basic Hall-effect distributor wiring
Nathan M. Gant
ground, a second wire for voltage supply or reference voltage, and a third
wire for output signal.
Probably the best question to ask is whether its output signal is actually
needed to generated a spark. Will the Hall-effect distributor generate a
spark without connecting the output signal into a computerized spark control
unit?
In other words, can I just just the 2 wires and disregard the wire for
output signal?
I have Dodge 2.2. engine, using an aftermarket 2-barrel carb running on a
modified points/condensor distributor (the ole Boss Kettering system), but I
want to install a Hall-effect distributor from a new vehicle. I am not
interested in interfacing it into a computerized control unit at the moment.
N8N
Why not use an "orange box?" I don't think it will work without some
kind of signal amplifier.
nate
Steve Austin
the spark advance? The cam sensor in the distributor won't do either.
Scott Dorsey
>Given that the basic Hall-effect distributor will require one wire for
>ground, a second wire for voltage supply or reference voltage, and a third
>wire for output signal.
Okay.
>Probably the best question to ask is whether its output signal is actually
>needed to generated a spark. Will the Hall-effect distributor generate a
>spark without connecting the output signal into a computerized spark control
>unit?
>In other words, can I just just the 2 wires and disregard the wire for
>output signal?
No. The output signal tells the ECU to spark. Without the output signal,
the ECU doesn't know whether to spark or not... it's sort of like the
points, but it's producing a very low level signal that needs to be
greatly amplified to drive the coil.
>I have Dodge 2.2. engine, using an aftermarket 2-barrel carb running on a
>modified points/condensor distributor (the ole Boss Kettering system), but I
>want to install a Hall-effect distributor from a new vehicle. I am not
>interested in interfacing it into a computerized control unit at the moment.
You could probably build a device to do the job, modelled after a capacitive
discharge ignition system with a big capacitor that charges up, and an SCR
that is fired by the signal from the hall sensor. But it would take some
electronic design work to do it.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
N8N
I think you're overthinking the situation. I suspect that a MoPar
"orange box" or a MSD 6AL or similar would serve nicely. Steve's
point about advance is something to think about though. Is the
distributor equipped with vacuum and/or mechanical advance
mechanisms? If not, might be time to acquire one that is so equipped,
otherwise it won't run worth a shiite. However, since he says he's
running points, I am ASSuming that he's talking about using the
distributor he already has and just ditching the points for a more
modern Hall sender, which should work fine so long as the advance
mechanisms are not defeated or significantly modified.
Just as an example, an old Studebaker V-8 Prestolite distributor is
essentially the same as a B/RB MoPar distributor inside, only the
housing, shaft, and gear are different. I'm currently running a
modified Prestolite distributor in my '55 Stude that has been fitted
with a Hall sender from a later model MoPar and is connected to the
stock coil through an "orange box" and matching ballast resistor. It
works great. (my right forearm can vouch for that...) I do have a
MSD box to play with but it works well enough at the moment that I
haven't been motivated to try it.
nate
Nathan M. Gant
how they hook up.
Basically, my 1984 Dodge Caravan has the original distributor yanked out,
and I put in a modified Bosch 009 distributor (the ones the old air-cooled
VWs have). FYI, the conversion from stock Mopar distributor the the Bosch
unit is documented here:
http://www.geocities.com/ngant17/VW_distrib_mod.html
Since then, I've gotten an old 2.2l parts car ('86 Dodge Charger, with same
motor) and I am interested in putting the stock electronic ignition back
into the van, basically as a back-up when my point get burnt and I can swap
in another ignition and get back on the road ASAP.
Unfortunately wiring is pretty bad in the old van, so I have to make all my
ignition wiring from scratch again.
Sounds like the Mopar orange box is the way to go. I'll check around to see
who's got a decent price on them. Any tips on hooking up?
Ngant
"N8N" <njn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3904f853-de5a-47ed...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
jim
N8N wrote:
>
> I think you're overthinking the situation. I suspect that a MoPar
> "orange box" or a MSD 6AL or similar would serve nicely. Steve's
> point about advance is something to think about though. Is the
> distributor equipped with vacuum and/or mechanical advance
> mechanisms?
If he is talking about getting the first Chrysler electronic ignition used in
the early 70's. Everything to control timing is in the distributor. But he needs
something either an after-market box like you refer to or the OEM control unit
to go between the distributor and the negative side of the coil.
