 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Dodge / Dodge Trucks / January 2009Ignition question involving use of ballast resistor
1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed I recently posted on rec.autos.tech about the problems I was having with an MSD 5900 Blaster ignition and an MSD 8202 Baster 2 coil. It seems I could use one or the other with no problem, either the MSD ignition with the stock coil or the MSD coil with the stock ignition, but if I had both installed I would get a stumble on accelerating from a dead stop. From this behavior I deduced that, for some reason, the problem was being caused by too much ignition voltage. To test out that theory I installed a 1 ohm ballast resistor in line with the +12 volts going to the coil. Voila, the problem vanished and I was back to strong, smooth acceleration from a dead stop. So then I tried a 1/2 ohm ballast resistor and the stumble returned, but not as bad, so I went back to the 1 ohm resistor. The stock coil has about a 1.5 ohm primary and the MSD coil has a .7 ohm or so primary. I don't know what impact this has on the situation but it's info that I have and I figured I might as well throw it in if I am going to all the trouble of posting this and you are going to all the trouble of reading it. Now we get to meat of the my puzzlement. The ignition wires that I have on the engine measure about 3000 ohms per foot. For about $45 I can buy some MSD Street Fire wires that are only 500 ohms per foot. I know a bit about electricity, but not enough to know whether or not these wires would enable me to run the MSD ignition and coil without the ballast resistor. After all, the point of an MSD ignition upgrade is to get longer stronger spark to the plug. I don't have a clue as to why the engine stumbles with both the MSD ignition and coil installed. From the symptoms it seems to me that it must be because of too much voltage at the coil tower, but why that might be causing the problem is beyond me. Could it be because the high voltage is leaking out to ground somewhere on the way to the plugs? I checked the engine at idle in a dark area at night and saw no evidence of arcing. Could the high resistance wires be the cause? If so, what is the rationale? I can't think of one. Well that's it. At present, I am more than happy with the ballast resistors. The truck runs great. Just curious as hell as to what might be going on. Jack ROTFLMAO !!! Jack, The purpose of a ballast resister is to allow a lower voltage ignition coil to be used. The reason for this is that when the starter motor is engaged, battery voltage will drop to say 8 V. You will note that when wired correctly the ballast resister is bypassed at that time allowing the coil to create adequate spark during lower battery voltage conditions . When the starter is then disengaged the resister bypass is also dropped and the resister is now in play to reduce excessive heating of the coil. Electronic ignitions are very sensitive to coil configurations, as they provide coil drive and can be permanently damaged if the DC resistance of the coil is too low. Follow the manufacturer's recommendations. Steve > 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > Jack > Jack, > The purpose of a ballast resister is to allow a lower voltage ignition coil [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > low. Follow the manufacturer's recommendations. > Steve Steve, thanks for the heads up on the wiring. I didn't run the B+ wire to the coil from the starter relay because I felt that the MSD ignition and MSD coil together would provide enough spark going through the ballast resistor even with the engine cranking. It proved to be true. The engine starts up immediately with the 12+ volts from the ignition switch going to the coil through the ballast resistor. I was mainly intent at the time to test the idea that the stumble problem was being caused by trying to push too high a voltage to the plug gap. The ballast resistor was my way of reducing the voltage at the plug gap while using both the MSD coil and ignition together. The ballast resistor is rated at 1 ohm and measures 1 ohm. The Blaster coil primary is rated at .7 ohms and measures .6 ohms. The resistance of the coil primary of the MSD Blaster coil and the added ballast resistor measures 1.6 ohms, all measured on a digital meter. The recommended primary resistance for the coil on this vehicle is 1.34 to 1.55 ohms. I don't know what stress is being placed on the spark control computer when using the MSD Blaster coil with the stock ignition and no ballast resistor, but the engine runs great under this configuration, with very smooth acceleration a dead stop. The same is true when using the MSD ignition box with the stock coil. The problem of a stumble on accelerating from a dead stop happens only when both are used together. With the addition of the ballast resistor the computer now sees what it was designed to see at the primary winding, so there should be no problem of the kind you are warning me about, having too low resistance at the primary. As to what is causing the stumble on accelerating from a dead stop using the MSD ignition and coil and no ballast, I am still in the dark. After all, the engines performs great with just the coil and no ballast. Jack >> 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed >> [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >> >> Jack > 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > resistor and the stumble returned, but not as bad, so I went back to the > 1 ohm resistor. Normally when all is working as it should, what limits voltage is the spark plug gap and the engine compression (actually the absolute pressure inside the cylinder). A wider gap or more pressure will cause the voltage to climb higher before it will cross the gap. acceleration from a stop often will produce the greatest pressure inside the cylinder. > Could it be because the high voltage is leaking out to ground somewhere > on the way to the plugs? Yes it could be that - If the voltage climbs too high too fast it finds another path instead of the spark plug gap. Ultimately, your ballast resister doesn't limit the voltage at the spark plug but it does slow down the rise in voltage which means that some other points in the secondary won't get quite as high. If stray arcing in the secondary is what is happening it would be likely that it would get progressively worse over time as the stray arcs develops a