Mazsport Ignition Solution!
11-15-2008, 10:49 AM
#1402
Administrator
iTrader: (7)
I don't think anyone will be seeing any more of these kits... (see Easy's post)
11-15-2008, 02:30 PM
#1405
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ekerö, Sweden
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BDC
Hi Jim,
The 'funny feelings' thing he's referring to is what I guessed was a lack of spark energy on the back-end. Turned out I was right. IIRC, the dwell was originally set to 2ms by Scott but then I left it around 3.2ms. Not being familiar with the hardware then, I decided not to experiment with it.
B
Stole this quote from the Esmeril thread - seems to back up a theory I was suggesting in my turbo install thread.
It seems Scott originally set the interceptor x dwell times to 2.0ms for ALL applications.
Stock dwell , if my theory on the tables is correct is a lot higher than that and that would explain why many people did not have problems with the Mazsport coils who did not have the interceptor x .
This is just speculation from third party hearsay and the interpretation of the stock dwell tables that Hymee & I came up with . BUT , it would explain a lot of the issues people had with these coils earlier on .
Originally Posted by BDC
Hi Jim,
The 'funny feelings' thing he's referring to is what I guessed was a lack of spark energy on the back-end. Turned out I was right. IIRC, the dwell was originally set to 2ms by Scott but then I left it around 3.2ms. Not being familiar with the hardware then, I decided not to experiment with it.
B
Stole this quote from the Esmeril thread - seems to back up a theory I was suggesting in my turbo install thread.
It seems Scott originally set the interceptor x dwell times to 2.0ms for ALL applications.
Stock dwell , if my theory on the tables is correct is a lot higher than that and that would explain why many people did not have problems with the Mazsport coils who did not have the interceptor x .
This is just speculation from third party hearsay and the interpretation of the stock dwell tables that Hymee & I came up with . BUT , it would explain a lot of the issues people had with these coils earlier on .
I`e DNA supercharger together with Power Mode, sparkplugg T 12, L 11,5 and the engine is doing a very god jobb on track. (This is a racecar only.)
11-15-2008, 03:20 PM
#1407
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ekerö, Sweden
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leading spark plugg NGK 11,5
11-16-2008, 11:05 AM
#1414
Here is what I know :
*There was an issue with the coils when paired with the interceptor x
*It was found that by raising the dwell to 3.5ms the problem was fixed
*Scott argued that 2.0ms was fine for NA but not FI
*When I got into the factory stock dwell table i found values that appear to be above that .
*The lowest value on the table is 395 (3.95ms at 9000 rpm) other values are higher and go as high as 1800 (18ms) at idle
*I have the ignition solution and turbo . So far I've taken it to 10psi with absolutely no sign of any coil issues .
My considered opinion : The coils are fine for FI applications at the stock dwell settings
11-16-2008, 05:02 PM
#1419
ditto here also--i have been running the MS ign package for some months and I dont think I have a problem---but what do I know?
I do shift at no more than 8 or 8.2K and i do have a modified ground wire(no pig tail) ---( I know MM--I know!)
cranks well, idles well, pulls good, plugs look good--23 mpg on hwy. 303 gns/sec at 7.8 K (constant pull on track at about 134mph)
would it be better with a different set up?
OD
I do shift at no more than 8 or 8.2K and i do have a modified ground wire(no pig tail) ---( I know MM--I know!)
cranks well, idles well, pulls good, plugs look good--23 mpg on hwy. 303 gns/sec at 7.8 K (constant pull on track at about 134mph)
would it be better with a different set up?
OD
11-16-2008, 05:11 PM
#1420
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ditto here also--i have been running the MS ign package for some months and I dont think I have a problem---but what do I know?
I do shift at no more than 8 or 8.2K and i do have a modified ground wire(no pig tail) ---( I know MM--I know!)
cranks well, idles well, pulls good, plugs look good--23 mpg on hwy. 303 gns/sec at 7.8 K (constant pull on track at about 134mph)
would it be better with a different set up?
OD
I do shift at no more than 8 or 8.2K and i do have a modified ground wire(no pig tail) ---( I know MM--I know!)
cranks well, idles well, pulls good, plugs look good--23 mpg on hwy. 303 gns/sec at 7.8 K (constant pull on track at about 134mph)
would it be better with a different set up?
OD
11-17-2008, 11:50 PM
#1422
Anji
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dhaka, Bangladesh
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These days, MM likes to point out whats wrong without revealing whats right...I guess thats "classified" info you will get only if you bought an AP from him....
11-18-2008, 12:23 AM
#1423
Its like handing booze and car keys to a 15-year-old.
I like watching the process of discovery, anyways.
Since when do I owe anyone knowledge, btw?
Almost ALL of the tables in the Mazda PCM are non-linear.
11-18-2008, 03:48 AM
#1424
Anji
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dhaka, Bangladesh
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But definitely concerned about not being able to contact Mazsport or Scott.
03-25-2009, 09:06 AM
#1425
manolo
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: lima peru
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anybody know where to find scott or his web page www.mazsport.net it has desappeard from the web, thank you
manolo
manolo