-jim
>If not, might be time to acquire one that is so equipped,
> otherwise it won't run worth a shiite. However, since he says he's
> running points, I am ASSuming that he's talking about using the
> distributor he already has and just ditching the points for a more
> modern Hall sender, which should work fine so long as the advance
> mechanisms are not defeated or significantly modified.
>
> Just as an example, an old Studebaker V-8 Prestolite distributor is
> essentially the same as a B/RB MoPar distributor inside, only the
> housing, shaft, and gear are different. I'm currently running a
> modified Prestolite distributor in my '55 Stude that has been fitted
> with a Hall sender from a later model MoPar and is connected to the
> stock coil through an "orange box" and matching ballast resistor. It
> works great. (my right forearm can vouch for that...) I do have a
> MSD box to play with but it works well enough at the moment that I
> haven't been motivated to try it.
>
> nate
----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Nathan M. Gant
Unit(P4120505) is whether it is made for the Mopar 4-bangers or the bigger
Mopar 8-cylinder motors? Will the stock 2.2 distributor connectors fit into
the 'orange box'? Or do I have to buy a separate wiring harness for it?
ngant
"N8N" <njn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3904f853-de5a-47ed...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Steve
> Wow, didn't know about the Mopar "orange box". I'll check them out to see
> how they hook up.
The Orange Box is made for a reluctor pickup, not a Hall Effect. Now, it
might actually work OK with a hall effect, but I'm not sure.
But I'll tell you a secret, and this is coming from a dyed-in-the-wool
Mopar guy: a GM 4-pin HEI module is much better than an Orange Box
because you can eliminate the ballast resistor.
http://duster318.freeservers.com/tech/hei.html
Note that the "chrysler electronic distributor" noted on that web page
is a RELUCTOR pickup type, NOT a Hall Effect.
Steve
> The only question I have with the Mopar Orange Electronic Control
> Unit(P4120505) is whether it is made for the Mopar 4-bangers or the bigger
> Mopar 8-cylinder motors? Will the stock 2.2 distributor connectors fit into
> the 'orange box'? Or do I have to buy a separate wiring harness for it?
> ngant
The 'orange box' could care less how many cylinders you have. All it
does is take a distributor output signal from the reluctor and amplify
it to fire a coil. The distributor is what sends the high voltage to the
correct cylinder. The same ignition module works on anything from a
4-cylinder to a v8, but as I noted in another post the 'orange box' and
the GM HEI module both expect a reluctor-type signal and not a Hall
Effect signal.
Scott Dorsey
>
>I think you're overthinking the situation. I suspect that a MoPar
>"orange box" or a MSD 6AL or similar would serve nicely. Steve's
>point about advance is something to think about though. Is the
>distributor equipped with vacuum and/or mechanical advance
>mechanisms? If not, might be time to acquire one that is so equipped,
>otherwise it won't run worth a shiite. However, since he says he's
>running points, I am ASSuming that he's talking about using the
>distributor he already has and just ditching the points for a more
>modern Hall sender, which should work fine so long as the advance
>mechanisms are not defeated or significantly modified.
Explain to me this "orange box." It sounds like precisely the thing
I described making.
N8N
this guy:
http://www.jegs.com/i/Mopar%20Performance/312/P4120505/10002/-1
it's basically the "high performance" version of the stock MoPar
electronic ignition box that was used on pretty much everything in the
70's, reason I suggest that is ordering the orange one from Jeg's,
Summit, et. al. is the same price or less than buying a stock
replacement from your FLAPS. You also need to buy a ballast resistor
and a wiring harness to go with it (both available;) after that it's
pretty plug and play.
I'd forgotten about the HEI module, but that is another option and
probably easier to hide if such is important. I used the orange box
on my car because it came with the distributor I bought.
Whoever mentioned that it was actually a reluctor not a Hall sender
was correct, but I don't know that it makes that much difference (and
I'm at work at the moment so I don't have the ability to research the
outputs of the two and see if there's a significant difference)
nate
N8N
centrifugal and vacuum advance, or is it computer controlled? if the
latter you probably would be better served by putting a Pertronix in
the 009 and being done with it, unless there's other reasons you want
to ditch the 009. (I could respect that actually, IIRC the 009 does
not have vacuum advance?)
nate
On Aug 28, 12:35 pm, "Nathan M. Gant" <ngan...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
> Wow, didn't know about the Mopar "orange box". I'll check them out to see
> how they hook up.