carbon trail that the current can follow more easily. The cause could also be in the primary there may be something that saturates in the primary or even something intended to limit voltage/current to protect against damage. -jim >I checked the engine at idle in a dark area at > night and saw no evidence of arcing. Could the high resistance wires be [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Jack > Normally when all is working as it should, what limits voltage is the > spark [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > higher before it will cross the gap. acceleration from a stop often will > produce the greatest pressure inside the cylinder. This was especially true when the Kettering system was used. When capacitive discharged systems came along, it pretty much stopped being true. Their rise times are so short and transformer action so definite that they usually put up much more constant ignition performance. I dont know what the multiple spark discharge systems do. Are they CD, or something else? Some early studies showed that, all things being equal, a small single spark ignited the fuel as well as anything else. Some university studies in England showed that high performance ignition systems which gave significant gains were possible, but they were not necessarily simple and cheap either. It is my opinion, and nothing more, that there is little to be gained from systems like the MSD for normal driving. For racing, maybe.... > > Normally when all is working as it should, what limits voltage is the > > spark [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > capacitive > discharged systems came along, it pretty much stopped being true. What stopped being true? The statement you are responding to has never stopped being true. It may have become unimportant to know that it is true, but that is hardly the same as being not true.. > Their > rise times are so short and transformer action so definite that they usually > put > up much more constant ignition performance. How does this information relate to solving the OP's problem? The rate at which voltage is developed in the coil is going to be a function of resistance and inductance no matter what. Which is why changing resistance produces different results. > I dont know what the multiple spark discharge systems do. Are they CD, or > something else? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > systems > like the MSD for normal driving. For racing, maybe.... His intent is related to neither of those - it is to improve emissions. -jim > I dont know what the multiple spark discharge systems do. Are they CD, or > something else? They're usually ordinary flyback systems, just like points systems. I never saw a CD multistrike system, but that was long ago, when every CD system was triggered by an SCR, a device that can be turned on but not turned off. But since then, high voltage, high current devices that can be turned off have become more common, so multistrike CD should be easier to implement. I had a double-strike CD system that consisted of 2 separate CD units because I didn't know how to make anything better. > It is my opinion, and nothing more, that there is little to be gained from > systems like the MSD for normal driving. For racing, maybe.... True, thanks to the EPA and its stringent emissions standards that include cold weather, cold engine conditions. >> Normally when all is working as it should, what limits voltage is the >> spark [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I dont know what the multiple spark discharge systems do. Are they CD, or > something else?] HLS, the unit that I have is the MSD 5900 Blaster. It is not multiple spark, but one strong spark through 20° degrees of rotation and it is induction discharge, not capacitive. But most, if not all, of MSD's other ignition units, with the exception of the MSD 5, are capacitive discharge. > Some early studies showed that, all things being equal, a small single spark > ignited the fuel as well as anything else. Some university studies in [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > systems > like the MSD for normal driving. For racing, maybe.... I installed the MSD components in the hope that they would help pass California smog requirements. I had to swap out the original feedback carb for a non-feedback version because the mixture control solenoid in the feedback carb is no longer being provided by anyone as a replacement part and owners of vehicles with this carbs are left to fend for themselves. I had the non-feedback carb installed the last time I had the truck smogged and it passed, but only just. I was 2 ppm below the max for HCs. >> 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed >> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > -jim Thanks, jim, for the feedback. I ran the engine at idle in the dark and could see no evidence of arcing. Of course this is different from accelerating the engine under a load from idle. At any rate, if the problem is caused by current leak, do you think that changing the plug wires from 3000 ohms per foot to 500 ohms per foot would help? It would only cost me about $50 or less to find out, but I hate throwing money at a problem to see what sticks. Jack >> I checked the engine at idle in a dark area at >> night and saw no evidence of arcing. Could the high resistance wires be [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >> Jack > >> I checked the engine at idle in a dark area at > >> night and saw no evidence of arcing. Could the high resistance wires be > >> the cause? If so, what is the rationale? I can't think of one. My guess is the cause is in the primary not the secondary. But if it was due to a leak in the secondary you would probably have to be looking at it in the dark while it was happening. Changing the spark plug wire resistance shouldn't have any effect. Current doesn't really flow thru the wires until the spark plug starts to arc. The tail end of the wave form will be affected but not the initial spike. Getting rid of the resistance won't change the peak voltage in a measurable way. It is not clear how this is going to help with your emissions. If the mixture ia a bit rich all the spark in the world is going to get the extra fuel to burn. If it is a tad lean it might help, but it doesn't sound like that is the case. -jim > >> Well that's it. At present, I am more than happy with the ballast > >> resistors. The truck runs great. Just curious as hell