I'm check on going with distributor-less ignition system, some pointers please

Micro squirt running ignition only would be my route. Haven't used any standalone units and haven't heard of any standalone units that are tunable.

A slightly self-serving reply...

I vote megasquirt or megajolt plus my ignition trigger http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?sho...p;#entry2132437

You could use a MSD with crank trigger and coil-on-plug.
The DIS-4 appears to be able to do this (for a 4-cyl), but I didnt read all the details.

What are you trying to achieve?

Less maintenance?
Tunability?
Space in the engine bay?
Something else?

Knowing what your goals are would help folks make better suggestions...

Clean up the engine bay, fine tuning, twin plug heads--dreaming of.

Wow, that is exceptionally cool. Good job.

Quick correction: the megajolt only uses a 36-1 trigger wheel which isn't compatible with my distributor parts. I've only used the megasquirt and assumed (my bad) megajolt was just the spark side of a megasquirt, but in reality the megajolt is only compatible with EDIS and might not get you to twin spark... not sure if the "SAW" signal can be paralleled to two EDIS controllers for the second set of plugs and coil pack. That's be a pretty cluttered setup anyway.

For twin spark on a megsquirt based system you would parallel the logic level coil fire signals from the megasquirt to the two VW 2.0 coil packs ($30 each new on ebay). Haven't set this system up myself (don't have the heads), but there's no reason it couldn't be done that way.

I have no experience with twin-spark setups so I can't really comment on what's involved there.

How "fine" do you want to tune things? Are you planning dyno sessions? Seat of the pants measurement?

Anything seriously analytical will benefit from a mapped setup, so something like Megajolt will be where you want to go.

Alternatively, you could have your existing 009 recurved (or learn to DIY).

Engine bay cleanup is a bit subjective; you can get that with some DIY ignition wires and zipties for some values of 'clean'. Other options might include the Compu-Tronix unit (it's very shiny, if that matters to you...).

For a twin plug 4-cyl setup, you could use your trigger system with an arduino beetle (the size of a quarter, it would fit in the cap) and it would send your timing pulse to two separate MSD DIS-4s.
The Arduino would delay the timing pulse to the second MSD with a adjustable duration that would determine the spacing between the plug firings.
Both MSDs would drive 4 coil on Plugs.

Clewett offers a system. Although it is for 4 plugs I have to believe that it could be easily changed to 8 plugs

http://www.clewett.com/index.php?main_page...products_id=291

Stugray: I've looked into developing the computing part of the ignition with a friend of mine who does a lot (more than me) embedded microcontroller work. The idea was to put it in the cap as you suggested. The arduino is probably capable (I've used them extensively for other work) but they might not be able to handle the heat. The Wiring code used for programming Arduino has it's limitations in i/o speed which might require programming the hardware in C/C++ instead. If you know of anyone or any project that have done it successfully, please pass it on, I'd obviously be interested.

I am positive that nearly all of the Arduinos could do this.
The "Beetle" that I speak of is of the Leonardo family and runs at 16Mhz.
So you easily have microsecond resolution of the timing of the output pulse.
The pseudo-code is so simple I could have it working overnight.
This is basically just a signal repeater with a programmable delay on one output.

You justuse an interrupt service routine to catch a rising edge of the tach signal.
Then it sets timers for X milliseconds in the future (plug set #1), and Y milliseconds in the future (plug set #2).
The timers would fire outputs to +12V Mosfets for the signal to the MSDs to simulate the Tach signal.
The delay is dependent on the value of the RPM and could be configured from a map, so the delay between plug set #1 & #2 could be variable based on engine RPM (or even load if you hook up a MAP).
You could change the parameters with a usb cable and a droid phone.

I have an Arduino as a datalogger in the racecar, so I have already written the code to read the TACH.
The tach signal is 0-200 Hz (0-6000 RPM) and I tested mine to 1000 Hz, so the processor would have no trouble keeping up.

edit: I would need to change my code for calculating RPMs because right now I "sit" for 1/2 a second to calculate RPMs while doing nothing else - so that would have to change.

http://rusefi.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
You may find what you want here.