>
> Basically, my 1984 Dodge Caravan has the original distributor yanked out,
> and I put in a modified Bosch 009 distributor (the ones the old air-cooled
> VWs have). FYI, the conversion from stock Mopar distributor the the Bosch
> unit is documented here:http://www.geocities.com/ngant17/VW_distrib_mod.html
>
> Since then, I've gotten an old 2.2l parts car ('86 Dodge Charger, with same
> motor) and I am interested in putting the stock electronic ignition back
> into the van, basically as a back-up when my point get burnt and I can swap
> in another ignition and get back on the road ASAP.
>
> Unfortunately wiring is pretty bad in the old van, so I have to make all my
> ignition wiring from scratch again.
>
> Sounds like the Mopar orange box is the way to go. I'll check around to see
> who's got a decent price on them. Any tips on hooking up?
>
> Ngant"N8N" <njna...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> nate- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
N8N
Why would you want to eliminate the ballast resistor? I can tell you
from personal experience that having a ballast bypass makes for much
easier starting on high-compression engines. friend had a warmed over
chevy 383 that wouldn't start worth a crap, I noticed that it had an
old Mallory ignition system that used a ballast and that there was no
wire from the starter to the coil side of the ballast. I rectified
that little issue and starting was much faster. You can't do that
with an ignition system that is designed to run on a full 12V all the
time.
nate
Steve
Its a slightly improved performance model of the standard Chrysler
electronic ignition module that was used from 1970 through about 1990
when the last models got their ignition control moved into the ECM. Its
just an amplifier that takes a reluctor signal and then switches the
coil. The OEM units were called the "black box." The "orange box" was
sold through Direct Connection (later Mopar Performance) and has better
high-RPM performance. The "chrome box" was an even higher frequency
model, and the "gold box" was a race-only version that allowed
eliminating the ballast resistor, but would overheat the coil badly if
you ever left the ignition on with the engine not actually running. The
Mopar box was one of the first fully electronic ignition systems put in
mass production. Its very good and very reliable, but the HEI module
one-ups it in performance by providing active dwell control that
switches the coil on only for a fixed period of time rather than leaving
it on and just interrupting the coil current when its time to fire a
plug. That allows elimination of the ballast resistor and its associated
losses.
See: http://www.jimsautoparts.com/mopar_performance_ignition.htm about
1/3 of the way down the page.
Steve
>
> Why would you want to eliminate the ballast resistor? I can tell you
> from personal experience that having a ballast bypass makes for much
> easier starting on high-compression engines.
Thats exactly why you want to eliminate it: you effectively ALWAYS have
a ballast bypass with a HEI system. Plus the ballast resistor is the
most common point of failure in the Mopar system (which really says how
reliable the rest of it is, because a ceramic encased ballast resistor
is pretty damn rugged).
N8N
> N8N wrote:
>
> > Why would you want to eliminate the ballast resistor? I can tell you
> > from personal experience that having a ballast bypass makes for much
> > easier starting on high-compression engines.
>
> Thats exactly why you want to eliminate it: you effectively ALWAYS have
> a ballast bypass with a HEI system.
Eh... not really. The system voltage still drops to 9-10V when
starting. Better that it do that on a system designed to operate at
that voltage than one that is designed to operate at 12V.
> Plus the ballast resistor is the
> most common point of failure in the Mopar system (which really says how
> reliable the rest of it is, because a ceramic encased ballast resistor
> is pretty damn rugged).
Which is also good for impressing females. I "fixed" an ex-GF's
Valiant at the side of the road with a paper clip and a shop rag when
the ballast crapped out, and her friends still think I'm a real-life
MacGuyver :)
nate
Nathan M. Gant
question is 1984, and the Charger is 1986. Just to set the record straight.
The (typically Brazilian-made) Bosch 009 dizzies are pure mechanical, always
have and always will be. That's what I got in the Caravan. Yes, there are
Bosch mechanical/vacuum units out there, if you can salvage them, and you
will definitely notice a hugh difference in acceleration. But to buy them
outright new would set you back many hundreds of dollars for a stock unit at
that. I'm not burning money like the racers do at the track, the 009's (or
050's, which are a little higher in price but have better mechanical advance
curve) are in the $60-$70 dollar range for NIB Bosch 009s, that price can't
be beat for a new part.
