When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
just one post above its already said. They dont fit...
R35 coils are same (body) as the rx-8 and look how it needs to be angled to fit the engine bracket..
Also r35 aremost likelyno revision or revision A rx-8 coils (according to dwell / output power).. Rx-8 rev-C have measured 112mJ at saturation (4.5~4.8ms dwell) same output as ign1A at 4ms ...
But the IGN1a dont lastlong when pushed abkve 40% duty cycle thus provide no power benefit..
I'm trying to force one coil manufacturer to do a rev-c vs that COP (dont whant to disclose yet) at 8000 and see what they survive long term (what output energy at few hours of testing)
Are wrong my firend, more energy out needs more amp input. Dont going to put numbers here, there many threads in this very froum which people did the banch test with all numbers and so.
OEM wiring is no where near feed anything like 112mJ.
On IGN1A conversion the only kept wiring is the trigger and the rest of the wiring loom needs to be fed directly via a relay( IG trigger) from the battery.
Others ( which I can not name here) did use generic coil wiring with upgraded very similar/ compatible trigger section to prevents enegine check light and been able to market as
" plug and play" , they works, how good ? definitely inferior than IGN1A, remember the bottleneck of RX8 is the wiring.
Ign1a cannot be fitted as cop... Which is the original topic, not coil near plug.
dont understand which part is wrong above on that a higher voltage for same dwell (as noted with aditional wiribg) will give more power...
many experts are on the forum but fail even on simple math when providing test results, assumptions and conclusions... (Not all but most coil tests...
I'm not saying the ign1a cannot be installed as a COP (as on picture, as its the same principle I want to use on rx-8 coils - mount them on the plug directly).
But on RX-8 you would need some Houdini trickery to fit it due to steering shaft, engine bracket, firewall.
on a more constructive side. is there any downside of running Alternator voltage instead of battery ?
Are wrong my firend, more energy out needs more amp input. Dont going to put numbers here, there many threads in this very froum which people did the banch test with all numbers and so.
OEM wiring is no where near feed anything like 112mJ.
....
oem rev-c coils are current limited to 9A (tested 4 of them) and are limited @4ms on 14V (for 90mJ output).. but they run 37% efficiency at that rate unlike ING1a or other which struggle to be above 25% efficiency (at 25% efficiency the ign1a will be at 120mJ as it is a downslope curve efficiency vs output)
oem wiring is more than capable of carrying max 9A without any significant voltage drop.
Just an FIY.. as to "primary coil current" and need for any upgrades in wiring running IGN1A.
max current shown in bottom row, test data is shown from various sources , where for IGN1a most optimistic one shown (gathered from multiple tests/sources 10% deviation in power reported) + last column is with one coil manufacturer I am pushing to test at our duty cycles..
Yellow highlighted part is estimated based on several parameters (efficiency increase, and available primary energy)
very interesting, but has it been measured how much of the coil output is being lost by oem plug wires (2500ohms/ft?) vs MSD low resistance wires (50 ohms/ft) vs no plug wires and what power difference can that actually make in our NA engines?
or to put it more simply is juice worth the squeeze?
so what is the current output by the coil (80mA?) and how long is the coil discharge time (0.5-1.5 ms?), my guess is much shorter than dwell time right?
at 80mA and 1ms we are talking 16 mJ loss with OEM wires vs 0.32 mJ loss with MSD wires, does this sound right?
Oem leads vs low res (300ohm/f) gave 20mJ increase for IGN-1a..from 90-112mJ
for NA i dont think any coil will make a positive diference (or position of it) in regards to power.
What we can gain on NA with more output power is longer spark duration giving the fuel more time to ignite at lean conditions.
Bigger arc if we have more voltage and increase the plug gap.
Neither of the two will result in power gain, but smoothness and emissions might be improved.
I need to relocate my coils anyways due to FI and that is the only reason for searching an alternative to oem which I beleive is superior to any (so far utilised) aftermarket coil..
The "john doe" will be tested in 2-3 weeks at 100°C and 8000rpm to see what is the max power/dwell/
very interesting, but has it been measured how much of the coil output is being lost by oem plug wires (2500ohms/ft?) vs MSD low resistance wires (50 ohms/ft) vs no plug wires and what power difference can that actually make in our NA engines?
or to put it more simply is juice worth the squeeze?
so what is the current output by the coil (80mA?) and how long is the coil discharge time (0.5-1.5 ms?), my guess is much shorter than dwell time right?
at 80mA and 1ms we are talking 16 mJ loss with OEM wires vs 0.32 mJ loss with MSD wires, does this sound right?
Coild on plug does not need to be ON/ Over
they did as is ON hence the lack of place on the cylinder head on the engine where whereas on rotary it could be side/ next to.
The whole idea of ZERO resistor wire is rubbish people go for it, they can not understand the internal spark plug has a built-in resistor, and not even that many coils on the plug also have a resistor in that short coil stem....
