Moparts

Mopar Muscle article

Posted By: 70duster340

Mopar Muscle article - 08/09/11 04:21 AM

In the October 2011 issue, there is an article about whether or not a ballast resistor is needed. In the article it is stated that a ballast resistor is needed with points-type ignition, but can be removed if there is an electronic ignition in place. What is the consensus from you folks? I would like to run without one, if at all possible.
Posted By: Daty Rogers

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/09/11 04:44 AM

Just carry an extra in the glovebox, the br steps the voltage down to 6v after start which is needed even after electronic ign conversion.

-Daty
Posted By: topside

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/09/11 04:48 AM

3 of my cars use an MP distributor to signal an MSD unit; no "box" or ballast resistor. Use the later voltage regulator (which you should already have in a '70), and connect the ballast resistor wires with a 10ga. wire.
Posted By: 70duster340

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/09/11 05:13 AM

How about the Pertronix Plug and Play distributor?
Posted By: Kern Dog

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/09/11 06:13 AM

I just read that article a few hours ago and wondered the same thing the OP asked. I'd be inclined to trust Richard Ehrenberg from Mopar Action magazine before the guys at MM. Steve Dulcich was pretty sharp too. I haven't seen him post here in a while.
I suppose that you can bypass the ballast and find out for yourself.
Posted By: ademon

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/09/11 07:02 AM

most regular coils need a ballast resistor and even have it printed on it. you would need a full 12v voltage coil to bypass the B/R
Posted By: 70duster340

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/10/11 04:30 AM

Would removing the ballast resistor cause the ECM to burn out?
Posted By: topside

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/10/11 04:50 AM

I neglected to mention that 2 of my cars run the MSD Blaster 2 can-style coil, the 3rd car runs the old Accel big yellow coil. One's been running that way since 1988, the other probably late '70s.
Posted By: Sinitro

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/10/11 05:19 AM

Quote:

I neglected to mention that 2 of my cars run the MSD Blaster 2 can-style coil, the 3rd car runs the old Accel big yellow coil. One's been running that way since 1988, the other probably late '70s.



Along with the Blaster II, What ignition box?
1. Mopar chrome box, the ballast resistor should be 0.25 Ohms.
2. MSD box, no ballast resistor.

Just my $0.02...
Posted By: mikemee1331

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/10/11 12:27 PM

so soon?? your cars will run without one. it's there to increase the life of your electronic parts. plain and simple. your choice. sorta like seatbelts for your ECU or coils.
Posted By: 540challenger

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/10/11 02:17 PM

I started a thread about no ballast a few days ago losts of good info in it.

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/show...e=6#Post6761068
Posted By: SomeCarGuy

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/10/11 03:38 PM

Haven't seen the MM article, but did see the MA.

Running a Blaster 2 w/o a ballast works fine. For a long time. For many many miles. In high heat.

I think somebody linked the other recent thread about it. I will say again that this seems to be an engineering theory that was thrown out there. People then ran with it and little actual testing was done. It's unlikely that I happened to have a one off set of parts that happen to work well, despite the dire warnings.
Posted By: CR8CRSHR

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/10/11 05:44 PM

Quote:

How about the Pertronix Plug and Play distributor?



According to the directions I have for mine, it clearly states to "by-pass" the Ballest Resistor...
Posted By: 70duster340

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/12/11 03:01 AM

Since I don't subscribe to MA, can someone enlighten me about that article, please?
Posted By: Kern Dog

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/12/11 06:07 AM

It was in a "Quick Tech" segment. The gist of the article was that points style ignitions should continue to use the ballast resistor to keep from damaging or prematurely wearing out the contact points. They also contend that the electronic systems did NOT need the ballast resistor. They suggest to tie the wires together at the ballast and enjoy a hotter spark with NO ill effects.
Posted By: Cab_Burge

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/12/11 07:24 AM

All of Mopar production cars with the ECU from the factory had ballst resitors, do you think maybe they where engineered that way for a good reason would you take the word of a magazine word geek over a engineer I don't
Posted By: Kern Dog

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/12/11 08:38 AM

You see.... I was thinking the same thing. The article didn't go too deep into the explanation either. My Charger has the MP conversion, so does the FrankenDuster. I'm keeping them as is.
The Chrysler engineers decided to implement a different ballast when they integrated the electronic system in 1972. Why spend the $ to develop a new part if it was unnecessary? I'm not saying that the factory never made mistakes, but I'm going to "side" with the factory on this one.
Posted By: 70Cuda383

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/12/11 11:45 AM

Quote:

All of Mopar production cars with the ECU from the factory had ballst resitors, do you think maybe they where engineered that way for a good reason would you take the word of a magazine word geek over a engineer I don't



They also engineered some degree of performance OUT of the engines in the name of "streetability" reliability and to lessen warranty claims.

by your theory, none of us should be changing cams, heads, intake manifolds, etc.


