock system in 2010. They had two versions. One is an external module, the other is internal. What I had proposed eighteen years earlier.

Designed at the World Headquarters of J&S Electronics. A spare bedroom in our condo.

I try to plug my stuff from time to time on different forums. I know I am often seen as an annoying guy hawking my wares, but I have invented a lot of cool ignition stuff. It's more "look what I did" than an actual sales pitch.

Shirley died recently from cancer. I found a video on her phone she made in 2016 and put it on youtube. It shows me testing an earlier version of the above system. I had to set the project aside the last three years while I cared for her:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0b3mFWPIqI

I suppose this is to suggest that MoTec could not have figured out how to do this properly sometime in the intervening 29 years....

With the MoTec M130, I can see the knock on a screen as it is happening while tuning. I can set the thresholds of when, what type (timing or fuel or both), and how much intervention is applied on a per cylinder basis. I can log these interventions so they can be tracked.

Not at all. It's just that I was first, and it took them a long time before they implemented it.

Yes, they have more bells and whistles. I'm one guy with practically zero resources except some intellect and a will to do it.

But one may ask a question, why do you have to intervene at all? That's the brute force approach.

I was inspired by the Bosch system when I read about it on the 944 turbo, in 1987. The system I released four years later was better than the '87 Bosch system.

No, but I see low voltage stuff too close to high voltage stuff. If that is fibre optic, then not such a problem, but perhaps you could elaborate? Guessing is not a game I enjoy. Fred

r