If we can agree, the goal is secondary voltage.
I guess we may have different goals, after all. My goal would be to effect a change that would improve, in some way, the HP, efficiency or MPG of the machine when proved necessary. It might be impressive to have a sissy bar made from a jacobs ladder. But, would that be a tangible performance improvement? Certainly has more voltage than stock!
The stock bike produces a secondary voltage already and ignites the fuel air mixture. Existence proof is all the operating SOHC4s running with the stock spark circuitry.
If you don't understand how secondary voltage is created, look it up, read about it. But the short version . .it's all about the primary circuit magnetic field that is created. The strength of that field and the quickness and COMPLETENESS of the collapse of that field. That , along with the amount of windings, is what generates the secondary voltage.
Of course, a secondary voltage is produced. That voltage rises until the spark gap is ionized and forms a conductive channel. The voltage necessary to create the channel is greater than the voltage needed to maintain it and the rapid current drain on the secondary, prevents further voltage increases. There are spark waveforms available for viewing if that is in dispute. If you are implying that the spark cycle must be shorter (quickness) to be improved. I'm not sure I can agree with that either. The SOHC4 is swirl quenched, the longer the spark lasts when introduced, the larger the initial wavefront of combustion leading to a more complete burn throughout the power stroke. This is what the Honda engineers were striving for, if I understand it correctly; efficiency and power output of the motor.
Since the in-cylinder operation of the spark voltage can't be significantly increased (without increasing the spark gap), your goal it seems, is actually to produce more spark current from the increase in power delivered to the spark gap. This comes at a cost of increased spark electrode erosion. Less than crisp edged electrodes will require a higher voltage to initiate a spark. But, until the gaps increase in distance, the voltage to maintain spark will remain the same as when unmodified SOHC4 ignitions are employed.
A points systems starts out at a disadvantage. Points inherently cannot survive at voltages greater than about 9V. plus, they don't allow the magnetic field to collapse quickly and completely when the voltage gets highers.
Well, not in my experience. Telco central office systems of yore had, egads, a lot of relay contacts that operated at 48 volts routinely. Yes, they had to be reconditioned periodically, just like the points in the SOHC4.
Now current and power factor through point contact's make and break operations are another matter. But, this has to do with contact sizing, material contact pressures, and contact cooling measures.
We are still talking about 9V, but the difference between 9V and 12V to the points, it very important and damaging. If the primary circuit current flow doesn't die immediately, is allowed to arc across and allow some flow still, the secondary voltage created is effected greatly. But in the entire picture of trying to get the most from the secondary circuit, that extra 3V or 33 % more voltage, is crucial.
I'm sorry. But, If you are trying to assert that the stock ignition circuit can't possibly work and as well as it has for over 40 years, I'm afraid you may have lost me.
What I have outlined here is not everything that makes one type better than another. It didn't even include the degrading aspect that is very important. But what I showed above is just factual physical differences and things that cannot be changed. You are working within certain parameters with an ignition system, some that can be changed and some that cannot. This causes a difference in the secondary created voltage, that going back to my first sentence, is the ultimate goal.
If, for a moment, we assume secondary voltage is such a laudable goal, and "better". Please show test data that demonstrates some aspect of a performance improvement (HP, MPG, etc.) in an SOHC4, when an electronic ignition trigger is substituted for a points system in proper working order.
Is this really too much to ask?
Cheers,
