to be honest, what has me even more interested is the coil at plug system.

I would like to learn more about that.

personally, the upgraded opti is a nice thing. and may prove to be more financually feasable... however, the coil at plug is bound to be more effective.

 

Does your DynaSpark use a standard OEM cap and rotor? If so, can the base unit be purchased without the cap and rotor.

It's a shame to have a nice pretty piece of machinery in a place that's virtually impossible to see.

 

John-

Yes it does utilize an OEM cap and rotor combination. I spoke at length to MSD and Accel yesterday at the PRI Show in Indy and there may be a replacement dist. cap and rotor available some time in the future.

No, the base unit can not be purchased without the cap and rotor. It comes complete as you see it in the photos.

Regards,
DTE

 

I understand that after market ignitions are hard on the stock Opti. Will your unit stand up to the higher voltages better than the stock unit and why? :)

 

One of the current, biggest contributers of premature distributor failure is OEM sloppy construction. Add to that a high output ignition system and its a wonder that these things (OEM Optisparks) even work at all, even when new.

By us reducing the internal tolerance variation drastically, we have increased the overall performance of the unit substancially, in that the distributer has a much tighter control on high voltage distribution on the secondary side, while increasing the CMP sensing accuracy on the primary side.

As far as your question as to just how much voltage the unit can handle....well, that is a function of the cap and rotor. Due to better assembly and blueprinting here, we expect the DynaSpark to have a greater voltage capacity based on the explanation above. There is a limit to everything however.

If things proceed like I think they are going to with aftermarket cap/rotor manufacturers, then extreme high voltages shouldn't be a problem at all once one of those is installed on our product.

Regards,
DTE

 

Warranty: GM dealerships do give a 12 month warranty on Optis'. Steve

 

Well it's red & looks nice but I bet it's still the same old thing!
I just seal up the cap with silcone never had any proplems. :lol:

 

Ok, well then provided two things happen, I'll be purchasing a DynaSpark from ya'll:
1. Mine fails (If it ain't broke yet, don't fix it yet)
2. You come out with a 1992-1994 version (duh.... I need it to fit too!)

 

The OEM Optispark sees high voltage breakdown due to moisture encroachment. The root cause is OEM upper and lower cap gasket shrinkage (loss of sealing) which results from age and heat cycling. This aftermarket unit uses the same GM upper distributor cap assy. Have you retained it's flawed "non-captive" gasket design or have you machined a groove into the billet base for positive retention of a "substantial" neoprene O-ring?? If not, I'll stick with OEM and a $3 tube of Permatex. A properly sealed and purged OEM Optispark is good for 100K miles. OEM rebuilds & replacements are not necessary on a 50K interval, if all cap seams are properly sealed with premium black Permatex.


[Modified by Rick93Z07, 8:53 AM 12/7/2002]

 

Rick-

Moisture intrusion is only ONE of the many reasons for premature distributer failure.

The OEM high temperature perimeter seal does NOT shrink. We have measured the nominal thickness, I.D. and O.D. on the perimeter seals on both new and 93,000 mile distributers and observed virtually the same dimensons. Most even have retained their resiliancy after all of that time.

What we have found however is that the cap deflects slightly with extreme age, increasing the cap to seal clearence, thus exposing the internal components to your leaking water pumps.

This is why we chose to use a severe duty, industrial grade sealant around the cap's perimeter, in addition to the two sealing techniques we use, to insure this problem will not re-occur.

Yes, we have "captured" the seal in the case as you stated that you would like to see. We have also removed another point of moisture entry by eliminating the sandwiched fiberglass rinite insulater that you commonly see on a OEM piece.

We have put a lot of forethought and re-engineering into this unit to target and correct the inherent problems associated with the OEM piece. I have been observing and tracking the different reasons for premature failure since when I started with LPE in 1997, so there isn't alot I haven't seen.

I will say however, that most pre-mature distributer failures almost always follow a modification that someone has done to his/her vehicle in some way. There are so many clearances and tolerances that are ignored and left unchecked by the owner during say, a cam change, that it is no wonder the unit fails early.

Just because it "bolts up" to the engine, doesn't mean it is matched correctly. We've even observed a huge variation and discrepancy in camshaft nose and drive pin height dimensions from manufacturer to manufacturer. We have inclosed in our kit, a dimension spec. sheet for you to follow so that you don't have to worry about damaging a new distributor again from incorrect component clearances that may be unknown by you in your particular engine combination.