as to what might > >> be going on. > >> > >> Jack >>>> I checked the engine at idle in a dark area at >>>> night and saw no evidence of arcing. Could the high resistance wires be [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > -jim I will find out soon what the emissions are. I just got back from a freeway run and some stop and go driving and the only problem was a sag when I floored it at about 25 to 35 mph, like the accelerator pump was out of adjustment or the power valve was not opening. I tweaked the pump linkage a bit but it wasn't out that much. I checked timing and it is at spec. Checking the power valve will involve tearing into the carb, which I will save for another day. It could be that the main jets are a tad too small, but before I do anything else I will take it to a smog shop for a dry run to see what the emissions are. At least the ignition system seems to be performing okay and that was my main worry. >From this behavior I deduced that, for some reason, the problem was >being caused by too much ignition voltage. To test out that theory I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >resistor and the stumble returned, but not as bad, so I went back to the >1 ohm resistor. The ballast resistor does more than just change the voltage, it can change the shape of the pulse through the coil as well. >Now we get to meat of the my puzzlement. The ignition wires that I have >on the engine measure about 3000 ohms per foot. For about $45 I can buy [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >resistor. After all, the point of an MSD ignition upgrade is to get >longer stronger spark to the plug. No, using a wire with a lower resistance will _slightly_ increase the voltage to the plug. But honestly, the difference is very small because the voltage is so high and current so low that it takes a lot of resistance to cause much drop. >I don't have a clue as to why the engine stumbles with both the MSD >ignition and coil installed. From the symptoms it seems to me that it >must be because of too much voltage at the coil tower, but why that >might be causing the problem is beyond me. What you want is an ignition system analyzer that will let you look at the signal coming out of the coil on a CRT. This will tell you what is really happening when you put the ballast resistor in. Ask older shops around town if they still have an analyzer kicking around. >Well that's it. At present, I am more than happy with the ballast >resistors. The truck runs great. Just curious as hell as to what might >be going on. The scope will tell you, and without the scope you have no real chance of seeing what is happening. --scott  Signature"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." >>From this behavior I deduced that, for some reason, the problem was >> being caused by too much ignition voltage. To test out that theory I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The ballast resistor does more than just change the voltage, it can change > the shape of the pulse through the coil as well. What role does the resistor play when voltage is cut off to the primary? This is what causes the secondary to produce its voltage, right, the sudden collapse of the primary field? Does the inductance produced by the expanding field of the primary limit the rate of expansionof the field? Is this why there is not a high voltage produced in the secondary when voltage is applied to the primary? Could it be that the lower resistance of the MSD coil primary over the stock coil, .6 to .7 ohms, compared to 1.3 to 1.5 ohms, coupled with the greatly increased voltage to the primary from the MSD ignition could cause the field in the primary to expand too quickly and cause a weak spark at the plug at the wrong time? >> Now we get to meat of the my puzzlement. The ignition wires that I have >> on the engine measure about 3000 ohms per foot. For about $45 I can buy [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > the voltage is so high and current so low that it takes a lot of resistance > to cause much drop. Scott, this was what I suspected. It seemed to me that the higher the voltage, the less impact high resistance wires would have. My thought was that perhaps the higher resistance wires was causing current to leak out somewhere besides the plug gap. >> I don't have a clue as to why the engine stumbles with both the MSD >> ignition and coil installed. From the symptoms it seems to me that it [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > seeing what is happening. > --scott Thanks, scott. I really appreciate your input. Jack >>From this behavior I deduced that, for some reason, the problem was >> being caused by too much ignition voltage. To test out that theory I [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > seeing what is happening. > --scott The modern equipment would be the Snap On Modis or the Snap On Vantage Pro. >>From this behavior I deduced that, for some reason, the problem was >> being caused by too much ignition voltage. To test out that theory I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The ballast resistor does more than just change the voltage, it can change > the shape of the pulse through the coil as well. And suppresses "ringing" in the circuit. And given the fact that the electronics that drive the coil are basically analog amplifiers, it changes their output current profile directly too. > 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > going to all the trouble of posting this and you are going to all the > trouble of reading it. I'm going to say MSD designed the output section of their ignition system wrong, and maybe when the resistance is low, it goes into current-limiting mode to protect itself. Another possibility is the high voltage protection for the output section (typically some zener diodes and capacitor) is interacting badly with the coil primary. > Now we get to meat of the my puzzlement. The ignition wires that I have > on the engine measure about 3000 ohms per foot. For about $45 I can buy [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > resistor. After all, the point of an MSD ignition upgrade is to get > longer stronger spark to the plug. Low resistance actually doesn't help in most cases, probably because it slows the rise time (turn-on) of the current, and I've heard of many people running into trouble when they switched to low-resistance plug wires. High voltage leakage shouldn't be a problem with modern (1980s and