"..you probably would be better served by putting a Pertronix in the 009 and
being done with it..."
Yeah, I always keep like to keep my options open, and
that's less than a C-note for new Petronix 009 conversion kits.
But I seem to be cornering the market in mini-mopar 2.2l parts for the
moment, this Mopar orange box thingee you mentioned has definitely caught my
eye. Seems like it's a little more cost-effective for me right now.
"N8N" <njn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2ce791ee-fef6-42f0...@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Nathan M. Gant
original Mopar distributor, it's that the 009 I rigged up (with distro drive
collar, ect) sometimes I have a nightmare that the thing will break or a pin
will come snap or wear loose, and I'll be stranded
http://www.geocities.com/ngant17/VW_distrib_mod.html
It's probably 'fear of the unknown', as I'm convinced I'm the original
pioneer in modifying the Bosch 009 dizzy to fit the mini-Mopars. In any
event, I've been running this set-up for several years now, haven't noticed
any wear on the parts except for the stock VW distributor clamp, which
cracked in half after the first few months from the stress of the bigger
motor. I got stranded on that one!
But I solved that by going for the heavy duty distributor drive clamps that
Bugpack sells aftermarket for VW fans.
The Caravan isn't a daily driver and mostly sees weekend work on the road,
so it hasn't really been torture-tested yet.
"N8N" <njn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2ce791ee-fef6-42f0...@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
mike
>
> If he is talking about getting the first Chrysler electronic ignition used in
> the early 70's. Everything to control timing is in the distributor. But he needs
> something either an after-market box like you refer to or the OEM control unit
> to go between the distributor and the negative side of the coil.
http://hometown.aol.com/pullingtractor/ignition.htm
for retrofitting electronic ignitions
Has some basic diagrams for Mopar, 4 pin GM and Ford Duraspark
Other sites have a different diagram with the Ford to retard the spark
when cranking. It seems those boxes from the Big 3 can use more
than just a reluctor, points and hall effect seem to work to trigger
as well.
**
mike
**
aarcuda69062
Steve <n...@spam.thanks> wrote:
> Nathan M. Gant wrote:
> > Wow, didn't know about the Mopar "orange box". I'll check them out to see
> > how they hook up.
>
>
> The Orange Box is made for a reluctor pickup, not a Hall Effect.
100% correct.
> Now, it might actually work OK with a hall effect, but I'm not sure.
You'd need a source for the 8 volt supply for the Hall Effect which the
orange box doesn't possess.
> But I'll tell you a secret, and this is coming from a dyed-in-the-wool
> Mopar guy: a GM 4-pin HEI module is much better than an Orange Box
> because you can eliminate the ballast resistor.
Again, 100% correct.
I did the conversion on my AAR last year, couldn't be happier.
The failing of the ChryCo ignition box is that it runs to much dwell
time, like 98% which manifests itself as a shorter burn time at the
spark plug because the ignition coil is turned on much too soon
shortening the secondary output from the coil. That always drove me
bonkers.
>
> http://duster318.freeservers.com/tech/hei.html
>
> Note that the "chrysler electronic distributor" noted on that web page
> is a RELUCTOR pickup type, NOT a Hall Effect.
IIRC, there was a stand alone Hall Effect Ignition box used in the late
70s/early 80s in the Omni/Horizon 1.7liter. But that doesn't solve
the problem that there ever existed a stock 2.2 distributor that (to my
knowledge) contained any type of mechanical or vacuum advance.
AFAIK, they were all computer controlled.
The Pertronix is an excellent choice and would work better than any
kludged set up assuming there is one available to fit the OPs Bosch
distributor.
aarcuda69062
<c3a8cbad-f4e3-4f46...@z11g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,
N8N <njn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Why would you want to eliminate the ballast resistor?
Because they're a potential failure point and they can burn the paint
off of the firewall where they're mounted.
The HEI on the AAR still has a ballast in place, the resistor is gutted
out and a fat chunk of 10 ga. wire replaces it.
> I can tell you
> from personal experience that having a ballast bypass makes for much
> easier starting on high-compression engines.
But the ballast resistor is bypassed during starting, so how can 'it'
"make for much easier starting?"