However,if cost is not important,an off the shelf is the way to go.
https://www.google.ca/#q=distributorless+ignition+retrofit

Interesting. Not sure if you looked at my advert, you could use the VW 2.0 coil pack VAG part 032905106B/032905106E and skip the igbt's or mosfets altogether. It's about $30 on ebay. Just two logic outputs for wasted spark, similar to MSD (?).

I think the megasquirt code used to use just one trigger per engine revolution to calculate engine speed and advance (ignore the others), what I think you propose, it now uses time between triggers (interrupts) to keep a running measurement of rpm. I don't think engines change speed fast enough under load to really matter in one engine cycle. But you do need some kind of sync to determine whether to fire coil bank #1 or #2 which is what the skip tooth is all about. Just an idea, if it used two opposed hall sensors and 1 trigger tooth like D-jet does for switching injectors (was it half-multiport?), you'd have two interrupts: one for each coil pack and no need to create or decipher a sync signal.

But I do think that an in-cap system on our air-cooled vehicles could have heat issues. The standard ATmega328p processor is only specified to 185 degrees F, and I kinda doubt it's going to be too happy at 184, or even 120, particularly if it's having to think very hard. That said, I haven't measured the temps in a cap. The ats617 sensor, an automotive part, was designed to operate up to 300 degrees F.

The simple MSDs require a tach signal that represents each cylinder firing, and it can be a nice clean signal like from a unilite optical pickup, a hall effect, or a noisy signal from a real coil/points.

My setup uses the mallory optical pickup straight to the MSD.
It is a perfectly clean looking 12VDC square wave.
You could split that signal to two MSDs and they would both fire simultaneously.
Now we just need to slow down the output for one of the MSDs and you have staggered firing.

So since the MSD can accept a nice clean 12VDC signal, I would just use two Mosfet "modules" for $5ea. to convert the Ard 5VDC IO to a 12VDC square wave.

And now that I thought about it, you could have either a second rotating pickup, or just a 5th "tooth" in the trigger wheel to determine crank position (TDC)
You could use that and provide a FI trigger signal to either a stock FI ECU, or a Megasquirt.

An encoder on the distributor is essentially "crank fired" anyway ( but you know that)

As far as overheating, if you are using the distributor to drive the COP style of MSD, then there is no "distributing" being done at the distributor, so it wont get very hot.
A fan on the distributor drive shaft could push air through the cap.
The operating temperature of the Atmega (+85C) is the same as the Renesas SH series CPUs in my BRZ, so I think it should be ok.

http://www.cbperformance.com/ProductDetail...roductCode=2094


Or wait for the next gen.

http://www.cbperformance.com/ProductDetail...roductCode=7075

I go Electromotive. You can either buy a Tec-S and use just the ignition channels, (keeping the FI channels for upgrade later) or you can go to the XDI and run twin coil pack assemblies from one trigger and wheel.

I used an XDI on my 2.6 T4 in my 356, and back in the 90s, when we started twin plugging these engines, the predecessor to the XDI, known as the HPV-1 is all that was around. I have several of those HPV-1 fired engines running around on twi plugs today and they've never had an issue.

It's being done that way , MS2xtra w/sequentil ignition & injection , I've been working on this for my 2.8 twin plug conversion , IT WORKS , will update my thread in the future,( couple weeks, my ECU is at the DUBSHOP for the sequentil injector modification, ) I test run the ignition part already

http://www.thedubshop.net/links.htm

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?sho...225696&st=0

here's few pic's enjoy , cheers Bill D.

Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment

I don't know why you would bother doing this unless you are going FI

Spend the money in the engine not on it. Only exception to this is headers which is the cheapest HP gain you can add to the engine.
This mod adds zero HP.