later) distributor caps, rotors, and wires. On the other hand after I installed a CD ignition in my 1975 Dodge Dart, 2 caps cracked in a few months. A slight modification to limit the primary voltage to under 400V stopped this. I would suspect that too much primary current just supersaturates the coil and it doesn't discharge properly, inhibiting the next charge/ discharge cycle. Dan <do_not_spam_me@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:1a3ecaa3-e0ab-49af-bac6- > Low resistance actually doesn't help in most cases, probably because > it slows the rise time (turn-on) of the current, and I've heard of > many people running into trouble when they switched to low-resistance > plug wires. I suspect the pure resistance is less of a factor than the distributed impedance, wouldnt you imagine? ><do_not_spam_me@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:1a3ecaa3-e0ab-49af-bac6- >> Low resistance actually doesn't help in most cases, probably because [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >impedance, wouldnt you >imagine? I am not really sure... I think you can look at the cable as a lumped-sum anyway. It's pretty much just the resistance of the cable that will affect how much the coil will ring on the tail end of the pulse, and I think that is the big deal. The capacitance between the cable conductors and ground COULD make a difference, but they are going to be different in every installation depending on how the cables are laid out. The series inductance of the cable should be minimal. --scott Signature"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." >> <do_not_spam_me@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:1a3ecaa3-e0ab-49af-bac6- >>> Low resistance actually doesn't help in most cases, probably because [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > of the cable should be minimal. > --scott I think the whole idea behind the MSW (magneto-suppressive, spiral wound solid wire) wires was to reduce the d.c. resistance (relative to resistive core wires - a thing of the past) for increased spark current, but increased inductance to keep the EMI/RFI (radio interferenece) within reasonable limits - kind of the best of both worlds ("hotter" spark, low radio interference). SignatureBill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > I am not really sure... I think you can look at the cable as a lumped-sum > anyway. It's pretty much just the resistance of the cable that will > affect > how much the coil will ring on the tail end of the pulse, and I think that > is the big deal. The inductance and the capacitance form the resonant circuit. The resistance is related to the Q, or quality factor. The resonant circuit is responsible for the ringing. I believe, anyway>) >> I am not really sure... I think you can look at the cable as a lumped-sum >> anyway. It's pretty much just the resistance of the cable that will [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >resistance >is related to the Q, or quality factor. Yes, but the thing is that the coil inductance and the distributed inductance of the coil are so enormous that the cable doesn't contribute a whole lot. The cable impedance is pretty heavily swamped. Someone mentioned spiral-wound cables for RF suppression... I have never used such a thing, but they could have enough series inductance to change things. The most important part of that is that they will be a low pass filter. >The resonant circuit is responsible for the ringing. > >I believe, anyway>) It is, but the coil resonance itself is so substantial that the cable shouldn't change it TOO much. It would be fun to measure it with a scope, though, and see how changing the cable length alters the waveform. It bet it doesn't do much, but it would be fun to see. --scott Signature"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." >> 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > high voltage protection for the output section (typically some zener > diodes and capacitor) is interacting badly with the coil primary. MSD recommends that these two units be used together on an ignition system such as the one in the 87 Dodge Dakota 3.9L. I am not saying that this means squat, just that this is their recommendation. The MSD ignition alone was causing the stock coil to get so hot that I could not keep my fingers on for more than a second after a good run, which is why I got the coil that MSD recommends. >> Now we get to meat of the my puzzlement. The ignition wires that I have >> on the engine measure about 3000 ohms per foot. For about $45 I can buy [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > months. A slight modification to limit the primary voltage to under > 400V stopped this. Ah, this interesting. How did you accomplish this, if I might ask? MSD specs the 5900 as producing 420-450 volts to the primary. The stock 12+ wire to coil remains and MSD adds another wire from the ignition unit to the + coil terminal and replaces the signal wire from the computer with another wire from the unit and the stock signal wire is connected to a third wire from the unit. A fourth wire goes to ground. Here is a link to a PDF file of the wiring instructions for the unit: http://www.msdignition.com/uploadedFiles/MSDIgnitioncom/Products/Ignitions/5900_ instructions.pdf Figure 2 is the one that applies. How might I lower the voltage as you have, rather than installing a ballast resistor in the +12 volt wire to the coil. Oh, and thanks for sending the schematics for the different ignition systems. Now that I have my system stabilized and running well, I plan to check them out in detail. Jack >>> 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed >>> [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > > Figure 2 is the one that applies. Shouldn't you be using figure 4 for your truck, unless you have switched to a points distributor ? Have you tried wiring it using figure 4 to see if it would run any better ? >>>> 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed >>>> [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > a points distributor ? Have you tried wiring it using figure 4 to see if it > would run any better ? That's what I thought when I first got the unit over a year and half ago and that's the way that I first wired it up. Didn't start that way. I got nothing but cranking when I turned the key to start. Again, MSD is totally remiss in their instructions about wiring up a *Hall effect* pickup as opposed