> friend had a warmed over
> chevy 383 that wouldn't start worth a crap, I noticed that it had an
> old Mallory ignition system that used a ballast and that there was no
> wire from the starter to the coil side of the ballast. I rectified
> that little issue and starting was much faster.
You bypassed the ballast...
> You can't do that
> with an ignition system that is designed to run on a full 12V all the
> time.
Sure you can, design an ignition coil like GM, Ford and eventually,
Chrysler did (E-core coil) instead of the antique crap the Chrysler used
(oil filled coil)
Better rise time, better saturation..
Steve Austin
Points last a long time if you take the coil primary load off them.
HLS
"aarcuda69062" <none...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:nonelson-
> The failing of the ChryCo ignition box is that it runs to much dwell
> time, like 98% which manifests itself as a shorter burn time at the
> spark plug because the ignition coil is turned on much too soon
> shortening the secondary output from the coil. That always drove me
> bonkers.
I have seen papers which intended to prove that a long spark period (reduced
dwell,
in essence) did no good at all in the ignition process. Capacitive
discharge had a
very short spark period in the original embodiments.
I dont have much of an opinion one way or the other, but have seen the
minimal
spark period CD systems do a good job.
What do you think?
HLS
"Steve Austin" <sau...@northnet.org> wrote in message news:48b7becd$0$7479
> Points last a long time if you take the coil primary load off them.
Absolutely.. IIRC, systems like this often use a low bias current as there
is an
optimum current level for long life and good performance. You may remember,
Steve,
how much this is...I dont. Maybe a couple of tenths of an amp?
aarcuda69062
"HLS" <nos...@nospam.nix> wrote:
It's long been taught that optimum spark duration is between 1.5 ms and
2.2 ms, so yes, anything over 2.2 ms will have little benefit.
On a good day, the ChryCo orange box would allow 1.1 ms spark duration.
Steve Austin
Don't know. At the time when CD setups for point distributors were the
hot ticket, I was kind of anti-electronic. lol.
Nathan M. Gant
http://duster318.freeservers.com/tech/hei.html
you're married this setup to a specific type of distributor, a Mopar
Electronic Ignition Vaccum Advance distributor.
Getting rid of a ballast resistor and the oil-filled coil would be fine,
I've been stranded on the highway by a bum oil-filled coil before. However,
I'm still stuck with the stock OEM K-car/mini-mopar/2.2 engine and the OEM
distributor, so that's the distributor I'll be using in place of my modified
Bosch 009 on the 2.2 motor.
Yes, pertronix for the Bosch 0009 would be my 2nd option here. But not the
most cost-effective as plenty of cheap 2.2/2.5 mini-mopar distributors are
out there and unfortunately I don't think they were vacuum advance units as
a rule. Looks like the Mopar orange box with the oil-filled coil and
ballast resistor will be the best I can do, all things considered so far.
Just want to have a way to run the van without using 009 distributor for a
change.
"Steve" <n...@spam.thanks> wrote in message
news:PsadnUjDILW0nirV...@texas.net...
Dan_Thom...@yahoo.com
> Given that the basic Hall-effect distributor will require one wire for
> ground, a second wire for voltage supply or reference voltage, and a third
> wire for output signal.
>
> needed to generated a spark. Will the Hall-effect distributor generate a
> spark without connecting the output signal into a computerized spark control
> unit?
> In other words, can I just just the 2 wires and disregard the wire for
> output signal?
>
> modified points/condensor distributor (the ole Boss Kettering system), but I
> want to install a Hall-effect distributor from a new vehicle. I am not
> interested in interfacing it into a computerized control unit at the moment.
We put a Subaru 2.2L engine in an airplane, and used a Ford TFI-
IV distributor that ran the coil directly. Can't remember the wiring,
though. Only used three, I think, of the five or six terminals. The
airplane is in Sweden now. That distributor even had advance, and I
don't know how it did it. I guess the chip has an advance function to
it. The only mod to the distributor was to the shaft drive.
Dan
Nathan M. Gant
distributor shafts together
http://hometown.aol.com/pullingtractor/sledinfo.htm#pinning
which is a good idea if you have access to TIG/MIG welders and metal lathes
and are willing to spend the time to do it right.
