Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
My deepest apologies to the rest of of the moparts board who have had to put up with the mindless flak.
Who said anything about computer controlled ignitions?? This subject is about a known deficiency in mopar electronic ignition systems used on cars built from the 60's thru the eighties. Pictures tell a thousand words.
Quote:
I'm still looking for "the proof." For example, quite a few modern vehicles have been built with crank triggered, computer controlled ignition WHICH IS THEN FED through a distributor WITH A LOCKED ADVANCE. This means that WHATEVER the computer does to the ignition advance, THE ROTOR DOES NOT CHANGE and therefore THE PHASING MUST CHANGE over the range of the advance. So let's say that the advance range in the computer is something, say, 10-50*. That's a spread of 20*, the center of which is 30* at the crank. THIS MEANS that if you phase the distributor at 30* crank degrees advance, the rotor phasing WILL STILL CHANGE by plus and minus 20 degrees!!!!!!!!!!!
Now I admit fully that I haven't researched these types of problems, but neither has the original poster---who hasn't posted on shread of dyno or oscope or mileage proof that this is an important or prevelant problem. All I know is, my Ford Ranger has the above listed type of distributor--and it doesn't seem to have problem tracking the cap!!! It doesn't exhibit poor mileage or driveability problems. I ran old Mopars thousands of miles, and I know a cap tracking problem when I see it.
The original poster is making statements like "your car will run better". Well fine---if it does, you should be able to prove it. You should be able to take an example car and show some 0-60 times, or mileage change, or something to back up your claims.
The question STILL in my mind is, "is this a problem" or "is this a PERCEIVED problem?"
(This would not be the first time that a bunch of sheep have run off a cliff.)
You really need to get a grip on yourself as you have no clue what you are babbling about. The community college near you may offer some basic electronics courses so you can understand ohms law but first you need to be able to add, subtract multiply and divide. Your nonsense is very discouraging to any further information sharing.
Phasing is something that needs to be checked and corrected if it is not correct. A properly tuned engine will have a phased distributor with a custom curve.
This has now become a PERSONAL ATTACK
"mindless flak."
"You really need to get a grip on yourself as you have no clue what you are babbling about. The community college near you may offer some basic electronics courses so you can understand ohms law but first you need to be able to add, subtract multiply and divide. Your nonsense is very discouraging to any further information sharing."
I have news for you, and I refuse to resort to the same below the belt name calling that you have just engaged in. I knew ohms law before I got out of junior high school.
YOU HAVE PROVIDED NO CONCRETE PROOF THAT YOU KNOW OF WHAT YOU SPEAK, THAT THIS ALLEGED PROBLEM IS WIDESPREAD, OR THAT IT'S EVEN A PROBLEM, AND HOW MUCH IF ANY GAIN IS TO BE GAINED.
Evidently you completely missed the point of mentioning computer controlled ignitions, or did you chose to ignore it? The FACT is that it helps prove my point. One a crank triggered computer controlled ignition WHICH USES A DISTRIBUTOR BODY the rotor does NOT advance or retard, either with centrifugal or vacuum. It is LOCKED in place, and the computer controls the spark timing. WHAT THIS MEANS IS that over the many degrees of advance/ retard, the DISTRIBUTOR PHASING cannot possibly be optimum, and this is my point------all these systems, whether points, magnetic, crank triggered, what, have a certain amount of variance BUILT IN to allow the advance system to work.
A little additional information. This subject has nothing to do with simple ohms law which you seem so proud of. For your information, I once had considerable electronics experience, and to this day have a fairly comprehensive test bench with more than enough test gear to start a two way repair shop. I still have some, if not aging, spectrum analysis gear, several once high end RF test gear, and the forerunner to a modern network analyzer. I have severa swept RF and audio generators, as well as a couple of pulse and other specialized bench generators clear down into the sub audible range
Nevertheless, some of that gear is just as accurate as it ever was, and that which is not is more accurate than it needs to be for my purposes.
I'm not going to mince words here. You WILL stop with the personal attack, the allegation that I'm stupid or uneducated, that I need more schooling, and you WILL NOT engage in any further personal references as to race, creed, religion, my height, weight, age, personal preferences, or any other damn thing.
Got it?
Last edited by 440sixpack; 05/23/09 01:25 PM.
|