to a *magnetic* pickup. One has to dig into their forums to discover that a Hall effect pickup is wired the same as a points system and not as a magnetic pickup system. Notice that a Hall effect pickup is not mentioned in the wiring instructions. However, preceding the Figure 2 diagram is a key to the colored wires of the 5900 unit. Notice that the white wire is for "Points or *electronic ignition trigger*". On my truck, 87 Dak with 3.9L engine, the Hall effect signal from the distributor is sent to the spark control computer where it is processed and amplified and then sent to the coil. This is the same signal that a points system sends directly to the coil and, after much frustration and finally an email to MSD, I realized is the "electronic ignition trigger" referred to in the instructions. Both are to be connected to the white wire. I can only assume from the wiring setup in Figure 4 that the signal from the *magnetic pickup* is already processed with spark advance information inside the distributer, as there is no provision for it once the wiring harness from the distributor is disconnected. The 5900 has no timing processing, just firing from a signal fed to it. This puzzled me at the time that I tried to use that wiring scheme, but it seemed like the one to use at the time. The following from an MSD tech spells out how to wire up a Hall effect pickup to an MSD ignition. The unit is different from the 5900, but the principal is the same: "If this is a Hall Effect Pick up, then you can use the white wire of the MSD Unit. The white wire is an input that can be triggered through a point or amplified style pick up, such as a hall effect. The other method is a magnetic pick up. Thanks, msdtech2" https://www.msdignition.com/forum/showthread.php?t=653 > 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed > > I recently posted on rec.autos.tech about the problems I was having with > an MSD 5900 Blaster ignition and an MSD 8202 Baster 2 coil. It seems I > could use one or the other with no problem, either the MSD ignition with 2 ppm HC is easy. Retard the timing 2 degrees and it will drop right down... Just to cover the bases... Is the Cat OK? a temp gun should show a hotter outlet than inlet. Does it run hot enough? No 160 TStat? Absolutely no misfires? A dollar bill held up to the exhaust should not vibrate. HTH, Ben >> 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > HTH, > Ben Thanks, Ben, I'll definitely keep that in mind when the time comes. 5 BTDC shouldn't look that much different from 7 BTDC. There has been an annoying misfire at idle for quite some time, although with the current ignition system that I described elsewhere on the thread, the idle seems to have smoothed out considerably. But the smog test I have to take doesn't cover idle. It covers 15 and 25 mph on a dynamometer. Sometime in the next week or two I am going to get a dry run at the smog shop to see what it's reading. > >> 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Jack, from readin gall the above posts, my GUESS is that the combination taht casues the stumble is for some reason casuing a WEAK spark. As one poster said, it is hardest to develop spark during acceleration when compression is the highest, so I guess there is some interaction in the electronics and the coil such that you have a poor spark at that time. Somehow the 1 Ohm ballast cures the interaction. I would leave the 1 Ohm in the circuit and be happy, but if you want to analyze this further I agree with another postr, you will need a scope or ignition analyzer to look at the SECONDARY waveforms and see just what is going on with and without the ballast. also as far as I know, the purpose of resistance plug wires is to reduce radio interference. They don't really lower or raise the voltage of the spark AT THE PLUG. You are doing a great job at narrowing in on this.. but I think you need a scope to get to the next step. Mark >>>> 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed >>>> I recently posted on rec.autos.tech about the problems I was having with [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > Mark Thanks, Mark for the encouragement. I am *more* than happy with the ballast resistor. After I got things working right by putting one in the system, I googled "ballast" at the msdigntion.com/forum site: http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=ballast+site:msdignition .com/forum and came up with a whole slew of posts regarding using a ballast resistor to compensate for the low primary resistance of the MSD coil when used on a mechanical distributor ignition that uses a magnetic or Hall effect pickup and electronics to fire the coil. The primary of the MSD coil is .7 ohms and the replacement stock coil that I had been using was 1.7 ohms measured with a digital meter. MSD mentions nothing in their instruction sheet for the coil or ignition about using a ballast resistor except when points are involved. Neither is this info on any of the pages of their website except buried in the forums in answer to questions of people who are trying to install their units. So, according to the advice of the MSD techs, I did the correct thing, but it sure would have been a helluva lot less time and nerve consuming had they discussed the need for a ballast resistor in a non-points distributor in their instructions. In all the advice to people asking about this the techs would invariably state that *NOT* using a ballast resistor could result in the failure of the electronics that fires the coil in non-points systems. You would think that a company like MSD would be more thorough in explaining in their installation instructions the correct way to wire up their units without causing damage to your vehicles electronics, but here we are. I'm glad I held off buying low resistance wires. It didn't make sense to me that they would correct the problem I was having. > makol...