The idea of XX coil on the test made XX mj is like these fake and very common dyno graphs people talk about, which XX car makes 500hp for 10 seconds on WOT once, typical.
I dont get your problem.. I really dont..
what that I wrote you dont agree with... Point out a mistake not just throwing numbers on the post expecting me to know what the "artist wanted to say"
my aim with COP is not to increase power output of it. Nor is more power needed on NA.. I never made such claim..
I need the place where the oem coils are and the other position I can mount them to is the cross brace above steering rack or directly on the plug....
Yes, there is resistor in the plug, resistor lowers the max current increasing "burn" time and reducing the EMI.. Most of oem COP also run a resistor 1kOhm for the 5-10cm long spring connection.
I wanted to increase the power of the coil by increasing supply voltage (without a V booster, just using a less voltage drop position in wiring).. And yes, I want a more stable ignition for FI .. For NA rev C and good quality cables (NGK or .msd, spiro ect .... and not zing long generic autostore)
I dont get your problem.. I really dont..
my aim with COP is not to increase power output of it. Nor is more power needed on NA.. I never made such claim..
Yes, there is resistor in the plug, resistor lowers the max current increasing "burn" time and reducing the EMI.. Most of oem COP also run a resistor 1kOhm for the 5-10cm long spring connection.
I wanted to increase the power of the coil by increasing supply voltage (without a V booster, just using a less voltage drop position in wiring).. And yes, I want a more stable ignition for FI .. For NA rev C and good quality cables (NGK or .msd, spiro ect .... and not zing long generic autostore)
known fact:
lower the path of the resistor equals reducing on time of drain, aka lower the resistor = rapid di charge = less time of spark
place restore in wire serve two propose:
1- lower noise which would interfere with other electric parts even if you do race tracts and even worse on city use
2- elongate spark (in a fraction in comparison to no resistance)
COP does not " increase power " All you do is the same as renewing all parts with OEM setup, coils are consumable parts that have a half-life and need to be changed as they age.
The only reason I used IGN1A was and is the economical part of the story as a new set of Rev C would cost the same while providing less half-life. They are a huge upgrade over OEM in any regard, based on the OG seller (Lance Nist) they could do 5ms @ 9000 rpm, my table is way, way less than that on 14v for lower RPM hence they are way relaxed.
Rotary engine ignition is not the same as Pistone counterparts, if you want to " increase power " you need to add the 3rd spark plug, use straight funded direct injection....
known fact:
lower the path of the resistor equals reducing on time of drain, aka lower the resistor = rapid di charge = less time of spark
place restore in wire serve two propose:
1- lower noise which would interfere with other electric parts even if you do race tracts and even worse on city use
2- elongate spark (in a fraction in comparison to no resistance)
COP does not " increase power " All you do is the same as renewing all parts with OEM setup, coils are consumable parts that have a half-life and need to be changed as they age.
Where have I wrote anything that counter says to that summary ?
Originally Posted by motodenta
The only reason I used IGN1A was and is the economical part of the story as a new set of Rev C would cost the same while providing less half-life. They are a huge upgrade over OEM in any regard, based on the OG seller (Lance Nist) they could do 5ms @ 9000 rpm, my table is way, way less than that on 14v for lower RPM hence they are way relaxed.
5ms @ 9000 RPM is 100% duty cycle so that is a VERY false advertisement.. they crap out at 80% for any period of time, and very few survive more than a year if ran hard (often above 40% duty cycle).
to point out few numbers and why 5ms is just a lie, maybe he meant it on a 4T... where that is more than possible...
5ms dwell, and that will result in 2-2.5ms spark and we have 6.66ms cycle time.. meaning that the spark gets extinguished (by charging the coil), and there is still energy in the coil, meaning the primary current will already be high, giving more charge energy for the same 5ms dwell, (as starting current is not 0), meaning even more energy stored in the coil, meaning even longer spark duration, meaning in 1.66ms even less power is discharged, meaning even higher primary coil charge current and it goes on.. meaning the coil will overheat in moments time.
Many have heavily underestimated the power of the Rev C coil, and I dont know that anyone has tested it under longer dwell time and higher duty cycles to determine thier true capacity. Since they are faster charging, they could stay at lower dwell and have more power than IGN1a..
Also another claim made by Lance is that that coil is used on a 2T Merc engine, and that is NOT true.. the coil is used on 4T engine that are run at 5500-6000 rpm (very easy to fact check by simply opening Mercury catalogue) .. Mercury coil that is on 2T engines has saturated core at 2.5ms and is a different part number / shape... 2T coil: 300 8M0077471
4T coil: 339 8M0077473 )IGN-1a
you can have a look here: https://www.rx7club.com/sakebomb-gar.../#post12378233 , post #17 (he discovered it by mistake and is conveniently side by side to show the difference in design. at the bottom of the page you can see measurements of said coils by a collogue in Finland.
04-01-2024, 08:48 AM