That's nice head work,tight compact chamber.Have you experimented with the stack length to gain low rpm torque?
Is this the DTM blower setup from Raby?A thought comes to me from this pix,a heatsink in the blower's airstream would keep the coilpacks cool.
The other thing I notice is the routing of the hightension cables,the close proximity of the cables through the others is a tidy looking way but may induce a misfire and destruction,it's cute,but widely separated cables is safer.

@WLD419 who did you twin plugging/headwork?
Edit: nevermind....

Mark: Theory is that accurately timed/mapped spark is the only way to make power in an engine. Of course in practice, to do it correctly entails dyno time. When you change internals, the ignition map needs to change to take full advantage of it. Changes in compression, combustion chamber, valve size, cam profile, bore, plug location etc. all effect the flame front and timing for optimal ignition. You can twist an 009 to not ping at full advance, probably make good power at WOT and full advance, but everything in between that and idle is likely sub-optimal. Fueling is pretty lenient across AFR in terms of power output. I suspect that Jake has spent considerable time looking at ignition hook curves and the output of knock sensors while deriving ignition maps for his engines. But of course, some of us like to tinker with these things ourselves!

WLD: Very cool. I have a pair of old T4 heads I considered using to jig up in the machining center. Pretty low priority project though, and seems like nerve wracking work if done to good heads.

OK I thought with more of a tune-able ignition you could squeeze a bit more out with out a lot of problems .
you have forgotten more than I know,,, so I will ask and I do listen , and thank you

All about the Benjamins,uh yes.How much dough you can throw.
All about the squish and crankcase pressure,the scavenging of the drysump.That .025 clearance is a reasonable compromise.
How close do you dare get,.012 is a dimension used in other forms of racing.
Those pistons are a very nice score,it appears iron cylinders are being used,have you considered application of coatings available today?A reduction of the heat the piston must transfer to the cylinder increases longevity of the rings.
A huge advantage is realized with the Nickies,closer clearances can be used,ring tension can be reduced significantly.
Big power gains can be had with a rollercam in an effort to reduce friction losses.All round an awesome build,gives a boost to my own efforts.


http://www.europeanmotorworks.com/
As a reference.

Ok, timing is important, you need a good curve, but to what point? Do you really need it? Many factors... like what are you running? Unless you are really high performance, programmable ignition is at best questionable.
As far as a good curve a mallory will do that.

Turbo yes it's good idea because it needs retard at boost. FI is also a good thing in this case.
Twin plug, yes as it solves the second set of plugs.
But performance NA, even high compression all you need 95% of the time is a good curve and a hot spark, a dizzy with MSD will do that.

"But Crank fire is more accurate"
OK...but how much and does it matter?
Sure a dizzy gear has slop, but that only comes into play during deceleration and really that doesn't mean a hill of beans. Even crank fire is not really accurate often wandering 2-3 degrees at any given time at higher RPMs.
Jarred's post is typical of what I often see making ignition (many systems) way more complicated than is needed. Maybe it's important on a F1 car...but a street car???

My SDS has programmable crankfire , really when you see the parameters on SDS you realize ignition isn't rocket science. As far as A/F ratio, jetting or your fuel map is the most important aspect. I've had and have just as good running engines with a good old dizzy.
Not saying ignition (and curve) is not important, just saying at the state of tune of most street engines it makes little or no difference.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoJfMZ9YgQc


http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=193547
https://www.youtube.com/user/Porschenut13/videos

Making it work.

I suppose it depends on what "complicated" is to you. I mean "you" generally, not any specific members of this forum. I'd rather fill out and modify a table on a laptop than buy springs, diaphragms and jets, bend over a 914 engine bay and huff gas fumes. But that's my preference. I like the immediate gratification and feedback of programmable engine management, and auto-tuning and tweaking fuel maps with wideband O2 is a pretty cool and empowering backyard tuning experience.

I'm not a tuning pro nor am I here to argue or convince anyone of anything. If the topic of FI and programmable spark are of interest to you, do some research, then have some fun learning and doing something new. Seriously, nothing about mucking with an engine is cheap or easy.