@yahoo.com wrote: > >>>> 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed [quoted text clipped - 77 lines] > > - Show quoted text - in addition, looking at the pdf of the instruction sheet, the fact that they specify those squeeze on connectors that bite through the insulation worries me. i've used them quite a bit but they are problematic on several levels and their use in a supposed high-class high-performance etc. product kind of sits me back a minute, and that combined with the lack of proper support you're mentioning really makes me wonder about these guys. even if their basic engineering is good, it seems their applications and marketing torpedoes the whole ship. looking at the pdf of the instruction sheet, the fact > that they specify those squeeze on connectors that bite through the > insulation worries me. i've used them quite a bit but they are > problematic on several levels and their use in a supposed high-class > high-performance etc. I had a 72 Dodge 318 PU that I replaced the ignition with a later Dodge Van electronic ignition. I had squeeze on connector problems with it after a few years. I replaced everything with Mil Spec connectors and all was OK. product kind of sits me back a minute, and that > combined with the lack of proper support you're mentioning really > makes me wonder about these guys. even if their basic engineering is > good, it seems their applications and marketing torpedoes the whole > ship. These are my thoughts also. Too many aftermarket products, particularly electronic, are market by folks who know little about their products. There are a few who do but they alwys turn out to be manufactured by Industry leaders like Bendix, Delco and the like. The ones that the big three turn to with problems. Like the brakes on my Chevrolet P30 RV chassis. Bob AZ Bob AZ wrote: > I had a 72 Dodge 318 PU that I replaced the ignition with a later > Dodge Van electronic ignition. I had squeeze on connector problems > with it after a few years. I replaced everything with Mil Spec > connectors and all was OK... A lot of time the problem with the insulation displacement type connectors is that people don't pay attention to the proper size (red, blue, or yellow) for the gage of wire. That is particularly a problem with using one made for bigger wire on smaller wire (say, blue connector good for up to 18 ga wire but used on 20 or 22 gage wire). But, yeah, otherwise, due to exposure to air and moisture, they are not nearly as reliable over the long term as a soldered or crimped-and-soldered connection. Crimped (no solder) is good if done right - i.e., right size connector for the gage of wire, and good quality crimp tools - none of this squeeze it flat with pliers routine. So much about making connections is dependent on the skill and care of the person doing the work. Shipping typical consumer (poor) quality connectors to be installed by the typical consumer is a recipe for poor reliability. But the typical consumer wants quick and easy vs. takes a little time and care to do, and the manufacturer/marketer wants low cost and to make it easy for what he knows is his ignorant, cheap, and impatient consumer (not saying you are any of those - just generalizing). If they put better type connectors in the kit, they may lose sales due to cost or higher skill levels required for installation (and you could credibly argue that they eventually lose sales due to poor reliability with cheap connectors, but unfortunately the company who cheaps out will probably have the overall better profitability record (in today's ebay/consumer market). SignatureBill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > A lot of time the problem with the insulation displacement type > connectors is that people don't pay attention to the proper size (red, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > size connector for the gage of wire, and good quality crimp tools - none > of this squeeze it flat with pliers routine. Bill Just a tip that many might use. When faced with using a too large terminal just strip the wire a little more than twice as long as needed, bend the wire over double and then crimp in place. IOW use the additional wire as a filler. I also agree on using the proper crimp tool. I do hate those cheap ones like the brand name "Crimp". Fortunately in many years I have collected enough crimping tools that I can do almost all of them. And also there was a thread seveal years agou about whether to solder and crimp or just crimp. Related to mostly battery cables. It was noted that GM crimped only. Less trouble with corrosion as in green stuff. The connection then needs to be sealed. Bob AZ Bob AZ wrote: >> A lot of time the problem with the insulation displacement type >> connectors is that people don't pay attention to the proper size (red, [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Bob AZ Good suggestion about doubling up on the wire, Bob - I think I've done that myself a couple of times - didn't actually double it over, but stuck a second piece of wire in there. For sealing a crimped or plain soldered connection, I've taken electrical grade (acetic acid-free) silicone sealer and covered the joint with it, then slid a piece of shrink tubing over it and shrunk the shrink tubing - fun watching the excess get squoze out. Wiped off whatever squeezed out. I think I got that idea from my Dad when I was a kid - I think that's how they did wire splicing with submersible pumps when they were a new item - maybe still do. The pumps came with the splice kit including the sealer - that was in a time when your typical silicone sealer had acetic acid in it, so the acetic acid-free type was provided with the kit. SignatureBill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > Bob AZ wrote: >>> A lot of time the problem with the insulation displacement type [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > silicone sealer had acetic acid in it, so the acetic acid-free type was > provided with the kit. Once upon a time I had a job (briefly) for an automotive supplier and occasionally would have to fabricate/repair wiring harnesses for test vehicles that weren't off the shelf parts. The way I was shown to weatherseal a soldered wire connection was to use silicone *grease* under the heat shrink. Sometimes connections would be potted in 5-min epoxy as well, e.g. multi-pin connectors. I hadn't thought of using slow-curing silicone sealant, but that seems more elegant if anything. nate Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel >> Bob AZ wrote: >>>> A lot of time the problem with the insulation displacement type [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > > nate I never would have thought of using silicone grease either, but I could see that working in certain situations. SignatureBill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') >>> Bob AZ wrote: >>>>> A lot of time the problem with the insulation displacement type [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > I never would have thought of using silicone