MSD Ignition Again Who Has Tried It

[Lotus-e-Clan]

Agree with what has been said especially re: megajolt robustness...that's why I went elsewhere (to Canems) for a professional product....and with Canems there is no separate EDIS to clutter the engine bay and worry about either.

[Mr E]

I had MSD ignition in my Spitfire (with a 2 litre pinto, 45 weber carbs 150+bhp).
It spoiled the drive by breaking down and not giving noticeable extras

[fitz]

Right, I think thats made my mind up, presuming TIL gets through the MOT ok in November i'll probably be purchasing some kit from Canems

mine did its trick of stuttering just as i pulled out of a side road leaving me coasting until it suddenly 'caught' again. A RR setup would give a chance for the carbs to be worked over to make sure things were working right there as well.

[MattDebbage]

Not convinced its needed mate.... Your stuttering sounds like you have a simple fault somewhere rather than needing an expensive upgrade to improve on the standard system.
First thing to check is the fuel system - replace the fuel filter, clean out the carbs..... I know how full of muck my filter was and it was only replaced a couple of years ago. Also worth looking at the points in the fuel pump.
Then go through the ignition system, clean all the contacts, unplug the limiter then try again. You may find you can cure it for nowt
Matt.

[tonypoll]

Here's the details of the igniton map from my DTA S40 for my Excel SE.
It's running carbs, with the idle jets increased from 55 to 58.

I hope you can read the data, else you can look at the DTA forum (http://www.dtaforum.com/) where you'll see it posted under 'maps'

The results have been excellent, as noted above.

Basic ignition map
Throttle % 0 2 4 7 11 16 22 29 37 46 56 67 79 92
RPM
500 12.0 4.3 2.5 -0.2 -0.2 1.3 1.8 3.2 4.0 5.3 5.3 6.2 5.7 6.1
750 12.6 14.9 13.7 9.3 5.3 6.1 6.5 7.3 8.5 9.6 10.8 10.8 11.6 12.7
1000 13.9 26.5 22.5 18.4 13.8 12.2 12.2 12.6 13.8 16.5 18.5 17.7 18.1 18.5
1250 12.8 36.0 31.8 26.4 22.1 18.3 15.4 16.9 17.9 20.0 21.6 23.1 24.7 26.2
1750 24.1 43.2 40.2 35.2 32.4 30.2 26.9 24.0 24.8 28.2 31.6 32.6 33.5 34.5
2000 31.6 48.5 44.6 40.4 37.1 33.6 31.2 29.0 27.8 29.1 31.6 32.8 34.5 34.7
2250 40.1 51.6 50.1 44.0 40.2 39.1 36.8 32.3 28.8 30.4 32.1 33.7 34.1 34.4
2500 41.8 51.6 50.1 44.3 39.8 39.5 37.0 29.7 29.4 30.8 32.3 33.6 33.9 33.7
3000 43.6 51.7 50.2 44.5 40.3 39.9 37.2 30.3 30.0 31.2 32.5 33.5 33.8 35.1
3500 43.0 51.7 50.2 44.8 40.9 40.2 37.4 31.0 30.6 31.6 32.6 33.4 33.6 34.0
4000 43.6 51.7 50.2 45.0 41.4 40.6 37.5 31.2 31.2 32.0 32.8 33.3 33.4 32.8
4500 43.8 51.8 50.3 45.3 42.0 41.0 37.7 32.3 31.8 32.4 33.0 33.2 33.3 32.8
5000 43.6 51.8 50.3 45.5 42.5 41.4 37.9 33.0 32.4 32.8 33.2 33.1 33.1 32.9
5500 44.4 51.8 50.8 45.8 43.1 41.7 38.1 33.7 33.0 33.2 33.3 33.0 32.9 32.9
6000 44.4 51.9 50.4 46.0 43.6 42.1 38.3 34.3 33.6 33.6 33.5 32.9 32.8 32.9
6500 45.0 51.9 50.4 46.3 44.2 42.5 38.5 35.0 34.2 34.0 33.7 32.8 32.6 32.9
7000 44.7 51.7 50.4 46.5 44.7 42.9 38.6 35.7 34.8 34.4 33.9 32.7 32.4 33.0


Water temperature compensation
Degrees c Ignition Advance compensation
-20 100
-10 100
0 60
10 60
15 50
20 40
25 30
30 20
35 20
40 20
45 20
50 10
55 0
60 0
70 0
80 0
90 0
100 0
110 0
120 -20

General engine settings
Ultimate RPM limit 7200
Normal RPM limit 7000
Defaults on sensor failure
Water 90 degrees c
Throttle 75%
Coil on time 3000 micro-seconds

Fan switching temperature 80 degrees c

Air con uplift 10 degrees

Idle Target speed
temp deg c RPM
0 1000
20 1000
30 1000
50 1000
80 950

[Lotus-e-Clan]

Nice set of data there.