I found Cramer's book to be a good read when I was doing my first tuning, probably a good starting point for anyone interested in the topic.
http://www.diyautotune.com/catalog/perform...ooks-p-436.html

If you tune on newer cars you will find that the high performance engines are pushing the car right to the edge of detonation (literally and figuratively).

The knock sensors detect knock and vary the timing maps based on engine load, RPM, and knowledge of previous knock events.
This allows them to push the timing advance to the absolute limit of knocking.
I just jumped in because I understand the systems on the FA20 engine, and I have been tinkering with some "megasquirt-like" designs of my own.

Well yes it is my opinion but this is what I base it upon:

30+ years VW engine building, 25 years performance engine building.

I was one of the first here playing with programmable fuel injection with crankfire ignition, I turned Jake Raby onto SDS at least a dozen years ago
I've also built a few performance engines, I'd say there's only a few guys here that have built more.

My personal 1967 bug Engine
2.6L T4 engine conversion, handmade shroud
SDS EFI with crankfire, WMS wideband
46mm ITB's custom modified from suzuki TB's, 55lbs deka injectors, custom linkage and fuel rails
102X78mm, CB rods, all german bearings
914 heads 44X38mm SI valves, 12mm plugs opened to 103 built by me,
dual springs, Berg CrMo retainers and keepers, manton pushrods, 911 adjusters, spacers
102mm Nickies with custom pocket JE's and oil pin oiling mod
webcam, ceramic lifters,
Full flow oiling system, 30mm type 1 pump, remote filter, custom windage tray
A1 header, custom engine bar
911-901 trans

I also built another engine with almost the exact same specs as this one (103X78mm) except 44 webers and mallory distributor. The engines were very similar I say the carb engine had a hair more top end power while my FI engine had a bit better fuel mileage.

Knock sensors will not work well on an aircooled engines as they are too noisy.
"Newer" cars are watercooled and thus can tolerate leaner AFR's. Aircooled engines actually use the fuel charge to aid cooling. Leaning out an Aircooled you will immediately see your head temps go through the roof, the results will be bad. I suggest you have a very good head temp gauge.
If you think you are charting new territory you are mistaken. Jake and many others have already experimented with this many years ago.
But by all means carry on.

If you have a digital distributor that can vary timing advance based on RPM and a MAP sensor, that is reprogrammable with a droid phone and a usb cable, then I would buy one from you right now.

They're getting closer http://msdroid.com/

That is almost identical to what I built (droid phone gauges and plotting wise) but mine currently can only log data and control my dash trouble light and shift light. No controlling since it is a vintage racecar.

Hate to say this but...bluetooth on a 50 year old engine based on a 80 year old design

MSDs have a "microprocessor" in them. doe that make them too high tech for our cars?

So there is something wrong with logging AFR, EGTs, CHTs, Oil Pressure, Oil Temp, Fuel Pressure, & throttle position?

Right now the way it works is the system monitors all of my vitals and if anything goes out of limit, it will turn on my dash light and display the item that is out of range on the droid phone.

I see lots of guys on the track with their $1000+ traq-mates.
Mine cost me about $200 (and a spare droid phone)
And while it doesnt have bluetooth, I COULD configure it so my "pit crew" could see my vital statistics while I'm out on track via WiFi, I just didnt see the point (until I get a nice driver radio system).

As for the distributor idea, I want to make something that can adjust timing advance curves without changing weights & springs.
There is a MSD that does exactly what I want that is >$500, but the hardware I need to do it I just bought for $20.

I understand why, but to me if you do want to go this route then something like MS is the only thing I'd consider. At least that gives you the option of going FI in the future.

In reality you may play with the ignition curve for a little bit at first, BTDT, but I guarantee in short order you will set it and forget it.
When I got my bug on the road last spring I played with my ignition curve a bit but in the end settled on a curve that I made a decade ago.

