Distributor or dizzy-less

[estutjaweh]

So, thats the question. My new engine is coming together nicely and seeing as todays a public holiday here in Germany, I've been doing my usual shift of sitting on the couch looking through the interweb for stuff I will need to buy. Now, before I go and get a new dizzy I was thinking about changing to dizzy-less instead - good idea or not?

Time wise its best to fit something like this while the engine is out anyway and cost wise its probably best not to buy a dizzy only to possibly replace it later but is it worth it?

Also, I can only find a complete kit online thats fully adjustable (Lloyd developments)

Do I need that adjustability? Does anyone do complete non-adjustable kits?

Any info/advice appreciated.

[MPoxon]

There are certainly advantages being able to map the spark and not rely on the vac advance on the dizzy to control the curve.... mainly mid range torque. It will mean you have to replace the existing 14CUX ECU with an aftermarket offering as the 14CUX is fuel mapping only.

It would certainly be cheaper to purchase another dizzy and stick with the 14CUX but at the same time if you have a new engine it may be a good opportunity to install decent aftermarket ECU with coil packs to get the best possible performace

If you do go aftermarket make sure you do your research... there are plenty of systems out there, some better than others. If you do go aftermarket I would personally appoint a good mapper first and see what they recommend. An aftermarket system is only as good as the person who maps it.

With regards to complete packages TVR power offer an MBE package but it is not cheap:
http://www.tvrpower.co.uk/news/slug/new-rv8-speed-...

There is also Emerald which I know quite a few people use
http://www.emeraldm3d.com/

HTH

Matthew

[blitzracing]

If you just want toadd a mappable spark, you can just buy an add on unit for the dizzy for around £200. The internal weights are no longer used. Although a wasted spark system and coil packs is ultimately the best solution, I doubt in real terms you would see any significant gains in either BHP or power over a mapped dizzy set up.

http://www.aldonamethyst.co.uk/

Its certainly the option I would go for with a bit of spare cash if the 14CUX is fuelling OK as is.

Edited by blitzracing on Wednesday 1st May 16:51

[TVR Beaver]

isn't the Omex 200 another option.. I think Mr Adams goes with this one if you are keeping the 14CUX

that said, I've just read the Aldon spec and it does look to fit the bill... any one tried one??

Edited by TVR Beaver on Wednesday 1st May 17:27

[spend]

It's much easier to have co-ordinated control of fuel & spark in a single ECU IMO...

The Lucas fans will obviously want you to have a spark only solution... I think its would be a bit like having loads of different remote controls just to watch a single TV

[chris1972]

What about this. Had anybody tried this Megasquirt system?

http://www.extraefi.co.uk/RV8_Kits.html#

[tonym789666]

I am running Megasquirt as are others on here. Much more drivable with better fuel consumption and no shunting. No way would I ever want to go back to the old system. Remember if you go down this route it is only as good as the person who maps it. I could not recommend Dale of Bailey Motorsport in Telford highly enough for this job. He is a real Megasquirt guru.

[KateV8]

To the OP, several of us on here are now enjoying the considerable benefits of Canems courtesy of Lloyds, who you mention in your post. Of course other systems are available but my personal experience of switching from 14cux to Canems is that my car is so much smoother, more reliable,more torquey and can easily be adapted to further changes, like yesterday when the twin plenum went on. Lloyds do a very good complete loom in with the kit and their after sales care is unbeatable. No connection with them, just a satisfied customer

[Zumbruk]

FWIW, I binned the Lucas system on my Chimaera years ago, and now have an Omex 700 series (710? I forget) Another 20bhp from binning the airflow meter and much better tractability. The engine is otherwise standard.

[spitfire4v8]

Not too sure about the blurb on the Aldon site. If you connect your vacuum pipe from the dizzy to the amethyst then at idle the amethyst effectively sees wide open throttle as the take off is the wrong side of the butterfly at idle position, so this means that any advance control of idle stabilisation is lost other than falling rpm v wide open throttle position. I would have thought it would have been much better connected as a MAP sensor would be, to see plenum pressure at all times, and map it from there so you have revs v plenum vacuum for all mapping including idle stabilisation. It just seems wrong but may be perfectly ok, I haven't tried one so can't comment from experience

[blitzracing]

The TVR motor can never make the most of modern ECU technology as you don’t have individual knock sensors to determine the best ignition timing point for all 8 cylinders so ignition timing will still have to be averaged out across the 8 cylinders whatever trigger / timing system you use. Variances in compression (carbon build up) and temperature will determine the best timing point on a cylinder by cylinder basis- and this simply cant be achieved on this basic motor however clever the aftermarket ECU. Its a pity the later Lucas Sagen (GEMS) system cant be easily installed as it has all the bells and whistles of any aftermarket system, and there are plenty now in scrap yards for pennies, but like the Lucas 14CUX any real data on this system is pretty non existent or well guarded and chipping to overcome the immobiliser is silly money.