Plenty of compensation ...something lacking on the "ignition only" Canems ECU I have. If I were to start again I would use the full Canems EFI ECU for ignition only instead of purpose built "ignition only" ECU because the full EFI ECU has those sort of compensations for temperature etc.

Having said that I've no real complaint with the ignition only Canems as the motor runs great in all conditions... but it would e nice to have the extra features to play with.

You must have one smooth running motor mind.

[StevenD57]

I don't know if this is still an active topic or not but here is some additional information anyway. I have fitted crank-fired distributor-less ignition and electronic fuel injection to my 1974 Jensen-Healey. Prior to doing this the car had Zenith-Stromberg carbs and Pertronix ignition using the standard distributor.

I used the Megasquirt ECU but I have also helped fit the Megajolt ECU to friend's cars. The Megajolt and Megasquirt ECU are intended to be fitted inside the vehicle leaving the actual EDIS OEM Ford bits (coil pack, EDIS module, and VR sensor) under the hood. I have put quite a few miles on the car and so far my car has been very reliable.

I fitted the system in two or three stages. First I fitted just the crank-fired ignition while leaving the original carbs on the car. Then once that was completely installed and working, I went back and added some of the EFI sensors (water temp sensor and wide band O2 sensor systems). Then when I had the modified manifold ready I removed the standard OEM North-American intake with the ZS carbs and fitted my modified ZS intake that had the bungs welded into it for the fuel injectors. I did this staged installation so I could reduce the complexity at each step since I was only adding a few discrete components each time.

Tuning the spark and fuel maps was pretty easy. For the ignition map I started with one posted on another forum where someone had done a similar conversion to a 2.0L BMW 2002 motor. This let me get the ignition part of the conversion up and running with minimal hassle. Once I had a minor wiring short issue worked out, the car started up on the crank-fired ignition just fine and ran quite well. The difference in starting and the smoothness of the motor on the highway were definitely noticeable from just fitting the ignition conversion in my first stage.

Once I completed the fuel injection installation I started with a rough base map for the fuel tables and then used the built in data logging and autotune features of the Megasquirt to improve my tune. Having the wide band O2 system helped a LOT with the fuel map tuning.

I would say the most complex and time consuming pats of the install was wiring up all of the components and the design of the high pressure fuel supply and return system. Getting the car running and tuned after it was all installed was surprisingly easy. When the car started and ran so easily after the ignition install and then later after the EFI install illustrated to me that the Megasquirt hardware and software has been very well designed.

BTW, I have written a 16 page pdf document that covers just the ignition conversion process. This document includes wiring diagrams, parts lists and other advice regarding the project. I have been sending this document out for free on request.

I am also working on making a batch of the converted EFI manifold setups. These would include the fuel injector bungs welded in, throttle bodies, fuel rail and possibly fuel injectors. This would be a near bolt on conversion to fuel injection on a Lotus 900 series engine. The high pressure fuel supply and electronic ECU would be the other required bits. I have also made duplicates of the VR sensor and toothed wheel adapters for the crank-fired ignition conversion.

I have an on-line photo album showing various bits from this whole conversion process and there is a video posted on youtube of the system taken shortly after I first got it running.

I recently acquired a 1988 Turbo Esprit with Bosch CIS injection and I will most likely be doing the same conversion to electronic fuel injection and crank-fired ignition on that car as well.
--
Steven DuChene

[Lotus-e-Clan]

Steven

This info is very welcome. Is it possible to post your PDF on an attachment so we can all access the info?

[KevW]

Welcome to the forum Steven. I'd also love to read your research.

[tonypoll]

Steven,
I suspect I had previously read your Jensen-Healey project notes on the J-H forum, and it was one of the major reasons I decided to fit mapped ignition.
Thank you.
As you tackled your project in stages, can you say a bit about the difference between mapped ignition only, and mapped ignition with fuel injections?
In particular, can you say something like: mapped ignition is X% of the final result, (in terms of driving experience).
The extra cost of adding fuel injection was $Z, and well worth it (or not).
(Increased fuel MPG is not an issue for me - since I'd have to drive a LOT of miles to cover the cost of any fuel injection solution).

