Topic: Shout-out to Ignitech ignition systems

[Captain]

 Yes it can be done that way.
 However in my case and as I shifted the intake ports in the cylinder head (huge gains) so I was required to change the carb spacing from 80-100-80 (OEM) to 80-139-80 and so I made a longer shaft. This then allowed extra to "D" shape the end of the shaft and the TPS slipped directly on.

 As for the testing question:   You don't have to mount it this way and mounting it temporarily and remotely is just as effective. Just an arm on your shaft and another the same length on the TPS temporarily mounted elsewhere and a rod connecting it.  Then start mapping in 3D and all will be revealed.

 Captain

[MRieck]

Yes it can be done that way.
 However in my case and as I shifted the intake ports in the cylinder head (huge gains) so I was required to change the carb spacing from 80-100-80 (OEM) to 80-139-80 and so I made a longer shaft. This then allowed extra to "D" shape the end of the shaft and the TPS slipped directly on.

 As for the testing question:   You don't have to mount it this way and mounting it temporarily and remotely is just as effective. Just an arm on your shaft and another the same length on the TPS temporarily mounted elsewhere and a rod connecting it.  Then start mapping in 3D and all will be revealed.

 Captain

No doubt. Those ports suck in stock configuration. Only the CBX's  #1 and #6 are worse. FJ ports/valve angle suck too but the FJ head is pretty much a copy of the Honda DOHC.
I am a bit surprised you use OEM cylinders. You run aluminum sleeves with Nikasil??

[livefast_dieold]

Yes it can be done that way.
 However in my case and as I shifted the intake ports in the cylinder head (huge gains) so I was required to change the carb spacing from 80-100-80 (OEM) to 80-139-80 and so I made a longer shaft. This then allowed extra to "D" shape the end of the shaft and the TPS slipped directly on.

 As for the testing question:   You don't have to mount it this way and mounting it temporarily and remotely is just as effective. Just an arm on your shaft and another the same length on the TPS temporarily mounted elsewhere and a rod connecting it.  Then start mapping in 3D and all will be revealed.

 Captain

How did you do it? Did you weld up the old ports and then CNCed new ones?

[Captain]

No doubt. Those ports suck in stock configuration. Only the CBX's  #1 and #6 are worse. FJ ports/valve angle suck too but the FJ head is pretty much a copy of the Honda DOHC.
I am a bit surprised you use OEM cylinders. You run aluminum sleeves with Nikasil??
[/quote]

 The rules in the class we race under state that we must use OEM crankcases barrels and cylinder head castings. It further states that no aftermarket "big blocks" allowed.

 Modification of these components is legal but only using tech of the period. So I cut of the OEM port and machine new ones and bolt them on.......No welding is involved.
 The trick was finding a way that this could be achieved and the result worked   210 CFM @28"

[Captain]

 Currently I’m still using iron liners but it’s a trade off. Iron is less desirable for heat transfer but does provide better support. Nicasil is the reverse and as our cylinder spacing is 80mm the at large bore sizes (76-77mm) leaves 4-3mm between bores !! This is very low and I’m very uncomfortable in this being able to support the pressure and even more maintaining cylinder head seal.
I do plan to do this at some stage in the future by a slow progression from what we are currently at.
Question for you:  just how large in bore size are your billet big blocks and the method of seal ?
 Captain

[MRieck]

Currently I’m still using iron liners but it’s a trade off. Iron is less desirable for heat transfer but does provide better support. Nicasil is the reverse and as our cylinder spacing is 80mm the at large bore sizes (76-77mm) leaves 4-3mm between bores !! This is very low and I’m very uncomfortable in this being able to support the pressure and even more maintaining cylinder head seal.
I do plan to do this at some stage in the future by a slow progression from what we are currently at.
Question for you:  just how large in bore size are your billet big blocks and the method of seal ?
 Captain

72mm (max) with MLS or copper gasket. I can cut an oring groove for copper if necessary. My first generation blocks used copper with the oring.
 Aluminum sleeves won't work at .120 bore spacing unless it's some special alloy. I get it. Too bad.
 Maximium cooling to the cylinder ((roadracing with my block) can increase HP by 4 to 5 HP. That is info given to me by a good customer with the ability to measure such things.
 I would search out aluminum alloys and some way of providing increased cylinder cooling. Just my opinion!
 I really believe there is even more in those DOHC engines even after having to use CR's. I truly appreciate your efforts and results....very impressive indeed! Take it from a man that has worked with an FJ1200 for 30 years and gotten 160 RWHP with 1314cc's.

[slikwilli420]

Mike, would there be any benefit to doing intakes like Captain did on his DOHC in a single cam head? Thinking of the stage 4 head you did for me.

Once I'm done chasing weight I'm going to start chasing power and if there is a way to get it, I'll consider it.

