Do we really need a modern ignition?

yes

Do we need modern technology? No, but nature being as it is and our desire for perfection, what we want requires it. It's like asking if we need telephones b/c you could just run down the road or yell to the neighbors. Or who needs them anyway? But two wrongs will never make right. I'm a seeker in a world of liars and this question smacks of bullshit. 2 years into looking at points from an engineering angle and you don't see the benefits of the digital age?
 
well said mah bruddah - performance (MPGs'n pep).
Is that not the restomod mantra?
EDIT:
Somehow my browser pointed me back here...

I don't like the look of the MSD box. Reminds me - we use our own senses on that balance (resto v mod)
to produce our end product. Take what U want Charlie, leave the rest. Difference makes my world go round.
A bigger distributor cap (than my '69 would have had) looks OK 2 me (DSII) but not a DUI or HEI top & so on...
 
You want the best for your six go electronic.
Allows wider plug gap & multiple sparks to eliminate misfires.
 
Charlie Cheap":38bof8n8 said:
I run a Pertronix but keep the points-cond. in the glove box just in case.
Why?
What happen to " Do NOT believe those who talk about constantly having to change/adjust points. Every 5,000 miles is usually fine...which is coast-to-coast driving. I understand many will disagree, but physics is on my side, and my little degree is in electronics."
 
You can run what you want. I run the best of the best.
Performance, drivability & economy.
Apparently a lot of you need to get your wallet out & step up to the elite.
 
65coupei6":i2lm0yn1 said:
Doesn't everyone with a vintage car keep points in the glove box in case a nuclear bomb or EMP goes off. (y)
No, cause points & condenser will not go in a DS11.
However i do carry a spare pick-up plate.
 
But all you need is a matchbook and screwdriver, it must be the best that man can get.
 
I just want to ask a related question here, I don't mean to hijack the thread. With my 250 build project I am/was intending to install some kind of electronic ignition but I was going through the paperwork on my 170 build and I have a Mallory dual point, mechanical advance distributor in it and it is listed for '64-'78 (I think) My car is a mid year '64 car so that makes sense.

Should I pull the Mallory and stick it in my 250? Or would electronic be a better option?

0afaa9320561578e6f3909985b716295.jpg


See Ya,
Mike
 
lotta talk abt remmin out the dizzy hole 4 a DSII dizzy or
lathe dwn the bottom of it (the dizzy) either to use in a pre '66 block.
Upgrade to the HEI 4 pin or DSII box...
So no, only 1/2 a jacked thread.
 
I wouldn't run it. Setting up 2 sets of points has got to be a pita for 1. I don't think you are going to spin your 250 fast enough to need any rpm range that electronic can't cover if that's the supposed advantage. And finally it looks like there's no vac advance on that distributor. You're going to want vacuum advance on a street car.
 
lavron":2ejlu96g said:
I just want to ask a related question here, I don't mean to hijack the thread. With my 250 build project I am/was intending to install some kind of electronic ignition but I was going through the paperwork on my 170 build and I have a Mallory dual point, mechanical advance distributor in it and it is listed for '64-'78 (I think) My car is a mid year '64 car so that makes sense.

Should I pull the Mallory and stick it in my 250? Or would electronic be a better option?

0afaa9320561578e6f3909985b716295.jpg


See Ya,
Mike

The distrbitor may fit the 250 block if the 170 is a late production 1964 or an early 1965 engine block check the block date code. The 250 as well as all other small six's from 1965 up have a 5/16 oil pump drive, were the 1960 to 1964 engines had 1/4 inch oil pump drives. To find out more info look into my sticky on Distribitor options for the early six'es.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=79622

Good luck (y) :nod:
 
Econoline":1luitrbs said:
I wouldn't run it. Setting up 2 sets of points has got to be a pita for 1. I don't think you are going to spin your 250 fast enough to need any rpm range that electronic can't cover if that's the supposed advantage. And finally it looks like there's no vac advance on that distributor. You're going to want vacuum advance on a street car.

I set it up the first time with no issue, that was a long time ago however :roll: It is a purely mechanical advance distributor, Clifford spec out most of the work I did on the engine 30 years ago and bought what they recommended including the Mallory. The 170 has always run fine with multiple Autolite carbs and 2 sets of points.

Correct me if I am wrong (likely) but isn't the purpose of the dual point longer dwell, so hotter spark?

bubba22349":1luitrbs said:
The 250 as well as all other small six's from 1965 up have a 5/16 oil pump drive, were the 1960 to 1964 engines had 1/4 inch oil pump drives.

It has a 5/16" pump rod almost positive but will check my date code on the motor or pull the distributor out and confirm.
 
Yes duel points were the state of the art for a battery powered ignistion system in the 1960's up through the early to mid 1970's. And yes the duel point allowed more dwell time and togeather with a better coil a hotter spark. :cool: looks like the old 170 engine also has the 3.03 trans and bigger flywheel 9 inch clutch combo too nice. (y) :nod:
 
luv the VC fasteners, fuel pump, draft tube, Offie intake (is it?) and all the red !
If that's a 4 Speed I'm jealous ! (I guess they're only 'top loaded'?).
 