However, that isn't practical for me, I have the most basic tool sets and a
hobby welder, so the most practical conversion I can do based on my limited
set of tools and budget, is to swap out the distributor drive cog between
the VW and mini-mopar/k-car 2.2 distributors. This works out pretty well, so
I'm preferring stick with this procedure, as you only need to ream out the
cog a little, as noted in the website:
http://www.geocities.com/ngant17/VW_distrib_mod.html
"...to replace the stock 009 distributor drive cog with the stock K-car's
cog, both of which are fixed to their respective shafts with a securing pin
at the bottom of the shaft...the 009 [distributor drive] shaft (shown on
right of picture) has a bigger O.D., which means you have to slightly ream
out the I.D. of the K-car's distributor-drive cog in order to get it to fit
on the VW drive shaft. You can see the K-car drive cog in the center of
photo. I reamed it out with a high-speed 'Dremel' type of rotary
grinder..."
Too bad the GM HEI distributors don't have the drive cogs on the end of the
shaft like the Mopar units, which would make it a no-brainer to swap them
out without extensive machining and welding of shafts together.
So far my Bosch 009 hasn't broke in that spot, so it's probably good enough
for the long run.
Mopar orange box with ballast resistor and old-style coil seems to be the
most practical way to go. And Pertronix in the 009 is probably where I'll
be going eventually, too.
<Dan_Thom...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:36fc30e9-b9a0-468a...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Kevin
news:qqednVNq6vrW3yrV...@earthlink.com:
> Excuse me, I might have mixed up my Mopar 4-banger years. The Caravan
> in question is 1984, and the Charger is 1986. Just to set the record
> straight.
>
> The (typically Brazilian-made) Bosch 009 dizzies are pure mechanical,
> always have and always will be. That's what I got in the Caravan.
> Yes, there are Bosch mechanical/vacuum units out there, if you can
> salvage them, and you will definitely notice a hugh difference in
> acceleration. But to buy them outright new would set you back many
> hundreds of dollars for a stock unit at that. I'm not burning money
> like the racers do at the track, the 009's (or 050's, which are a
> little higher in price but have better mechanical advance curve) are
> in the $60-$70 dollar range for NIB Bosch 009s, that price can't be
> beat for a new part.
>
> "..you probably would be better served by putting a Pertronix in the
> 009 and being done with it..."
>
> Yeah, I always keep like to keep my options open, and
> that's less than a C-note for new Petronix 009 conversion kits.
>
> But I seem to be cornering the market in mini-mopar 2.2l parts for the
> moment, this Mopar orange box thingee you mentioned has definitely
> caught my eye. Seems like it's a little more cost-effective for me
> right now.
>
> "N8N" <njn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2ce791ee-fef6-42f0-8a28-136de2f68d00
@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com.
> .. Before you go too far with this, does the '86 dizzy have
>> news:3904f853-de5a-47ed-85e4-
e45342...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com.
Get the Dr Jacobs ign. book. in it it will tell you how to wire any
elect. ign system using almost any manuf. parts. piece of cake KB
--
THUNDERSNAKE #9
Protect your rights or "Lose" them
The 2nd Admendment guarantees the others
Nathan M. Gant
I was going down the highway around a curve, and suddenly heard a loud
"pop", like it stuttered once, and I lost my spark, then I had to coast on
what momentum I had left.
Luckily I found a convenience store parking lot to come to a final halt.
In between the bursts of rain showers, I pulled out my trusty back-up Bosch
009, bolted it to the Caravan engine block, put on the same 009 distributor
cap,secured it with the 2 clips, and it fired right up. I was on my way
again.
Don't know what it could be this time, but probably either the points or
condensor. Need to get the stock mopar dizzy or some electronic ignition
ready to run in it soon. Definitely motivated to do the work this Labor Day.
"Nathan M. Gant" <nga...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:Y6mdnfz037Gp6SvV...@earthlink.com...
> Given that the basic Hall-effect distributor will require one wire for
> ground, a second wire for voltage supply or reference voltage, and a third
> wire for output signal.
>
> Probably the best question to ask is whether its output signal is actually
> needed to generated a spark. Will the Hall-effect distributor generate a
> spark without connecting the output signal into a computerized spark
control
> unit?
> In other words, can I just just the 2 wires and disregard the wire for
> output signal?
