MSD has come up w/another "tqhead"/LTCC or whatever they're called, ignition system for Gen I SBC. You'd have to do the LT1 distributor hole mod to make this work on an LT1, but it's another $1200 option for those who've had enough with their opti's.

MSD DIS IGNITION

 

thanks cool.

 

Pretty neat. If you absolutely positively wanted to get rid of the opti as a whole, that’s definitely a thing. Just requires more direct work. As you mentioned, it requires modifying the engine to accept a standard distributor, but it also requires fabricating a mount for the coils.

i personally prefer the LTCC approach of using the “opti” while disabling the “spark,” but I’m not everyone. More competition is always better!

 

I would mount the coils on the frame rail. Out of sight.

I'd keep the opti in place to keep the ECM/CCM/gauges happy.

 

LOL. Why woud you want to get rid of the optispark?

Unless you are using a non OEM made in china optispark, or LOL the $500 MSD optispark....the OEM optispark is completely reliable

The 92-94 optisparks had a design flaw (lack of vent), but its easily corrected at which point it becomes reliable.


i laugh, but theres gonna be someone that buys this.
while I drive carefree with my NOS gen 2 optispark.

 

I wouldn't.

Lot's 'o folks on here though, feel differently than I do.

 

Per-cylinder dwell control? Stronger spark per cylinder without overdriving the opti's rotor/cap assembly? There's plenty of wonderful reasons why the world moved away from distributors and went to coil-on-plug and coil-near-plug systems. It's awesome that you're having so much luck with your stock setup, and congrats to you. But you're gonna get some laughs if you suggest that your distributor is superior in every way to coil-per-cylinder setups.

 

Maybe I missed it-- as this does seem like a "overview" article--but didn't see where this would work with OBD1 motors?

R

 

It will work with any motor, regardless of electronic control. It takes over the ignition completely. Now, if you wanted to keep our particular OBD1 motors happy you'd still need to retain the stock feedback loop--which means you'd need to keep the opti in place sending its signals back to the PCM so that the PCM is happy. But the PCM would have zero actual control over the timing advance/retard. This isn't a huge deal--except of course that you lose timing control via ASR operation, and knock feedback. That's why a system designed specifically for the LT1 is superior to generic systems like these (for example, the LTCC or DIY equivalent); they utilize the stock feedback loops, and thus respond properly to timing commands from the car's existing systems.

But hey, like I said earlier--to each their own, and competition is always a good thing in niche markets like ours.

 

im superior bc I can (and have) put an MSD box on my optispark for multiple sparks and a hotter spark.

you cant do that with coil on plugs.

IMHO coil on plugs just cheapened things up for the OEM and is why they did it

 

You're wrong, plain and simple.

A distributor is mechanically limited by design. You cannot override this mechanical limitation.

Coil-per-cylinder setups have no mechanical limitation because the "rotor" is in software--it's code. You're limited by the signalling speed of the ignition controller and its associated wiring, which is several orders of magnitude faster than the physical rotor arm in your distributor.

Again, I'm glad your setup works for you. But suggesting that the optispark is superior to coil-per-cylinder is ridiculous on its face.

 

I see no reason why they couldn't adapt this to the Optispark general design package. After all it is a distributor, being driven from the opposite end of the same camshaft that that distributor is.

 

They absolutely could. If they could get their control box to output the proper low res and high res signals, and to accept timing commands (for ASR and knock retard support), it would plug straight in and the C4 would be happy. They could also have their fake distributor be a fake optispark to do the same thing but without the modification to the block.

But they'd have to want to, and generally this appears to be targeted at generic small-block engines, and not the Gen 2 LT1.

 

OK, I see that now. Thanks for the clearification.


ronn

 

The ONLY advantage the opti has over other systems is the resolution; 360* of signal, or a signal every 1* of crank rotation. How meaningful is that compared to the resolution found in later engines? Probably just about meaningless. Every other aspect of the opti is a disadvantage:
arcing across points
LONG plug wires
Primary and secondary in the same housing
Shafts, seals, and leaks.
Location
One coil fires 4x/revolution
One ICM -if it stops working, car won't run
Once coil -if it stops working, car won't run

I'm sure the list could go on and on, but those are some big ones. I'm not about to change mine over, b/c IMO the $$ isn't worth it; I could buy 10 opti's for the price of the conversion. But even though I'll keep the opti, I know that it is not better. Or even as good as newer COP/CNP systems.

 

MSD has some newer coils with multi spark capability built in (or so they say on their website). If they would work with the LTCC box and truly have multi spark capability, I think that would be the way to go. That would get the voltage out of the Optispark and just let it be the positional driver.

As I have said in the past, putting a MSD box on the 454 in my 1991 pickup cleaned the emissions up a lot, picked up a couple miles per gallon and you could feel the engine running a little better. Just felt "crisper". (when the truck is getting 13 mpg and it goes to 15 mpg, that is an extra 70 miles on a 35 gal tank, it does add up).

These are the ones that say they have multi spark capability built in

https://www.holley.com/products/igni...ls/parts/82878

 

agreed to this, if you got a bigger cam it (and msd box) can help cleAn up a nasty pungent exhaust smell at idle

 

I still find that one hard to swallow. Cleaner emissions, better gas mileage, obviously better combustion.....but SQUAT on the dyno? I can't rationalize that one...

 

This is a clarification of why I say I saw a difference.

30 yr old truck with a big pig engine -vs- small more modern design V6

I don't have the paperwork any more, but we have been under emissions testing here since 1996 and was provided with the test results, actually HAD to have the test results to get license plates.(still do). I had a 1997 Buick Skylark with a V6 that ran very nice. According to the sniff test, the truck ran cleaner than the car. The test encompassed putting the vehicle on a dyno type of device so they could test at varying speeds. A 454 with a rudimentary fuel injection ran cleaner than the V6 Buick did AFTER I put the box in. We are on odd and even years, so a 91 and a 97 had to be checked at the same time so I could get my plates on my birthday, that is how Ohio does it.

We are not as bad off as California is though.

Of course, OBDII is a snap, just plug it in, passes or don't and away you go.

A couple miles a gallon was very noticeable.

Did it make x more HP ? Can't say. Did it run better, absolutely. It was burning up more of the fuel, especially the unburnt hydrocarbons. The 454 of 1991 was not as efficient as the 454 of a couple years later. Simply by unplugging the box from its power source changed the feeling of the engine. As I said, the "crispness". It didn't turn it into a race truck, not saying that.

It did get better mileage than the 1989 454 that ran off with my ex-wife. (same gear ratios, both were 4x4 with 3.73:1 differentials) I still had/kept the horses though, kept the place, she went down the road. When you are hauling 10,000 lbs of horses and horse trailer behind you, you can tell if something has helped or not. I pulled the horses all over and hauled lots of hay with that truck, both for myself and others.

This is what we have been living under since 1996 and what I judged by. Very scientific.

https://epa.ohio.gov/dapc/echeck/why...to%20the%20air.

 

It would be a lot easier to just install an lS3 than figuring out how to modify to accept a distributor shaft