MTFCA Forum

Posted: **Sat Nov 11, 2023 8:08 am**

In my newest video, I explore the real-world effects of ECCT-tuned coils on my 1926 Runabout. Premiers on Sunday Nov 12 at 8:30pm EST. Join me then and we can 'chat' about the topic, or watch at your leisure some other time. https://youtu.be/HaTH32bvsSw

Posted: **Sat Nov 11, 2023 8:35 am**

Steven ....... Will be tuned-in . Thanks

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2023 9:15 pm**

This video is now available to view. https://youtu.be/HaTH32bvsSw

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2023 9:31 pm**

Somewhat informative, but in my estimation really didn't cover everything necessary. First off, were the point assemblies tight on the top terminals? What was the gap of the cushion spring against the holding rivet? What was the gap between the the two contact points?.... Were washers placed under the upper point standoffs to compensate for wood depression and to reestablish physical position of the upper point assembly?.... I feel an analog meter should have been used for electrical results. Enclosed with the ECCT tester, there are pages of detailed instructions on how to adjust each coil to have the same resulting output. .... I'm sorry but that was not accomplished on this video, or did they really care?..... I am very disappointed in this presentation, and only shows their lack of interest or experience.,.. any physical pressure on the point assemblies will definitely change the electrical values, so the coil unit should be handled only by the wood as they are placed in and out of the car's coil box.......... All of my coil rebuilding customers have responded with their cars. Better engine response. Idle smoothness and power..... I did loan a set to a friend who I asked put in one of his Model t's and to report any changes plus or minus... And he reported that the car would not start as it did before. I did recalibrate the coils on the ECCT only to find that the electrical values were off and not as preset. ..... Possibility of physical pressure being put onto the coil top hardware and points.

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2023 10:50 pm**

The tune on the ECCT coils was not very good. I didnt accept that much variation in the time to fire. Mine set & tested all excellent & 95 or 98%
They should have put more effort into the coil tune.

The test subject was a poor, worn old motor. Coil tune is less important.
The poor old motor wont do much better unless going down hill.

My personal testing saw an improvement in top speed @ 8mph. with a smoother idle & better acceleration.
Also my new day timer has very little wear after 2 years running. A quick fine sand made it as new.
My motor has 95# compression & a bigger carb.

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2023 11:20 pm**

What really stood out as I was watching, is the top speed of 67 kilometers per hour ( 42 mph). This is slow for top speed; however this is faster than I care to tour.

A hill climb test would have been interesting.

The buzz box adjusted coils had a touring year on the points, unless I missed something. He should have used fresh points.

I use a buzz box to adjust my coils, but with some electronic equipment attached to it. I have thought about installing ECCT adjusted coils to see if I can tell a difference in the performance of my car. The engine is in good condition. Compression is 62 psi on all cylinders.

Art Mirtes

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2023 11:20 pm**

What really stood out as I was watching, is the top speed of 67 kilometers per hour ( 42 mph). This is slow for top speed; however this is faster than I care to tour.

A hill climb test would have been interesting.

The buzz box adjusted coils had a touring year on the points, unless I missed something. He should have used fresh points.

I use a buzz box to adjust my coils, but with some electronic equipment attached to it. I have thought about installing ECCT adjusted coils to see if I can tell a difference in the performance of my car. The engine is in good condition. Compression is 62 psi on all cylinders.

Art Mirtes

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2023 11:21 pm**

Sorry about triple entry. It's late.

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:32 am**

Interesting video. I've had a lot of experience with coil adjustment, with buzz boxes, an oscilloscope based tester, and the ECCT.
One thing I don't recall being mentioned in the video was if the coils were run on battery or magneto. Buzz box adjustment tends to be more favourable for battery operation, because the coil is being triggered by the timer contact, not the rising magneto voltage.
My experience is that with points in very good condition, the gaps correctly set, and the average current set to 1.3A, the adjustment will be pretty good, especially on battery operation. I ran my car like that for many years, but only on 6V because the magneto was defective. The right thing to do is to set the coils to fire with equal dwell time, or at least see that they are, if they've previously been adjusted on a buzz box. So I then built the oscilloscope based tester, and then later bought an ECCT (which operates on the same principle). I would also highly recommend the computer interface for the ECCT.
For a dirt road of the gradient the car was being driven, 67km/h would be about right. Put it on a flat tarred road and it would probably get into the 70's.
Another important thing, what was the condition of the timer used in the test car?