I agree with you. However with the dist.s we have currently (I have the Mallory), you have to take the dist apart and change out springs & weights.
With my idea, you can change the advance in 10 seconds without taking anything apart.
I could probably make the software such that you could modify the parameters on the fly while the engine is running.

Having just one of those seems it would be an advantage to an engine builder to be able to find the sweet spot while on the dyno.
With the cost of Dyno time, the dist would pay for itself just by not having to disassemble the dist between runs.
However I am guessing that anyone who tunes a lot of these engines probably have a variable timing system like the $$ MSD for initial setup.

I know there are distributors with mechanical "Programmable" curves, but are a PITA.
I looked into the Magnaspark II that does exactly what I want, but AFAI can tell, it wont mechanically fit on our engine.

So if I am crazy, then so are these guys:
http://www.cbperformance.com/Articles.asp?ID=254

There is this , use your distributor in locked mode (no centrifugal weights) , program on the fly with a laptop & serial cable plugged in I believe,
kinda like my vintage CB Quicktune EFI system (soon to be upgraded to MS2xtra sequential ),

http://www.cbperformance.com/ProductDetail...roductCode=2013

Cool that the CB box under $200. I agree with Stugray though it's $20 in parts. If you have a pertronix, you could probably figure out how to use that as the trigger/interrupt for a microprocessor then control the coil fire timing through a Bosch ignitor which is practically free off of any junked european car from the '80's. Spark would still be through the rotor/cap and using a single coil. Which is what these are guys are probably doing: http://www.123ignition.nl/products.php?id=50&lang=eng Drawback is you pay the cost of a whole new distributor ~$450

BTDT
This method is problematic do to phasing, basicly the cap and rotor contacts are not long enough for the advance curve.

I'm a few days late and several dollars short to chime in here, and I'm so green its ... Well, I'm green and learning. But I have MS with Ford EDIS and twin plug on a 3.2. Of course this is for a six and the original question seems be about a Type IV and I'm not even sure if Ford had /4's with EDIS on their cars. But they are pretty damned adaptable, apparently. Now I'm slowly learning how to tune this beast Joe built for me, at least the principles. I may have overkill for street use, but I'm gonna have fun!

Pretty sure they did, the megajolt jr uses ford EDIS bits. You can buy the bits as unofficial "kits" on evilbay or gather it up at the local scrapyard. I checked into megajolt jr but for a few bucks more you can get a MS and have future FI. MS supports a bunch of different ignition options.

I seriously was thinking of using megajolt or MS for my twin plug then I pick this up for a song.

Ford also did EDIS control for 4's and 8's. Nearly all their cars had it in the 80's and 90's. I'm running EDIS 6 and Megasquirt on my TVR. It's a good setup and Ford takes care of interfacing/conditioning the VR sensor for you. MS reads the PIP and sends out the SAW so it's a two wire setup to the MS, but several more for the EDIS controller.

Very true. Not sure how that works.

Ditto for a Ford ztec four in a Lotus Seven replica. Simple, easy, super cheap, parts all over the place and dead on reliable.

If you can figure out phasing issue you can just buy a MSD 6al-2 programmable for just over $300 I don't know if you could just fire this with a crank trigger but that might solve the phasing issue.
I never looked further into this as this is when I got the dizzy above which uses a MSD internals.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxDy-sBZDM4

Twin plugs are not a cosmetic item..pretty sure the plugs go into the motor somewhat

I was talking type 4 in general on this post and I don't really think twin plug was part of the conversation at this point.
My opinion still stands as having a stand alone programmable ignition for a T4 single plug NA application has little, if any, benefit.
My opinion, based on actual experience (as I have and have used both types), is time, money and effort could be better spent on the mechanics of the engine.

Twin plug, turbo, etc., is a different situation as turbo needs retard and there's not many economical twin plug solutions.
That said why would you have a stand alone ignition for a turbo? It would be part of the FI.