As I understand it, I could be wrong, dwell times are adequate under 4k with single points. Dual points can run much higher rpms and have a much more stable dwell. Dual points definitely have the advantage of less point wear and if a set goes bad you can run a single in there I think. The lack of a vacuum advance system is a big problem with that unit for the street imo. It's going to cost you mileage and may complicate tuning for mid throttle performance or pep. I'd sell it and use the money for something else, like an msd 6al or street fire box.
 
bubba22349":13bzxfh7 said:
looks like the old 170 engine also has the 3.03 trans and bigger flywheel 9 inch clutch combo too nice. (y) :nod:

Yes I think it is a pretty nice motor really does not have that many miles on the rebuild (even though I did the rebuild 30 years ago so it will need some freshening up) but got bit by the 250 bug, and will probably find it's way into a different project one day, not sure what yet but have my eye on a 1960 Comet I would like to have.

chad":13bzxfh7 said:
If that's a 4 Speed I'm jealous ! (I guess they're only 'top loaded'?).

No it is a 3.03 top loader 3 speed out of an Econoline van with the tail shaft swapped in from a car.

chad":13bzxfh7 said:
Offie intake (is it?)

Yes and I still have the carbs and header to go back on it. 8)

Econoline":13bzxfh7 said:
The lack of a vacuum advance system is a big problem with that unit for the street imo. It's going to cost you mileage and may complicate tuning for mid throttle performance or pep. I'd sell it and use the money for something else, like an msd 6al or street fire box.

I will leave it in the 170 for now and go ahead and plan on electronic of some sort, it might not work anyway I checked the casting number on the block today and it is a C4DE 6015-A which according to the handbook is a 1/4" drive distributor if I read it right.

See Ya,
Mike
 
To the modern ignition guys...YES they are better...in computer-controlled engines where timing, emissions, transmission shifting are computer-controlled. However, in our street driven SIX we have only 6 lobes on the dizzy cam, so more time to charge the coil primary. Don't forget, if 15,000 volts ignites the mixture, 50 bazillion volts is not needed. Checking with engineers, the main reason for electronics is LESS maintenance and better control of emissions. The better control of timing is mostly due to HIGH RPM where electronics works better...but up to about 5,500 RPM points work fine. Today's points are much better than 1960's and car-people usually check points just to keep things working well. Points go about 6,000 miles between adjusting or changing, and that is twice across the United States. With a good condenser, points, hotter coil, slightly lower resistance ignition resistor, solid copper wires (not recommended for computers) that have virtually zero resistance, platinum plugs, and all in good tune, I see no advantage in adding complication to our SIX. I now have a Pertronix in place of points but keep points, condenser in the glove box...just in case. My set-up is hotter than stock, has no computer box, runs great, and starts just as quickly as any computer system. With 2.83 gears and 26.3" tall tires 5,000 RPM puts me well over 100 MPH. Even with my modified suspension/brakes/tires, 100 MPH is probably not in my near future...even on long trips.
 
what kinda gap is achievable on the plugs?
(zero maintenence & clean burn R my nxt concerns)
 
Charlie Cheap":3a2i2oyc said:
Don't forget, if 15,000 volts ignites the mixture, 50 bazillion volts is not needed.
This is a not the total picture and leads to misconceptions.

Looking at the spark waveform on a scope shows a high voltage spike that initially jumps the plug gap.
Once the air between the gap is ionized by the initial spark, the gap resistance goes very low which drops the voltage to a low value and raises the current significantly.
It is the current that ignites the fuel and starts the flame front Not the Voltage
The more current the wider the spark and the more fuel molecules get targeted.
This is especially important to those that want to run a lean mixture at cruise to maximize fuel economy.

As the engine load and cylinder pressure increases the resistance between the plug gap increases which requires a higher voltage to initially jump the gap.
The ignition system needs to supply enough voltage to jump the gap at the engines highest cylinder pressure.
This also includes the gap between the distributor rotor and the cap which can be as high as 5Kv.
If the rotor phasing is off the voltage needed will be much higher.

In the case of the MSD, a capacitive discharge to the coil may be shorter than an inductive discharge but the current at the plug gap is much higher by several times in comparison to the standard street inductive system.

Another consideration is that the coil discharge time or spark duration decreases as output voltage increases so going to a system without a distributor cap and rotor eliminates the rotor gap which decreases total output voltage from the coil and increases spark duration and spark current.
This is a short pitch for coil near or coil on distributorless ignition systems.

In all the cases so far the 300 six shows improvement in both low end power and fuel economy using the MSD ignition.
Again we are talking about improvements below 2500 rpm.

The use of solid copper wires can cause a crossover spark to another cylinder if the wires are parallel and close to each other.
Been there with resulting piston and valve damage.
Better to use a low resistance spiral wound wire.

If a person wants their Ford six to have better torque throughout the power band with better fuel mileage and less carbon deposits then Yes, a modern ignition system that provides much higher spark current is needed.

The fact that the points are in the glove box kinda negates part of the argument.
 
Back
Top