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 10:47 am**

First of all, thanks to Steven for posting another Model T video, there really aren’t enough. It’s a tough topic to address, so many experts disagree on tuning coils. Bottom line is that if your coils need tuning any method will show an improvement. I have no experience with the ECCT, but if my Strobospark dies I will probably get one. A HCCT works fine but there is a learning curve to balance a set of coils and the prices are ridiculous.

Andy

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:50 pm**

I'll do my best to answer your questions and suggestions, in order. I really appreciate that you guys took the time to watch, and to reply here. Thanks!

First, @moxie26

"didn't cover everything necessary." Agree. I will do a follow-up video sometime. Have already planned to work with Russ, his ECCT , BuzzBox, AND HCCT this winter to try to understand each of them better.

"What was the gap of the cushion spring against the holding rivet? What was the gap between the the two contact points?" Russ and I both set the rivet to .008-.010 in. We set the points-gap to .025-.030 in. Russ's were set recently, mine were set a year ago. And we know at least one of mine closed-up.

"Were washers placed under the upper point standoffs to compensate for wood depression and to reestablish physical position of the upper point assembly?" Dunno about this one. Good point. I'll be sure to take this step next time I rebuild coils.

"I feel an analog meter should have been used for electrical results." AGREE! I WISH I had one! I love old tools, and I prefer analog over digital anyday. If you know where I can get some good-quality analog meters at an affordable price, I am all-in!

"Enclosed with the ECCT tester, there are pages of detailed instructions on how to adjust each coil to have the same resulting output. .... I'm sorry but that was not accomplished on this video, or did they really care?" Ouch. My objective was to compare some well-tuned ECCT coils to my year-old self-tuned coils on my dilapidated old car. I think I accomplished that. Never said my objective was to show how to expertly tune coils.

"the coil unit should be handled only by the wood as they are placed in and out of the car's coil box" I pull them up by the solid studs. I guess that "physical pressure being put onto the coil top hardware and points" might affect the tune slightly. I'll pay more attention to this.

I enjoy doing these tests, and making videos. It keeps the history alive for me. If you would like to send me some coils to try next summer, I'd be game. Thanks for the comments @moxie26

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:56 pm**

Replying to @speedytinc

"The test subject was a poor, worn old motor. Coil tune is less important.
The poor old motor wont do much better unless going down hill." Yup. That was the test. How would ECCT-tuned coils affect the performance of my old car? My jalopy only has 30-40 psi compression. I know the rings leak a bit. See my video on Differential Compression to see how I know. https://youtu.be/UbgYTVdTV4o

"my new day timer has very little wear" I also have a Newday timer. It probably does need some TLC...

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 1:01 pm**

Replying to Art M:

"What really stood out as I was watching, is the top speed of 67 kilometers per hour ( 42 mph). This is slow for top speed; however this is faster than I care to tour." Yeah, I determined that my car isn't performing all that well when I took the 1/4 Mile Drag Race Challenge. https://youtu.be/iuJycR6F7KU

"A hill climb test would have been interesting." I like this idea; I'll look for a suitable hill. You can listen to the car in my video as it pulls up a hill at full throttle, but I didn't take any time-distance data.

"The buzz box adjusted coils had a touring year on the points, unless I missed something." You are correct.

"I have thought about installing ECCT adjusted coils to see if I can tell a difference in the performance of my car. The engine is in good condition. Compression is 62 psi on all cylinders." I would be excited to hear what you find!

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 1:07 pm**

Replying to @JohnH:

"One thing I don't recall being mentioned in the video was if the coils were run on battery or magneto." Good point. i should have mentioned that I always run the car on Mag; I only use Bat for starting.