>
Nathan M. Gant
broke and worked itself loose.news:CoadnQxAkv90NSTV...@earthlink.com...
Steve
> I should mention that one minor fear that's motivating me to go back to the
> original Mopar distributor, it's that the 009 I rigged up (with distro drive
> collar, ect) sometimes I have a nightmare that the thing will break or a pin
> will come snap or wear loose, and I'll be stranded
> http://www.geocities.com/ngant17/VW_distrib_mod.html
Yikes! I'd hesitate to trust any webpage with a first sentence that reads, "
FYI, all Chrysler/Dodge 4-cylinder "K-car" engine models, which were
mass-produced in the early and mid-1980's, appear to be based on a VW
(water-cooled) short block."
Good grief. Nothing in common at all. Chrysler DID use a VW block for
the entry-level engine in the Omni/Horizon for many years, but it was
never used in a K-car. The 2.2 used in K-cars is all-Chrysler and shares
some heritage with the B/RB big-block v8s (same main bearing sizes,
which is why the 2.2 turbo bottom end can live at 400+ horsepower) and
the slant-6.
Steve
> Sounds like the HEI would be the perfect setup, but from the site
> http://duster318.freeservers.com/tech/hei.html
>
> you're married this setup to a specific type of distributor, a Mopar
> Electronic Ignition Vaccum Advance distributor.
>
> Getting rid of a ballast resistor and the oil-filled coil would be fine,
> I've been stranded on the highway by a bum oil-filled coil before. However,
> I'm still stuck with the stock OEM K-car/mini-mopar/2.2 engine and the OEM
> distributor, so that's the distributor I'll be using in place of my modified
> Bosch 009 on the 2.2 motor.
>
> Yes, pertronix for the Bosch 0009 would be my 2nd option here. But not the
> most cost-effective as plenty of cheap 2.2/2.5 mini-mopar distributors are
> out there and unfortunately I don't think they were vacuum advance units as
> a rule. Looks like the Mopar orange box with the oil-filled coil and
> ballast resistor will be the best I can do, all things considered so far.
This doesn't make sense. IF you can run the orange box, YOU CAN RUN HEI
and ANY COIL YOU WANT! By the way, I don't understand the hate for
oil-filled coils. Yes, E-cores are great, but there are oil-filled coils
that perform just as well. Oil filling also provides more uniform coil
cooling than a solid molded dielectric around the coils, too. Anyway, it
was the OEM design requiring a ballast that was the problem, not the
fact that the coil was oil-filled per se.
The problem *I* see is that you're married to a hall-effect pickup,
which won't trigger EITHER the orange box or GM HEI. And if you're
talking about the most common 2.2/2.5 distributors, you got no way of
applying an advance curve without the computer.
Nathan M. Gant
I am glad you corrected me on Chrysler design history and I'll note that
error when I update the pages. I can definitely vouch for the Bosch
conversion, otherwise I'd have been a pedestrian a long time ago.
What threw me off, is that there's definitely some German (VW/Bosch)
influence in distributor design of the 2.2. Just compare the cogs at the
bottom of each distributor, other than the Bosch's off-set, they're pretty
similar in function. Is there any other non-Mopar (foreign or American)
distributor which can fit almost exactly in the engine block like the VW
dizzy can? I'd like to know.
Chrysler was officially married to Daimler/Benz AG in 1998, but I would
speculate that Lee Iacocca was influenced by the German designs back in the
1980's.
Also didn't Chrysler move the plants to Mexico for K-car production? That
would seem somewhat sacrilegious from the made-in-USA "heritage with the
B/RB big-block v8s". Mexico has always been saturated with the German-made
VW cars, so I was assuming there was some influence in that regard.
"Steve" <n...@spam.thanks> wrote in message
news:-KednWCGbq83rSbV...@texas.net...
Steve
> Steve,
>
> I am glad you corrected me on Chrysler design history and I'll note that
> error when I update the pages.
Didn't realize that was your page, actually.
> What threw me off, is that there's definitely some German (VW/Bosch)
> influence in distributor design of the 2.2. Just compare the cogs at the
> bottom of each distributor, other than the Bosch's off-set, they're pretty
> similar in function. Is there any other non-Mopar (foreign or American)
> distributor which can fit almost exactly in the engine block like the VW
> dizzy can? I'd like to know.