As you'll see above, I kept the carbs and went with ignition only, to avoid some of the subjects you listed: high pressure fuel supply, mapping both fuel and ignition, etc. I'm very pleased with this solution, so I'd be very interested to hear your views on ignition only.
Or, to put it another way, should I plan to add fuel injection to my Excel at some point

Plus... another vote requesting your 16 page document on your project.

Tony

[AndyLotus]

Hi Steven,

Another one who would like to have a look at the pdf document please. I will get around to fitting the megajolt eventually. As Tony has done, I think I will keep the carbs to reduce the complexity and cost.

Thanks for the info,

Andy.

[Lotus-e-Clan]

As long as your carbs are properly set-up, the major benefit is with mapped ignition IMO.

For DHLA's and cams with a wide overlap you should ideally use an ignition ICU governed by rpm and TPS and not rpm and MAP....even SE cams would benefit from TPS rather than MAP. The available vacuum to work MAP above 20% throttle is non-existent / greatly reduced with wide overlap cams because the early exhaust opening and late inlet closing collapses the vacuum @ relatively small throttle openings.

If the ign ECU has an additional air intake temperature (or engine temp) input all the better for cold starting 'cos you can advance the ignition when cold then back it off when warm to prevent pinking @ low rpm /high load.

And has been said already, a wideband AFR meter makes both carb and ignition tuning /mapping a breeze. Better value for money to spend the extra on an AFR meter/logging unit rather than fuel injection IMHO. In fact buy the AFR unit first before mapping the ignition because a lot can be done to set-up DHLAs and the std dizzy with an AFR meter.....for example the AFR meter can provide insight into the comparison between the std air box and open K&Ns...the air box will win 'cos you can set the carb jetting to achieve stable AFRs via a stable air intake temperature rather than the wide range of temps and hence unstable AFRs you get with open under bonnet K&Ns or any open decoupled intake system..the plenum air box wins every time.

[StevenD57]

Steven,
I suspect I had previously read your Jensen-Healey project notes on the J-H forum, and it was one of the major reasons I decided to fit mapped ignition.
Thank you.
As you tackled your project in stages, can you say a bit about the difference between mapped ignition only, and mapped ignition with fuel injections?
In particular, can you say something like: mapped ignition is X% of the final result, (in terms of driving experience).
The extra cost of adding fuel injection was $Z, and well worth it (or not).
(Increased fuel MPG is not an issue for me - since I'd have to drive a LOT of miles to cover the cost of any fuel injection solution).

As you'll see above, I kept the carbs and went with ignition only, to avoid some of the subjects you listed: high pressure fuel supply, mapping both fuel and ignition, etc. I'm very pleased with this solution, so I'd be very interested to hear your views on ignition only.
Or, to put it another way, should I plan to add fuel injection to my Excel at some point

Plus... another vote requesting your 16 page document on your project.

Tony

I currently have two Jensen-Healeys that run. This one in Arizona that started off with the ZS carbs and Pertonix ignition in a standard distributor (read old & tired). The other one at my dad's house in Ohio has Dellorto DHLA45 carbs and now has the salvaged distributor and Pertronix ignition setup from the Phoenix car.

Now that the car in Phoenix has the crank-fired ignition and the fuel injection with the larger throttle bodies (up from the dual 1.75 inch carbs to the dual 2.125 throttle bodies and ported manifold) I would say the two cars probably have similar power. Where the fuel injected car beats the Dellorto car is economy and drive-ability. I know the car with the DHLA45 carbs has good top end but I also know that at part throttle conditions it is just not as smooth on the tip in as the car with the EFI.

As far as the ignition only conversion I think the big benefit is that it "probably" runs cleaner as far as emissions but the most noticeable difference is how nice it started. When cranking the motor over with the crank-fired ignition and the ZS carbs it pretty much started first crank, where-as with the regular distributor, single coil and Pertronix ignition I KNOW I had to crank it about 3x - 4x as much. Now I think this very well might be because of the old tired distributor and old coil. Who knows what the advance curve was with the original distributor and I am REAL sure the spark I am getting out of the Ford coil pack is definitely much hotter than what I was getting with the old coil, distributor cap, rotor and plug leads. I also definitely noticed a difference in how smooth the car ran on the highway after I finished just the ignition conversion. With the programmable ignition curve there are things that can be accomplished that are just NOT possible with springs, advance weights, and vacuum pots in a old style rotating distributor.