"For a dirt road of the gradient the car was being driven, 67km/h would be about right." I don't know about you, but I prefer driving testing on dirt roads. Feels more like time travel then. I am sure if my motor was fresh, she would wind-out a bit more. We'll see, someday, when I refresh it.

"Another important thing, what was the condition of the timer used in the test car?" New Day Timer - 12 months since last it was serviced.

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 1:09 pm**

Replying to @AndyClary:

"thanks to Steven for posting another Model T video" You are welcome! I enjoy it.

"so many experts disagree on tuning coils" Yep. I was expecting some vitriol. The funny thing is, I KNOW that I am not an expert.

"Strobospark" Wish I had access to one this winter, because Russ and I are going to spend some time experimenting with ECCT, HCCT, and Buzz to compare/contrast them.

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 1:56 pm**

REPLYING TO FLIVVER ..................."so many experts disagree on tuning coils" Yep. I was expecting some vitriol. The funny thing is, I KNOW that I am not an expert "...............................................Both of you would have a better presentation IF the ECCT instructions were read and applied,.... instead of you just pushing buttons on the tester. Anyone who has purchased the ECCT , to my knowledge, has not expressed negative results...WHY ??? maybe because they read the instructions and use the phone/e-mail contact provided for help. ........ WE ALL are not experts until we learn by being educated.... Why were the loaner coils not ECCT adjusted to show " 0 " on testing ?

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 3:44 pm**

The ECCT is the best way to set up coils in the field. Coils and points need to be in reasonably good condition to get good adjustment results by any method. Adjusting coils by any method will not correct issues with worn or defective engines, timers, wiring, spark plugs, switches, magnetos, etc.

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 5:23 pm**

Not sure what’s trying to be proved here. Saying poorly adjusted coils on a worn engine might not make a difference in drive ability? If that’s the case I’m not buying it. Because I’ve seen the change in my ‘23 touring. Started dead cold on mag by hand crank for the first time ever after my coils were set up. It was an HCCT that was used. The change in running was very noticeable. My comp. varied from 40 to 48 or so. What does going from tested coils to tested coils actually show?

Posted: **Mon Nov 13, 2023 7:34 pm**

Properly set up coils will eliminate issues caused by improperly set up coils.

Posted: **Tue Nov 14, 2023 2:38 am**

I am sold on the ECCT. My unit was used last year by Todd Wirth at the National Tour if anyone needed tuned up coils. Mike Kossor has always been a gentleman any time I contacted him.

Posted: **Tue Nov 14, 2023 3:23 am**

The buzz box does not test the coils in the same environment that they will work on when operating in the car running on the magnet.
Read Ron Patterson Co's articles about the Model T ignition system and understand how it actually works.
The Strobospark works just the same as a HCCT basicly but have also the ability to test the capacitor.
Both HCCT and Strobospark assumes, that with a certain draw of AC current, the dwell will be the same. Dwell is the lag in the spark after it's fired and it should be 2 milliseconds.
The coils you had back then was most likely made out of the same batch and hence had similar electrical specifications, so with the same draw of current they would have the same dwell - give and take - but today the coils you work with are mixed and from diffeerent years and maybe even different vendors (KW or Ford or modern) so dwell may vary with same current draw.
That's where ECCT comes in since it does not base it's judgement bad-good-excellent on the current but measures the dwell and judge on that. At the end of the day - that's what we are aiming for - single hot spark at the same time on all 4 coils.
Try to attach a computer to the ECCT and run the accompanying program and you will get a full report on the coils including current draw.

You may compare results with ECCT, Strobospark and HCCT, but they will most likely give different results as the tools are working differently and aiming for different targets.

Hope this helps.

Posted: **Tue Nov 14, 2023 8:13 am**

Comparing the test results between the ECCT and HCCT is like comparing apples and oranges.

The coil setup is totally different, the ECCT is concerned with timing and the HCCT is concerned with current.

Dean Yoder was an early tester of the ECCT and he drove his Model T over 20,000 miles with no ignition problems.

The timing issue does give a much smoother running engine with more power.

When you start cranking an HCCT to test a coil, while watching the Voltmeter (if there is one), and slowly increase the speed, you will notice the sparks appear at a different voltage, some as little as 2 volts, and some as much as 4.5 volts.