Got me, but a distributor is hardly more a part of the engine design
than an alternator. I think all of the "Big 4" (including AMC) used to
buy distributors from third-party vendors like Prestolite for certain
applications. Just like they all bought Holley and Carter carburetors.
> Chrysler was officially married to Daimler/Benz AG in 1998, but I would
> speculate that Lee Iacocca was influenced by the German designs back in the
> 1980's.
They probably kept the Bosch-influenced design from the VW 1.6L that was
used in the Omnirizon.
>
> Also didn't Chrysler move the plants to Mexico for K-car production? That
> would seem somewhat sacrilegious from the made-in-USA "heritage with the
> B/RB big-block v8s". Mexico has always been saturated with the German-made
> VW cars, so I was assuming there was some influence in that regard.
Chrysler's Toluca MX plant did indeed build 2.2/2.5s for K cars (after
they had ceased K-car production in the US for that matter.) But loooong
before that, Toluca was building industrial slant-sixes. And that plant
built the vast majority (if not all) of the PT Cruisers.
Toulca MX and the plants at Bramlea and Windsor in canada have been with
Ghrysler for many years and have shared production of numerous models
with the US plants. My '66 Polara was built in Windsor.
Nathan M. Gant
I often wonder if Lee Iacocca got his idea of the K-cars from the VW
"people's wagon" concept. All those air-cooled VWs, Type 1 (bug, ghia,
thing), Type 2 (vans), Type 3 (fastbacks/hatchbacks) and to some extent the
Type 4 (vans and fastbacks as well as the Porsche 914, although these
air-cooled engines were re-designed with stronger castings, a little more
'beefier' crankcase), they were basically built on the same powerplants
(engine/tranny combinations) and VW just modified the body styles to make
them appeal to a greater number of peoples. There were some minor but
important differences in engine design(i.e. flywheels from 914 will fit on
Wolfsburg Type 4 VW crankshaft, but as they were designed in Stuttgart for
the Porsche 5-speed tranny, the Porsche 914 flywheel/clutch assembly won't
work exactly right on the Type 4s, due to different trannies and slightly
different thickness of 914 flywheel). But a lot of these VW parts were
designed to be interchangeable.
So I figure Iacocca just used that tried-and-true VW concept and applied it
to the K-cars, economically it turned Chrysler around and brought it out of
bankruptancy. Of course, building those big battle tank engines for the
Pentagon ($10 million a piece in 1980's dollars), that helped to bring in
the extra gravy, too.
As far as the design of the 2.2 distributor, I would have to think that it
was something more than an after-thought of engine design, more than an
alternator or even a carb design (and BTW the VW 2-bbl 'progressive' carbs
fit perfectly on the K-car manifolds). You have to drill a specified hole
in the crankcase and you had to design a way to get that distributor to
sychronize its motion with the engine. It is more than coincidental that a
German Bosch distributor unit would almost drop right in the K-car engine
block.
I suppose there must be a definitive book on the history of the K-car, if
there were some German influences there, that might help to shed more light
on the question.
Nathan
"Steve" <n...@spam.thanks> wrote in message
news:U4CdnYq1PczD6CHV...@texas.net...
aarcuda69062
"Nathan M. Gant" <nga...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
> So I figure Iacocca just used that tried-and-true VW concept and applied it
> to the K-cars,
Well, since Chrysler was doing what you describe long before Iacocca
came along, no.
Steve
> Good points, Steve.
>
> I often wonder if Lee Iacocca got his idea of the K-cars from the VW
> "people's wagon" concept.
Well, since the K-car and particularly the 2.2 engine were in
development long before Iacocca arrived at Chrysler, I'd have to say
"not likely."
Iacocca didn't create the K-car. He moved it to being top priority and
slashed the large cars (and unfortunately the big-block engine, which
wrecked Chrysler's truck sales in the 80s since Ford still had the 460
and GM still had the 454). That didn't recover until the Cummins diesel
arrived in 1989, when some of the bad decisions Iacocca made started
getting un-done.
HLS
"Steve" <n...@spam.thanks> wrote in message
That didn't recover until the Cummins diesel
> arrived in 1989, when some of the bad decisions Iacocca made started
> getting un-done.
With all due respect, I had thought that had not Iacocca become involved,
Chrysler would be only a name in an automotive history book.
The K cars were shit, but he managed to save this company from certain
ruin (I think)