Bottom line is, just like anything else one changes in their combination, such as internal engine, correct fitment and application is key to success and component durability.

Yes Rick, you are correct, cap replacement is not "really" needed at 50,000. But as I stated earlier, it is an individual preference to do it and a form of preventative maintainance.

I hope that clears things up for you, and thanks for the input.

Regards,
DTE

 

It's a beautiful piece. I'd take one if I were building a sunny-days-only car. It's too pretty to subject it to road spray! :D

Is the aluminum work cast aluminum (jig plate) or is it wrought plate/bar stock? Looks like 6061...I work for what's essentially a very good high-tech machine shop (assembly systems, no engines, unfortunately), I'm always interested in good machine work.

 

One last question. You wouldn't happen to have pictures of the other colors available would you?

Just interested in seeing all the choices you know.

 

I would be interested in a coil on plug optically fired unit but you need to build it for all model years.

 

Matt-
The primary reason for the hard anodized coating is to provide corrosion protection. Asthetics are secondary. Yes, it is manufactured from 6061-T6 billet aluminum plate stock.

Nathan-
We do not have a piece of every color sitting around here. The colors we offer are true to the light spectrum in shade.

Regards,
DTE

 

DTE,

I probably should have offered more clarity in my post. The '92-'94 Corvette Optispark "fiber perimeter seal" most definitely shrinks, cracks, loses crush preload and invariably gets drawn into the cap. It's clear you're confident with with the later OEM "clear silicone bead" cap seal and have chosen to retain it, but we've all heard about later Optisparks failing from moisture leakage from upper and/or lower cap seams. Good to hear you designed your base with a captive seal groove, but retaining the OEM upper cap seal is a concern to me.

You say moisture intrusion is only one of many causes of failure. IMHO, moisture passing thru cap seals is the root cause of premature Optispark failure. This can cause optical control troubles, HV carbon tracking/breakdown and rust problems that lead to corrosion debris & bearing failure. Other modes of failure are uncommon and insignificant. We've all heard owner's of early and later Opti's consistently remark about motor washing episodes and Optispark autopsy results. In the case of later Opti's, this is the ineffective OEM cap seal (you've retained) causing problems.

IMHO, the later purge-vented OEM cap design is poor due to inconsistent cap seal position & bead thickness. A silicone bead is "squirted" onto the cap with some silly extruding machine...applied like "words on a birthday cake". Every new cap seal looks different. I think it'd be better if this notorious, "poorly thought out" 5 cent OEM seal was pulled off the cap and replaced with a "real" captive neoprene O-ring or something with CONSISTENT dimensions and crush thickness. I consider the reuse of the OEM seal to be a weakness in your design. For peace of mind, I'd be liberally applying an external bead of silicone where the billet housing joins the cap seam. I'd put my"early" GM Opti with $17 worth of purge-venting and gobs of silicone wiped on the seams up against any design with OEM seal in any powerwash or water bucket dumping contest. Just my opinion.


[Modified by Rick93Z07, 12:36 PM 12/8/2002]

 

Very few designs start out "perfect" at least DTE is trying to address the opti problem. Your right about the o-ring, but that adds another machine operation, & detail piece to the design. If DTE applies the correct sealer judiciously it should last forever. Heck if all designs were perfect we wouldn’t even have the opti to begin with. :D

I'm interested in hearing more about the direct fire coil setup :)

 

:cool: :cheers:

 

Jeff, for GM, it is coil near plug (CNP) not coil on plug. I know it sounds like I'm nitpicking, but COP is for those engines that have their plugs coming thru the v. covers, ala hemi head. To incorporate COP to an LT1 would be not be as feasible.

I agree with those that say a major durability/reliability concern is the prevention of moisture invasion. Thou stats say the majority of opti electrical failures are high voltage circuit induced. Whether this failure is due in part to spark ionization and/or is meshed with moisture encroachment derivitives, either way. IOW, relieve the opti of it's high voltage responsibility, and great strides will be made in the reliability of the oem opti.

Anyway, I am running an LS1 ignition setup on my '95 LT1. IOW, CNP ignition with 8 coils. The cost for parts to run this setup ran me about $800, using the existing opti in vehicle.