This does allow the spark plug to fire at a slightly different voltage levels and piston position for a slightly rougher running engine and slight power loss.

Posted: **Tue Nov 14, 2023 8:22 am**

Among other coil adjustment parameters, "time to fire" is important, It varies from one coil to another for various reasons. The ECCT permits synchronizing time to fire among all four coils in a set very accurately. The benefit of accurately synchronized time to fire ought to be obvious.

Posted: **Tue Nov 14, 2023 8:46 am**

TXGOAT2 wrote: ↑
Tue Nov 14, 2023 8:22 am
Among other coil adjustment parameters, "time to fire" is important, It varies from one coil to another for various reasons. The ECCT permits synchronizing time to fire among all four coils in a set very accurately. The benefit of accurately synchronized time to fire ought to be obvious.

Like the accuracy of a good distributor.

Posted: **Tue Nov 14, 2023 5:37 pm**

Stephen Park, aka Flivver..... Any other thoughts or comments on the last group of postings?

Posted: **Tue Nov 14, 2023 6:38 pm**

What we really need is a comparison test between Bloggers, Youtubers and fart facers so we can get a handle on which may be the least useful.

Allan from down under.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:26 pm**

dykker5502 wrote: ↑
Tue Nov 14, 2023 3:23 am
The buzz box does not test the coils in the same environment that they will work on when operating in the car running on the magnet.
Read Ron Patterson Co's articles about the Model T ignition system and understand how it actually works.
The Strobospark works just the same as a HCCT basicly but have also the ability to test the capacitor.
Both HCCT and Strobospark assumes, that with a certain draw of AC current, the dwell will be the same. Dwell is the lag in the spark after it's fired and it should be 2 milliseconds.
The coils you had back then was most likely made out of the same batch and hence had similar electrical specifications, so with the same draw of current they would have the same dwell - give and take - but today the coils you work with are mixed and from diffeerent years and maybe even different vendors (KW or Ford or modern) so dwell may vary with same current draw.
That's where ECCT comes in since it does not base it's judgement bad-good-excellent on the current but measures the dwell and judge on that. At the end of the day - that's what we are aiming for - single hot spark at the same time on all 4 coils.
Try to attach a computer to the ECCT and run the accompanying program and you will get a full report on the coils including current draw.

You may compare results with ECCT, Strobospark and HCCT, but they will most likely give different results as the tools are working differently and aiming for different targets.

Hope this helps.

This is interesting. I appreciate the constructive, logical analyis given here.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:37 pm**

Charlie B in N.J. wrote: ↑
Mon Nov 13, 2023 5:23 pm
Not sure what’s trying to be proved here... What does going from tested coils to tested coils actually show?

Charlie: I was curious if my car, running on my coils, tuned by me a year ago using simple tools, would benefit from ECCT-tuned coils. It didnt. Some here have pointed out that the ECCT-tuned coils could have been better. Others have noted that a baffed engine like mine isn't as sensitive to coul tuning. Both are fair points.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:53 pm**

Moxie26 wrote: ↑
Tue Nov 14, 2023 5:37 pm
Stephen Park, aka Flivver..... Any other thoughts or comments on the last group of postings?

I'm not really sure what I can add to many of the last few postings. Couple of them are about distributors (not really relevant to my video) and very few others ask any questions of me.

There are some anecdotes about ECCT success, and defense of it's virtues. Fine.

There are some detailed comments about how ECCT, stroboSpark, buzz, and HCCT differ, which is interesting; I hope to study that farther.

Among other coil adjustment parameters, "time to fire" is important, It varies from one coil to another for various reasons. The ECCT permits synchronizing time to fire among all four coils in a set very accurately. The benefit of accurately synchronized time to fire ought to be obvious.

I imagine time-to-fire is a function of the timer, and the coil tuning. And I imagine that consistent time-to-fire is much more important as rpm rises. Two of my coils were really out of whack concerning time to fire, whereas the ECCT-tuned coils were all very close to TDC. But that made no noticeable difference in my old car. This was essentially the premis of this test and video.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2023 7:55 pm**

Perfect coils will not overhaul a worn or damaged engine, any more than having good tires will cure oil burning.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:40 pm**

Something else to remember. Even perfectly match and timed coils will not make a worn or poorly made timer run any better.