grease either, but I could > see that working in certain situations. >>> Bob AZ wrote: >>>>> A lot of time the problem with the insulation displacement type [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > I never would have thought of using silicone grease either, but I could > see that working in certain situations. I like the ideas presented regarding sealing crimped terminals. Good stuff! To add my $0.02 worth, I've also done the double-over (and sometimes more) wire trick when the terminal normally fits a larger wire. I also prefer to use a crimper like this one: http://tinyurl.com/7lcqas (Klein pn 1005). Another way to keep moisture out of the crimp zone is to use heatshrink tubing. You can get heatshrink w/ adhesive/sealer on the inside. A side benefit is a little more support for the wire as it exits the crimped terminal. When I added a second battery and wiring (front & rear) for an electric winch to my '77 Dodge 3/4 ton pickup, I used 1/0 welding cable with heavy-duty sealed heatshrink on the crimped terminals. Yes, the ground cables are also now 1/0 wire! The connectors for the winch are 175A units, and I made up a 1/0 jump-start cable w/ gnarly clips... I don't have to open the hood to give (or get) a jump-start! :) Bryan > Well that's it. At present, I am more than happy with the ballast > resistors. The truck runs great. Just curious as hell as to what might > be going on. > > Jack Jack Read Dans' reply more closely. I would suspect that too much primary current just supersaturates the coil and it doesn't discharge properly, inhibiting the next charge/ discharge cycle. Dan Your post centered aound the ballast resistor selections. And Dans post says it all. Perhaps things would be improved by a RF coil or choke with a resistance of the same ohmage as the ballast resistor you have determined to work well. The secondary voltage is not really effected by the plug and or wire resistance. Perhaps by their construction. The signal at the plugs is really a complex Radio Frequency waveform that without a good scope can not be interpreted. The usual monitor scope found in the garage is not up to this. And finally the manufacturer of your ignition should probably not be in businees at all. They know little if anything about ignition systems. You vehicle manufacturer should be relied on. Contact their high performance folks for advice and guidance. Undoubly the manufacturer maximized the performance of your original ignition. Bob AZ Bob AZ wrote: >> Well that's it. At present, I am more than happy with the ballast >> resistors. The truck runs great. Just curious as hell as to what might [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > systems. You vehicle manufacturer should be relied on. Contact their > high performance folks for advice and guidance. The vehicle manufacturer, Chrysler, is the one that stuck me with an electronic feedback carburetor for which I cannot buy a replacement mixture control solenoid. Do you really think they would grace me with advice and guidance? Get real. > Undoubly the > manufacturer maximized the performance of your original ignition. > > Bob AZ > The vehicle manufacturer, Chrysler, is the one that stuck me with an > electronic feedback carburetor for which I cannot buy a replacement [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > > Bob �AZ- Jack All things considered I do believe the manufacturer is a good source. I have contacted Chrysler myself and received good advice. And after a long evening conversation with a Ford Ignition Systems Engineer I am more aware of the choices that the manufactures make. Remember I advised to contact the manufacturers Performance folks. They have a periodic magazine that is available by subscription. I read all the issues at the dealer while getting my car and truck serviced. Chrysler, Ford and GM do make decisions as to whether parts ar available and for how long. I did own a 87 Chrysler 5th avenue for a number of years and I would expect to be able to locate whatever I would need for it. Might take some time but if the demand is there the parts are usually available. In another instance just this past year I needed a fan blade for a 64 Dodge PU and the Chrysler dealer bent over backwards to locate one for me. Took a few days but they called when they had the blade and there was no charge. Bob AZ Bob AZ wrote: >> The vehicle manufacturer, Chrysler, is the one that stuck me with an >> electronic feedback carburetor for which I cannot buy a replacement [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > Bob AZ Bob, you'll have to excuse me for being a jaded. I bought this truck new and have taken very good care of it. That fact that I cannot buy a $60 replacement part that is crucial to running the truck has caused me seemingly unending problems. How would one find these "Performance folks" on the net? > Bob, you'll have to excuse me for being a jaded. I bought this truck new > and have taken very good care of it. That fact that I cannot buy a $60 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > - Show quoted text - If I remember correctly I called them from a number I got at the dealer who had their magazine in the waiting room. I would go to the Dodge site to locate an internet address for the Dodge Performance people. Or ask at the service counter. Bob AZ >> Bob, you'll have to excuse me for being a >> jaded. I bought this truck new [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Bob AZ You might also try these guys. http://www.manciniracing.com/ > Bob, you'll have to excuse me for being a jaded. I bought this truck new > and have taken very good care of it. That fact that I cannot buy a $60 > replacement part that is crucial to running the truck has caused me > seemingly unending problems. Well, they can't keep EVERYETHING in production forever. I rather doubt that I could go to a Chrysler dealer and buy a carburetor for my 1949 Plymouth Club Coupe, either ;-) Everything becomes obsolete eventually, and you have to come up with acceptable replacements. > How would one find these "Performance folks" on the net? Chrysler's performance aftermarket segment (Mopar Peformance) can be found at http://www.mopar.com/performance/index.html But frankly, they're not nearly as helpful for the old-school carbureted guys as they used to be. They're too busy selling crate versions of the new Hemis for people to retrofit into their muscle cars (not a bad idea, but its gotten too dominant for my