Now the engine in the EFI car in Phoenix is a bog stock unit rather than one with any mods. This brings us to the real advantage I feel of going to the programmable fuel injection. Should I decide to make some internal performance modifications to the motor with the EFI I KNOW from the experience I had with dialing in the tune so far that redoing the tune for any mods I make to the motor would be real simple compared to what I would have to do if I still had carbs and regular distributor. It is the flexibility of being able to easily retune the system that really makes it a winner. Having the wide band O2 system and the autotune features of the TunerStudio software used with the Megasquirt is what really makes this a successful operation.

As far as costs you have to realize my primary expense was the one-off fabrication work I had to do with the injector mods for the intake manifold, the VR sensor bracket and the crank pulley adapter for the toothed wheel for the crank-fired ignition. One of the reasons this was the primary expense is that I had to do the fuel injector bung mods on the intake twice since I initially tried to cheap it out by having a somewhat inexperienced friend do the machine work and welding the first go round. The result I ended up with was not very good or professional. I then chose to take the semi-screwed up intake to a professional fab shop to get it redone right. It just goes to show that the quality of the work is worth what you pay for it. The rest of the parts I used in the conversion except for the ECU itself were all salvaged from various cars in local wrecking yards. The ECU I was able to score a good deal via an Ebay seller from Turkey of all places. The extra money I had to spend on the redoing of the intake was slightly offset by the cash I saved on the Ebay Megasquirt ECU.

All in all though, the cost of doing the conversion was not that bad at all. I learned a WHOLE lot since prior to starting on the job, I did a LOT of studying and reading of various documents on the Internet that pertained to fuel injection design and the Megasquirt in particular. There is a lot of information available on things like the pros and cons of different injector types, how to correctly size injectors, interfacing the crank-fired ignition to the Megasquirt ECU, choosing the right engine load calculation types (speed density verses mass air flow or MAP verses TPS) and etc. Plus the on-line community around the Megasquirt is a great technical and advice resource. The on-line documentation that people have published on their conversion projects is a GREAT resource. For instance the guy who did the conversion on the BMW 2002 has pages and pages of project notes published. It includes a LOT of great photos as well as discussion of design evolution and changes over time and discussions about various design choices he made over the course of his project.

[StevenD57]

As long as your carbs are properly set-up, the major benefit is with mapped ignition IMO.

For DHLA's and cams with a wide overlap you should ideally use an ignition ICU governed by rpm and TPS and not rpm and MAP....even SE cams would benefit from TPS rather than MAP. The available vacuum to work MAP above 20% throttle is non-existent / greatly reduced with wide overlap cams because the early exhaust opening and late inlet closing collapses the vacuum @ relatively small throttle openings.

If the ign ECU has an additional air intake temperature (or engine temp) input all the better for cold starting 'cos you can advance the ignition when cold then back it off when warm to prevent pinking @ low rpm /high load.

And has been said already, a wideband AFR meter makes both carb and ignition tuning /mapping a breeze. Better value for money to spend the extra on an AFR meter/logging unit rather than fuel injection IMHO. In fact buy the AFR unit first before mapping the ignition because a lot can be done to set-up DHLAs and the std dizzy with an AFR meter.....for example the AFR meter can provide insight into the comparison between the std air box and open K&Ns...the air box will win 'cos you can set the carb jetting to achieve stable AFRs via a stable air intake temperature rather than the wide range of temps and hence unstable AFRs you get with open under bonnet K&Ns or any open decoupled intake system..the plenum air box wins every time.

This is where there is a difference in doing the crank-fired ignition with the Megajolt verses the Megasquirt. Here in the US the Megajolt is around $160 - $170 US dollars plus shipping costs but it ONLY does ignition and does NOT have this provision to add all these additional sensors like air temp, water temp, or wide band O2 sensors. By using the slightly more expensive Megasquirt ($350 - $450 US dollars) these additional capabilities come into play. Also there are more sophisticated load calculation strategies available with the Megasquirt. The Megasquirt allows the tuner to choose a blended load calculation where a MAP signal is used over part of the RPM or throttle range and the TPS for other engine speed or throttle opening ranges. With more modern Megasquirt ECUs than what I used, there is also a special load calculation option available that is specifically designed for independent throttle bodies or ITBs.

[MrCoolA]

Not wanting to get drawn in to a load of posts that go well over my head (I'm a Civil Engineer who specialises in Railway so quite a simple sole really) i would like to ask a simple question...........................I am in the process (or soon will be) of having EFI fitted to Loti in the guise of QED throttle bodies and a Wolf controller etc..............there is a lot of talk on forums about getting cars set up on rolling roads and, i have certainly had mine done in the past......is it imperative to get the car once the EFI is fitted setup on a rolling road??