Total Loss Ignition

[Matt_E]

That's the reason, right there.

Hotter spark per plug, and uses less energy. = more efficient.

 

[waxhead]

Why is every one so concerned with this hotter spark thing
There is no power to be gained unless you are misfiring due to a weak spark
after that then the hotter spark is just there to waste your battery life

 

[Matt_E]

I am not sure I get it either. However, that's always been MSD's claim to fame.
I see the real advantage in the dual coils in saving some battery life.
But is there something to be gained here? I mean, I charge the battery every single day anyways.

 

[waxhead]

the thing is matt you are still firing a coil
so its going to use the battery as to how much more or less i wouldnt know
to make a bigger spark is going to use more as well

i thought the msd claim to fame was it brain boxes breaking down

the reality is that a well set up total loss boat seems to last all weekend no matter what ignition it has on it

 

[robertg]

Doesn't MSD mean multiple spark discharge? I thought it fires the spark a few times per revolution.

 

[jetskiking]

This is funny!!! Me and jacobski were talking about this yesterday.Msd ignition,Hotter spark and multiple spark.My oppinion is that the reason you get a gain is from the timing curves.All this multiple spark hotter spark stuff is selling points.I would think that once you ignited the mixture its gone. Throwing another or a hotter spark in the same place isnt going to make it burn any better. Now on that note I could see were having two sparks spread throughout the combustion chamber would create a more efficiant burn. Kinda like the ford rangers. Look at it like this. If Im standing in a room full of explosive gas vapors and I take a 9v battery and arc it to cause an explosion. The explosion wouldnt really be any smaller than if I did it with a car battery. Thats just my oppinion and I am not an expert.

 

[Matt_E]

the thing is matt you are still firing a coil
so its going to use the battery as to how much more or less i wouldnt know
to make a bigger spark is going to use more as well

A single channel fires both plugs at the same time.
Assuming that the secondary voltage is the same from single to dual channel, the single channel ignition will draw more current from the battery.

 

[Matt_E]

Now on that note I could see were having two sparks spread throughout the combustion chamber would create a more efficiant burn. Kinda like the ford rangers.

On that application (Ranger) the plugs fire at different times. The idea is to ignite all of the fuel/air mixture completely, and not waste anything.

 

[WAB]

Doesn't MSD mean multiple spark discharge? I thought it fires the spark a few times per revolution.

Even the stock coil & CDi does that, doesn't it?
The plugs spark at the same time so it does not matter if you put the plug wires on the wrong plugs. That should mean they are sparking multiple times each relolution of the crank.


lol at wax
"i thought the msd claim to fame was it brain boxes breaking down"

 

[waxhead]

i agree matt it may use more energy to fire a double coil i am not sure
but i believe the amount of spark that an msd throws around would use alot more

anyway i have seen all total losses run all weekend
the main issue is badly tuned skis that are hard to start
the starter uses alot more than the cdi

 

[Matt_E]

Even the stock coil & CDi does that, doesn't it?
The plugs spark at the same time so it does not matter if you put the plug wires on the wrong plugs. That should mean they are sparking multiple times each relolution of the crank.

You're confusing two things here....Multiple Spark Discharge has nothing to do with both plugs firing at the same time. That's done because it's simpler and cheaper.
Judging from the existence of only two input wires into the stock coil, I would say the stock CDI does that. (For 2 cyl applications, anyway)

Multiple Spark Discharge, on the other hand, is about sparking multiple times instead of just one continuous spark. I am not sure what advantage there would be...unless the multiple sparks last longer than just one spark.
And no, the stock CDI does not do that....it's circuitry doesn't allow for it.

 

[waxhead]

the oem one is called a wasted spark systems
there is a few cars that do the same thing

 

[Matt_E]

i agree matt it may use more energy to fire a double coil i am not sure
but i believe the amount of spark that an msd throws around would use alot more

True. So, comparing just between different MSD systems, the dual channel would be slightly more desirable.
I would find the dual channel system better simply because of the adjustability advantage of the digital system over the analog, and the reliability advantage over the single channel digital system.

anyway i have seen all total losses run all weekend
the main issue is badly tuned skis that are hard to start
the starter uses alot more than the cdi

I think the MSD systems (The Digital one, anyways) accounts for this by retarding the timing 20 degrees on initial startup.

 

[Matt_E]

the oem one is called a wasted spark systems
there is a few cars that do the same thing

It's just easier to build, and slightly cheaper.

 

[waxhead]

i am talking about just cranking the engine over
weither the ignition is turned on or not
the hard part for the battery is getting that mass spining

i would say yes the wasted spark system is cheaper to make and thats why they do it

you have mentioned msd and reliable in the same post again
i am confused is there sone one out there that hasnt had to replace there triggers a few times and there brain a few more

 

[Matt_E]

The reliability issue is disconcerting, yes. I think the triggers are unreliable by design. They can be fixed once broken, and can be made so they won't break again as easily.
The brains seem to be a hit-n-miss, much like the enhancers. My current Pro-Digital II is working like a champ - well, minus the broken timing LED.
I had one broken analog brain before that, and another somewhat sketchy analog brain.
However, as I said earlier...if my current brain ever breaks, I am not replacing it.

i am talking about just cranking the engine over
weither the ignition is turned on or not
the hard part for the battery is getting that mass spining

That hardly has to do with the ignition. That's a starter/battery issue.

 

[waxhead]

The reliability issue is disconcerting, yes. I think the triggers are unreliable by design. They can be fixed once broken, and can be made so they won't break again as easily.
The brains seem to be a hit-n-miss, much like the enhancers. My current Pro-Digital II is working like a champ - well, minus the broken timing LED.
I had one broken analog brain before that, and another somewhat sketchy analog brain.
However, as I said earlier...if my current brain ever breaks, I am not replacing it.



That hardly has to do with the ignition. That's a starter/battery issue.

Thats my point
every one is so hung up on how long the battery will last
and i am saying if your ski is tuned well so it starts easily then the battery charge the cdi uses isnt an issue

 

[Matt_E]

I am not with you...what does "tuning" have to do with the hard starts?
It's either ridiculously advanced timing, a bad starter, a bad battery, or bad connections.

EDIT: BTW, Yes I agree...Total Loss ignitions are going to use battery, get used to it. I don't think the differences are noteworthy.

 

[waxhead]

well if your low end mixture is not set correctly
or you n/s are leaking so it floods when it sits there
then its going to take a lot of cranking to get it going

 

[Matt_E]

Aaah...okay, I follow you.
Yes...that's obviously not an ignition issue. But it will be turned into one if you are runnning a Total Loss, can't get your ski started in less than two bumps, and sub-sequently only get 1-1/2 hours runtime out of a charge.