tastes). And on top of that, you're looking for parts for an 80s 2-bbl v6, not a 1969 440 Magnum. I'd take a look at places like: Manciniracing.com Edelbrock.com Summitracing.com Jegs.com Just off the top of my ol' noggin ;-) > ...Everything becomes obsolete eventually, > and you have to come up with acceptable replacements... Reminds me about the old joke about the man talking about his axe: "Yep - I've had this axe for years - best axe I've ever owned. All I've ever had to do to it was replace the handle twice and the head once." SignatureBill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') >> Bob, you'll have to excuse me for being a jaded. I bought this truck new >> and have taken very good care of it. That fact that I cannot buy a $60 [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Just off the top of my ol' noggin ;-) Thanks Steve, but I got the damn thing figured out. I can understand the Mopar guys wanting to go where the money is. These electronic feedback carbs must have gone on a gazillion cars and trucks and those who bought them are left holding the bag. But I got the non-feedback version of the Holley 6280, which is a 2280, and finally got the MSD setup working right with the addition of a 1 ohm ballast resistor to bring the MSD primary on the coil up to 1.7 ohms, same as the stock coil, which seems to have made everything okay. The damn thing runs better than new. I'm pretty sure it will pass smog, with a little denatured alcohol and 2 degrees retarded timing. Now that I have it running perfect, I want a new one, or at least something with fuel injection. >> Just off the top of my ol' noggin ;-) > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > These electronic feedback carbs must have gone on a gazillion cars and > trucks and those who bought them are left holding the bag. You think YOU'RE holding the bag.... try one of the 89-92 TBI v8 engines! That's an orphan and you can't even very well "MacGuyver" a solution for it like you can with a carb. The problem is that there's not only no reason for the factory to keep supporting 80s vehicles, there's also no aftermarket interest in 80s vehicles to cause the kind of support that you can get for 60s cars. About the only 80s car that even raises any interest at all is the Buick GN/GNX. >>> Just off the top of my ol' noggin ;-) >> Thanks Steve, but I got the damn thing figured out. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > About the only 80s car that even raises any interest at all is the Buick > GN/GNX. I can't believe how complex these internal combustion engines are and how well they run when everything is operating correctly. They are truly marvels of engineering. At 2500 rpm, a V6 is firing each plug over 20 times a second. Each intake and exhaust valve is opening and closing at the same rate. 125 explosions a second, all synchronized to maximize power output. Meanwhile, the cooling system is pumping coolant throughout the engine block and heads and through the radiator. The power is transmitted to the wheels by another complicated system to propel the vehicle down the road at speeds in excess of 70 miles an hour. Thousands of different parts are involved and all must be working correctly for the vehicle to maintain forward motion. I am truly amazed that I don't see more vehicles broken down on the side of the road. > At 2500 rpm, a V6 is firing each plug over 20 times a second. > > Each intake and exhaust valve is opening and closing at the same rate. > > 125 explosions a second, all synchronized to maximize power output. Its not a car engine, but given the stats you quoted above you should enjoy this little read.... http://www.sandersaircraft.com/aircraft/dreadnought/One_Second_with_Dreadnought.pdf >> At 2500 rpm, a V6 is firing each plug over 20 times a second. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.sandersaircraft.com/aircraft/dreadnought/One_Second_with_Dreadnought.pdf Holy Crap! Each cylinder displacement is as big as a small V6! And there is 28 of 'em! "Each piston has traveled 50 feet in linear distance, changing direction 100 times per second, with the total linear travel of all 28 pistons adding up to a ¼ mile." What controlled fury! Look at the crew who probably serviced the carburetor: http://www.vintagecarburetors.com/about.htm happy looking bunch, eh? >> http://www.sandersaircraft.com/aircraft/dreadnought/One_Second_with_Dreadnought.pdf > > Holy Crap! That pretty much sums up an R-4360 ;-) > Each cylinder displacement is as big as a small V6! > > And there is 28 of 'em! 28 cylinders, 56 spark plugs, 4 magnetos. One caburetor (actually a hybrid called an "injection carburetor" with venturis the size of coffee cans. > "Each piston has traveled 50 feet in linear distance, changing direction > 100 times per second, with the total linear travel of all 28 pistons > adding up to a ¼ mile." > > What controlled fury! In this case, controlled SEA Fury ;-) And when those engines were installed in a B-36 or a Globemaster, they would run *continuously* for 20+ hour missions. A B-36 had SIX 4360s, each of which had two turbochargers in addition to its 56 plugs. That made for one very busy flight engineer! Turbocharger wastegate, throttle, mixture, prop pitch, and several other parameters were all set and monitored by the FE. Good old days! > > Bob, you'll have to excuse me for being a jaded. I bought this truck new > > and have taken very good care of it. That fact that I cannot buy a $60 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Plymouth Club Coupe, either ;-) Everything becomes obsolete eventually, > and you have to come up with acceptable replacements. time was when chrysler was famous for keeping replacement parts for everything forever (more or less) but they had to dump this policy after the near bankruptcy in 1980 or thereabouts. too bad. > 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > Jack > iron monkey, well you should put the msd in and the coil pack in . then you should run a NOVIS system on your cars brain box to change the factory setting . to a higher voltage . You can also up the fuel and air ratio , novis is a wonderfull tool . >> 1987 Dodge Dakota 3.9L carbed >> [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > higher voltage . You can also up the fuel and air ratio , novis is a > wonderfull tool . Novis? Never heard of it and can't find anything about it thru google. Are you sure of the spelling? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.