Note: I do need to keep round top carbs and am limited to 760cc in my class.

[bwaller]

Being able to accurately dial in ignition lead would help any race engine. That and having space to fabricate an adequate airbox.

[Harald F]

for my supercharged engine i have a full 16x16 table for ignition control. Map and rpm based. same for fuel. with lots of modifiers for temp, ++

[MRieck]

Mike, would there be any benefit to doing intakes like Captain did on his DOHC in a single cam head? Thinking of the stage 4 head you did for me.

Once I'm done chasing weight I'm going to start chasing power and if there is a way to get it, I'll consider it.

Note: I do need to keep round top carbs and am limited to 760cc in my class.

Yes. Getting the port centered to the intake valve helps. Bolting on the adaptors as Captain has done is a nice solution because he is also able to achieve a more downdraft angle. The SOHC requires removing spigots and boring with welding/spigot fabrication.
I have generally see it for drag racing with a large (37/38mm) intake valves. It's a lot of work as valve angle has to be changed a bit too.

[turboguzzi]

3D ignition mapping sure is cool, just not allowed in italian vintage road racing..... kudos on the straightened ports. In the 500-550s it's quite easy to via new inlet manifold, the ports in the head are almost a straight shot, but on kz750 motor i'm building I will mill off the contorted and long inlet in the head and build something similar.

[Captain]

for my supercharged engine i have a full 16x16 table for ignition control. Map and rpm based. same for fuel. with lots of modifiers for temp, ++

 That's called 4D and 5D and is really getting into it. However it is only what every OEM gasoline turbo/ supercharged auto has.

 Captain

[gschuld]

Bringing this back and dusting it off.

So what coils are people running with the Ignitech TCIP4 ignitions?

https://www.ignitech.cz/en/vyrobky/tcip/manual_sparker_tcip4_v96_en.pdf

George

[Leino]

Bringing this back and dusting it off.

So what coils are people running with the Ignitech TCIP4 ignitions?

https://www.ignitech.cz/en/vyrobky/tcip/manual_sparker_tcip4_v96_en.pdf

George

We have been using Ignitech coils, quickshifters etc in classic road racing and streetbikes.  TCIP4 is the usual choice for them, I'm installing a racing3 in my drag bike. Built in launch limiter and it can handle four coils. Too much possibilities for me to ever use but price is still very reasonable. Don't get scared of the little bit of extra work it takes to install the unit or their slightly special way of saying things in English 

[gschuld]

Leino,

Thanks.

https://www.ignitech.cz/en/vyrobky/accessories/ic/ic.htm

I looked up the accessories section a got to coils, then found 5 different versions that of the 8 or so that are meant to work with the TCIP4.  Electronic ignitions are NOT my strong suit. Because of my aversion to the mental challenge, I’m tempted to stiffen the advancer springs in the factory advancer, and run a Dyna S and some Dyna coils and forget it.

I’m looking at doing ignitions for multiple bikes, 2 or more for road racing use.  Plus spares. This stuff adds up, adds complexity to the bikes overall, and some complexity to the user.  Less parts generally equals more reliability. Do the benefits outweigh the cost and complication?

George

[turboguzzi]

you might not like the reliability of dyna, having electronics mounted down at the crank end in a super hot racing engine is not good for component life. surely people will tell you here they never had a problem, but ive seen too many fried units to rely on them.
i think we been here before, you might recall that Brent and me use old GSXR boxes, never seen them fail.
as for coils, just right them an email, they usually reply within a few days.

[Leino]

you might not like the reliability of dyna, having electronics mounted down at the crank end in a super hot racing engine is not good for component life. surely people will tell you here they never had a problem, but ive seen too many fried units to rely on them.
i think we been here before, you might recall that Brent and me use old GSXR boxes, never seen them fail.
as for coils, just right them an email, they usually reply within a few days.

Plus one, never heard of a oldskool GSXR ignition unit failing in any use 

[Dresda500]

What coils are you guys running with the Ignitech?  I was planning on starting out just using 2 of the channels and running a dual tower coil and wasted spark. I'm about to pull the trigger on one for  my CB500 and they recommend either a 0.8Ohm or a 2.7Ohm. They say both use about the same amount of current to the system. A couple quotes from emails:

"Coils with low resistance has usually better efficiece. Primar spark energy is the same as with 3 Ohm coils, but duration of spark is shorter with low resistance coil.
Coils with low resistance need short dwell time. Short dwell time is more difficult for control (mainly when engine rapidly accelerate).
TCIP4 can work with IC-TCI-D2 and also with Z43.
We do not offer spark plug caps.
Yes, 8mm HV cable is OK for both coils.x

and

ignition system will take the same or similar integral current from battery.
With high resistance coil will be current in coil lower, but need longer dwell time.
With low resistance coil will be current in coil higher, but need shorter dwell time.
Result to integral current is the same approx.