I informed this forum of an LS1 type of ignition for the LT1 almost a year ago. LOL, not one soul was interested. The (LTCC) conversion module converts opti hi-low resolution signals for use in firing LS1 coils with oem pcm. The oem opti is now used just for generation of pcm signals. And no Tom Piper, it does not have 8 additional low-voltage wires coming from the Opti-Spark. :) AFAIC, it's the way to fly. :) Bought it originally for the FI setup. But ended up putting the 1st unit on an LT1 with it's opti suffering from a deteriorating high voltage circuit. For oem or highly modified LT1s, it just the ticket.

 

I won't argue that moisture intrusion is probably the main cause of many problems. But, I want to point out, in my case (with the later vacuum vented Opti-Spark), there was never any moisture that got into the unit. How do I know??? Because, I check the sealing of my Opti-Spark on a regular basis by plugging the tube that allows the air to enter the Opti-Spark from the air snorkle with a vacuum gauge, and I use a hand vacuum pump on the vacuum harness that normally goes to the intake manifold. After pulling a vaccum on the Opti-Spark with the hand vacuum pump, I watch how long it takes for the vacuum to drop. I have always had mine sealed well. Even with these precautions, I developed carbon tracks. After taking it apart, I saw no signs of moisture.
I believe that the cap of the Opti-Spark does not have enough "high voltage separation" built into it to prevent cross-firing when the cylinder pressure is more than stock -- as a performance engine will have. With higher cylinder pressures, it takes more electronic potential (voltage) to fire the plug gap. This higher voltage is reflected back into the Opti-Spark and causes cross-firing, which ultimately causes carbon-tracking. My opinion is: the OEM cap is not up to modified engines. And, after-market coils with a higher voltage capability exacerbate the problem. The best thing is to get the high-voltage out of the Opti-Spark completely.

Tom Piper

 

Rick-

You are certainly entitled to your opinion on ours' and GM's design on the Gen I and Gen II Optispark.

I agree with you on the Gen I seal, but not on the later seal. We are "confident" as you put it, with the Gen II seal because we have tested our design utilizing that seal, under severe conditions that would have killed an OEM unit and ours still operates flawlessly.

As I have stated twice now before, it is NOT the seal that fails on the GEN II, but the cap deflects somewhat causing an increased gap between the seal and the cap. That is why we have chosen to apply this high tech. sealant in a positive effort to decrease this point of moisture entry. We use three different sealing techniques for the cap alone, where only one existed before, so there is no problem.

If you have noticed, we've completely eliminated one of the seals altogether to increase the products' resistance to moisture.

You mentioned on how the seals are manufactured. Have you had personal visual experience with this method? Every cap seal is not "different". We have measured 28 new Gen II cap seals in a row now and all of them fall within a few thousandths of each other, which is excellent for a silicone-type seal that is mass produced. Even O-ring manufacturers commonly give a +/- spec. of a few thousandths of its' claimed size. Yes, we have explored the usage of an o-ring in it's construction, but the machining costs go through the roof. and by the looks of recent responses, no one wants to "afford" any more cost with this unit as it is. It is VERY expensive to manufacture and I now see why MSD and Accel never ventured forth to reproduce such an item.

So my question to you is, do you want an o-ring used in it's construction? If you do, are you willing to bear the additional cost? If you say yes to both questions, than I'll have the design changed with just a phone call and we'll put that o-ring in there that you desire. We already have blueprints for that now. That change is easy.

BTW- Neoprene o-rings as you would like to see used, are not suited for this type of application and would shortly fail with the chemicals that they would be exposed to. As I stated before, we have explored and researched this already. If we use an o-ring in this application, it will be of Teflon or Viton......resists nearly every chemical and extreme hot and cold.

The bottom line is, we have tested our design for quite some time and have subjected each of them to extremely harsh environmental conditions and every one of them has performed well, as expected. We are providing you with a quality component that address and corrects the problems that people complain about and would not release it if it did not perform as promised.

We have initiated promising contacts with various dist. cap/rotor manufacturers, corrected the problems that everyone has complained about and was the only company to have actively pursued an alternative redesign to this poor OEM product. We've given you want you wanted based on your input as a whole, so give us the professional courtesy of trying one before you pass your negative judgement on the product. Warranties are effective here........

We have a CNP system that is nearly complete and ready for testing, but judging from the negative responses that we have been unjustifiably given, we may shelf the project and apply the R&D funds somewhere else. Sometimes the hassle may not be worth it.

I'm sure you understand where we come from and I thank you once again for your input. We expected some skeptisism and we accept that. That is why we have answered all of your questions honestly and completely.

Regards,
DTE