My understanding of the issue, is that the older coils were designed to run on 6-8 volts. this ensured they had enough voltage available to make a hot enough spark while the starter was sucking the battery juice to crank the engine...since your system voltage drops from 12.5 down to 8-ish volts while cranking the engine. but a coil designed to run on 6-8 volts won't last very long when you start feeding it the 14 volts from a running engine with the alternator providing charge.


but on today's newer coils, they've designed them to run on 12-14v allowing you to eliminate the resistor for more volts to the coil, and more volts to your spark plugs.


Following that theory, I bought a new coil, old school orange box, no ballast resistor and proceeded to drive 4,000 street miles in all kinds of weather, over a 5 year period, and not once did I have a problem with the coil or orange box "burning out"
Posted By: SomeCarGuy

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/12/11 04:26 PM

Quote:

It was in a "Quick Tech" segment. The gist of the article was that points style ignitions should continue to use the ballast resistor to keep from damaging or prematurely wearing out the contact points. They also contend that the electronic systems did NOT need the ballast resistor. They suggest to tie the wires together at the ballast and enjoy a hotter spark with NO ill effects.



No, Eberg claimed you will overheat the ECU running no ballast. I don't think he has ever actually tried it, as what he said isn't the reality. I continue to think that overheating was a "possiblity" thrown out there way back when that has since become "fact" since nobody ever tested to see if that was the case.
Posted By: furious70

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/12/11 07:25 PM

I've never read a study on how long an OEM coil and ecu will run on 12v but it's indisputable that they were designed to run on 9v to provide better starting characteristics. Run any electrical device with more volts than it was designed for and it will work, how long would come down to how much of a safety factor was built into the original design.
Posted By: can.al

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/12/11 07:52 PM

...why do you want to remove it?
Posted By: Kern Dog

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/12/11 09:28 PM

The article claims that without the ballast resistor, the spark energy is higher.
Posted By: 70duster340

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/13/11 02:58 AM

Quote:

...why do you want to remove it?



It's not that I want to remove it, I just wanted to know if the possibility exists that the car will perform as well if not better without the ballast resistor.
Posted By: SomeCarGuy

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/13/11 04:08 AM

Quote:

I've never read a study on how long an OEM coil and ecu will run on 12v but it's indisputable that they were designed to run on 9v to provide better starting characteristics. Run any electrical device with more volts than it was designed for and it will work, how long would come down to how much of a safety factor was built into the original design.




We're aren't and never were talking about running a 9 volt coil on 12 volts.
Posted By: SomeCarGuy

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/13/11 04:10 AM

Quote:

Quote:

...why do you want to remove it?



It's not that I want to remove it, I just wanted to know if the possibility exists that the car will perform as well if not better without the ballast resistor.



It absolutely will run better, it's questionable if you will notice though IMO. The MA blurb said it will run better. Burning up the ECU is the only consideration. Empirical evidence shows it won't.
Posted By: mikemee1331

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/13/11 02:16 PM

In the last few weeks I have spent more time reading articles about what/why/where/ and when you need a ballast then I really care to admit! Pretty much here is what I’ve come up with-
1) if you run points you need the ballast to extend the life of the points regardless of coil type.
2) if you run an ECU (any color) with a STOCK coil (6-9volts) you need the coil manufacturers recommended ballast. The coil will eventually fail/overheat.
3) If you run an ECU (any color) with a PERFORMANCE coil (12 volt) you shouldn’t need one but you should confirm that with the manufacture.
4) If you run a multi-spark ECU you shouldn’t need it regardless of coil type. The coil doesn’t hold the current long enough to cause overheating. Again, confirm that with the manufacturer.

The bottom line here is when you start mixing and matching you have to pay attention to each component’s requirement. Are you going to see any performance gains if you were using one when you didn’t need to, I don’t know but I tend to think the output voltage from the coil won’t be that different but wouldn’t know how to measure that.
Posted By: Kern Dog

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/13/11 07:37 PM

Sound advise and well written!
Posted By: IronWolf

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/13/11 10:18 PM

The ballast resistor takes MINUTES to change values.

Why doesn't someone set up a test with one of those cheap (now) laser thermal sensors ? Run the car ; record the temp at the ECU with the crappola parts store ballast resistor, Then, run with a low resistance ballast and record the temp at the ECU. Same time period obviously.

I've already run this test without recording the values. I've heard all the BS and ignored it. Don't stick to points or the crappola stock coil !

Scientific method rules.
Posted By: 70duster340

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/15/11 07:22 PM

Thanks for all the replies, folks!
Posted By: Kern Dog

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/15/11 07:24 PM

See what you started?
Posted By: 70duster340

Re: Mopar Muscle article - 08/15/11 07:27 PM

Didn't mean to start anything, believe me!!!
© 2024 Moparts Forums