[blitzracing]

spitfire4v8 said:

Not too sure about the blurb on the Aldon site. If you connect your vacuum pipe from the dizzy to the amethyst then at idle the amethyst effectively sees wide open throttle as the take off is the wrong side of the butterfly at idle position, so this means that any advance control of idle stabilisation is lost other than falling rpm v wide open throttle position. I would have thought it would have been much better connected as a MAP sensor would be, to see plenum pressure at all times, and map it from there so you have revs v plenum vacuum for all mapping including idle stabilisation. It just seems wrong but may be perfectly ok, I haven't tried one so can't comment from experience

Not noiced that one- but a new take of point would not be a big issue. Electronically the standard ignition amp should provide a suitible trigger for the Amethyst, so you would not need purchase additional trigger units.

[spend]

blitzracing said:

The TVR motor can never make the most of modern ECU technology as you don’t have individual knock sensors to determine the best ignition timing point for all 8 cylinders so ignition timing will still have to be averaged out across the 8 cylinders whatever trigger / timing system you use. Variances in compression (carbon build up) and temperature will determine the best timing point on a cylinder by cylinder basis- and this simply cant be achieved on this basic motor however clever the aftermarket ECU. Its a pity the later Lucas Sagen (GEMS) system cant be easily installed as it has all the bells and whistles of any aftermarket system, and there are plenty now in scrap yards for pennies, but like the Lucas 14CUX any real data on this system is pretty non existent or well guarded and chipping to overcome the immobiliser is silly money.

You are talking rubbish IMO Mark.....

What modern cars have egt per pot? erm .... zero! You at least have a chance of mapping this on a RR sampling headers onexone with a proper mappable ecu if it has sequential features

How do the Gems / Thor V8's manage spark? erm a knock sensor per bank ~ no egt.... (and silly money for t'other Mark to disable the bodywork loom?) If cylinder vols/pressures are different it can still only adjust fuelling based on the bank sampling of the lambda sensors.

...and your still stuck with that massive bhp anchor which masquerades as an AFM?

[blitzracing]

spitfire4v8 said:

Not too sure about the blurb on the Aldon site. If you connect your vacuum pipe from the dizzy to the amethyst then at idle the amethyst effectively sees wide open throttle as the take off is the wrong side of the butterfly at idle position, so this means that any advance control of idle stabilisation is lost other than falling rpm v wide open throttle position. I would have thought it would have been much better connected as a MAP sensor would be, to see plenum pressure at all times, and map it from there so you have revs v plenum vacuum for all mapping including idle stabilisation. It just seems wrong but may be perfectly ok, I haven't tried one so can't comment from experience

Not noiced that one- but a new take of point would not be a big issue. Electronically the standard ignition amp should provide a suitible trigger for the Amethyst, so you would not need purchase additional trigger units.

[blitzracing]

spend said:

You are talking rubbish IMO Mark.....

What modern cars have egt per pot? erm .... zero! You at least have a chance of mapping this on a RR sampling headers onexone with a proper mappable ecu if it has sequential features

How do the Gems / Thor V8's manage spark? erm a knock sensor per bank ~ no egt.... (and silly money for t'other Mark to disable the bodywork loom?) If cylinder vols/pressures are different it can still only adjust fuelling based on the bank sampling of the lambda sensors.

...and your still stuck with that massive bhp anchor which masquerades as an AFM?

Fair enough, I just thought there was development on knock detection per cylinder for the latest ECU's- maybe Im ahead of things here but even so a single knock sensor is a big improvement over fixed timing to optimise things, and it would be good to be able to use the facility.

I’m intrigued you say the immobiliser is part of the loom? I thought there were two Eproms involved in the Gems- one for fuel and one for immobiliser, cost of a reworked pair around £700?

I agree on the AFM on the bigger engines, but the last roller test I saw on a 249BHP 3.9
showed no increase what so ever with a bigger AFM, so Id say if you are running less then 250-270BHP and the engine runs well enough leave the 14CUX be, but beyond that spend you money on aftermarket.

[Graham]

I've looked at fitting gems to the chim, and it can be done, you need to stick with the intermediate serp front cover and get the cam sensor added, and a relavent cam. John eales can do a suitable flywheel so you can use the gems crank sensor to.

the 600/700 quid from mark adams is to disable the security and also provide a new target map thats better than the stock RR so a bit more than just disabling the security bit..

still not decided which way I'll go yet, as I use emerald on the other cars

G