The two coils recommended are:

Ignition coil Z43.
Ignition coils with two outlets for inductive ignitions (for TCI, TCI-P4, Racing 3). Resistance of primar winding 0,8 Ohm, inductance 3.64 mH. Note: improper for original japan ignitions. Suitable also for capacitive ignition. Without cable. The cable is easily replaceable

or

Ignition coil IC-TCI-D2.
Ignition coils with two outlets for inductive ignitions (for TCI, TCI-P4, Racing 3). Resistance of primar winding 2,7 Ohm, inductance 15.15 mH. Suitable for original japan ignitions (12V, primar resistance 3-5 Ohm). Spacing of mount holes is 102.5 mm for M6. Without cable. The cables are easily replaceable.

[Don R]

 I'm curious about coil resistance with a CD ignition. I measured the cir-cyle coils on my Gerex and it seemed to be 4.6 ohms. I believe I need to re-check with a better meter because that sounds too high.

[Dresda500]

Yeah, usually CDI have really low resistance

[tourmax]

What coils are you guys running with the Ignitech?  I was planning on starting out just using 2 of the channels and running a dual tower coil and wasted spark. I'm about to pull the trigger on one for  my CB500 and they recommend either a 0.8Ohm or a 2.7Ohm. They say both use about the same amount of current to the system. A couple quotes from emails:

"Coils with low resistance has usually better efficiece. Primar spark energy is the same as with 3 Ohm coils, but duration of spark is shorter with low resistance coil.
Coils with low resistance need short dwell time. Short dwell time is more difficult for control (mainly when engine rapidly accelerate).
TCIP4 can work with IC-TCI-D2 and also with Z43.
We do not offer spark plug caps.
Yes, 8mm HV cable is OK for both coils.x

and

ignition system will take the same or similar integral current from battery.
With high resistance coil will be current in coil lower, but need longer dwell time.
With low resistance coil will be current in coil higher, but need shorter dwell time.
Result to integral current is the same approx.

The two coils recommended are:

Ignition coil Z43.
Ignition coils with two outlets for inductive ignitions (for TCI, TCI-P4, Racing 3). Resistance of primar winding 0,8 Ohm, inductance 3.64 mH. Note: improper for original japan ignitions. Suitable also for capacitive ignition. Without cable. The cable is easily replaceable

or

Ignition coil IC-TCI-D2.
Ignition coils with two outlets for inductive ignitions (for TCI, TCI-P4, Racing 3). Resistance of primar winding 2,7 Ohm, inductance 15.15 mH. Suitable for original japan ignitions (12V, primar resistance 3-5 Ohm). Spacing of mount holes is 102.5 mm for M6. Without cable. The cables are easily replaceable.

I'm going to be running coil on plug, Denso 12700 units. The Ignitech can run them directly with a quick selection in the config program.

Also be aware that you can change your wasted spark system to sequential with a TCIP4. The TCIP4 will run 4 individual coils, but sequential ignition usually requires a cam sensor or a higher resolution crank sensor. Ignitech has figured out a work around for this though. They add a map sensor on the #1 cylinder and the tcip4 detects when the cylinder is on it's intake stroke. It then uses that info to fire the coil on the appropriate stroke and each cylinder follows after that.

Pretty clever work around....and my 650 will be running sequential on a TCIP4. I don't really mind wasted spark, but this means the ignition system cycle is cut in half. Good for longevity, good for performance (for several reasons).

Oh, and one more point to consider: anyone thinking of going COP on a SOHC (at least on a 650), be aware that the coil will block the tach cable port on the head and you will have to switch to an electronically driven tach or go without one at all. Luckily, the TCIP4 also has a tach drive output...

[CB750R]

I know this is an old thread, but does anyone have any detailed info on install for these on a Sohc 750?

Looking at this as an option or the sasche electronic or dyna 2000…

The Ignitech seems to have a lot of strengths but their website and communication aren’t…

[MRieck]

I know this is an old thread, but does anyone have any detailed info on install for these on a Sohc 750?

Looking at this as an option or the sasche electronic or dyna 2000…

The Ignitech seems to have a lot of strengths but their website and communication aren’t…

I have the Sasche for my CBX engine.....hopefully I get to install it before I leave this earth.

[MRieck]

I wish the Sasche had a variable limiter instead of a high or low limiter. You have have to send it back if you want something different. Other than that it looks like a great unit.

[CB750R]

I’m leaning that way simply due to the recommendations and they publish a nice installation manual, and make an install kit for our bikes. 

What would you recommend for my engine as a safe redline now? The crank balance came with paper work saying good to 14,000, that’s well north of my comfort zone!

Part of my desire for upgrade is a rev limit as I have a garage full of more powerful bikes and sometimes it’s easy to forget your on the old beast when your having a good time in the twisty mountain roads!