To get the benefit of well timed coils you also need an equally accurate firing signal from the timer. If the timer doesn't "fire" at 90 degrees between each rotation or the timer roller brush bounce etc.. then there will not be an accurate and regular signal to fire the coils and the benefits of consistent matching coils will be lost.

You need to have both good matching coils, a good accurate timer and the right voltage to get the best overall results from the ignition system.

A few T owners here have installed the flapper timer and have also found out that they needed to be adjusted to get the firing signals to be at 90 degree intervals and that just "out of the box" was not good enough in some cases.

By the way. ECCT user here. Its taken a while to learn how to set things to get good firing results, but it can be done. And it makes condenser testing a breeze too. I like it.

I also have one of his I-Timers that I haven't installed yet. The good original roller timer in mine is working well, but I have noticed a bit of high speed missing at times. So the I-timer will be tried out next spring to see how it works with well timed coils.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2023 9:58 pm**

nsbrassnut wrote: ↑
Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:40 pm
Something else to remember. Even perfectly match and timed coils will not make a worn or poorly made timer run any better.

To get the benefit of well timed coils you also need an equally accurate firing signal from the timer. If the timer doesn't "fire" at 90 degrees between each rotation or the timer roller brush bounce etc.. then there will not be an accurate and regular signal to fire the coils and the benefits of consistent matching coils will be lost.

You need to have both good matching coils, a good accurate timer and the right voltage to get the best overall results from the ignition system.

Quite right. No doubt my NewDay could use a good service. Thanks for the comments.

Posted: **Thu Nov 16, 2023 8:54 am**

Coils are one link in a chain.

Posted: **Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:21 am**

I always enjoy your videos Steven. They are well done, entertaining, informative and objective. Thank you. I check regularly for new ones. Keep them coming!

Posted: **Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:28 am**

Steven, Thank you for an excellent production and presentation. Your well planned methodical approach and narration was a pleasure to view. I applaud your curiosity, motivation and willingness to share what you learned here on the forum. Many great replies, valid considerations and thought-provoking suggestions for future performance testing which you are receptive.

In that sprit, I offer the following observations and suggestions for your consideration in planning future testing.

Review
As others have already stated, Model T engine performance depends on many variables. The challenge is making sure there is no weak links in the chain of variables that limit performance.

: Weak link in the chain.JPG (26.11 KiB) Viewed 15168 times

Coils
Your investigation focus was coils and coil tuning. You observed no significant difference in your engine performance between coils firing spark at unequal and inconsistent times versus a set of coils firing spark at relatively equal firing times and good firing consistency. An unexpected result since it is widely known spark ignition engine performance largely depends upon spark ignition timing relative to piston position. Possible conclusions are:
1. The tool used to tune coils is ineffective
2. Low compression Model T engines do not need finely tuned coils; buzz box or by ear is just fine
3. Another variable that determines when spark ignition occurs is varying more than the coils

Conclusion 3 seems most probable considering many have reported significant improvements in engine performance using the same tools and methods adopted for timed performance competitions. So what are the other variables that determine when spark ignition occurs?

Timer – contacts, spring condition, carbon debris from arcing and poor maintenance can cause unequal and inconsistent coil activation relative to piston position. Solution: inspect, clean, resurface or replace the timer to minimize its contribution to ignition timing error. A New Day timer is a good choice. An ideal timer eliminates nearly all timer induced cylinder to cylinder ignition timing variation so is a good candidate to use for engine performance testing. Check timer wire insulation is not worn or cracked. Inspect all timer wire terminals to ensure all crimp connectors are clean and tight. Verify wire terminals have no frayed insulation or broken strands.

Spark Plugs – Dirty, worn electrodes or unequal gapped spark plugs are subject to misfire and contribute to cylinder to cylinder ignition timing variation. Clean, gap or replace worn spark plugs.

Spark Plug Wires – Crimp terminals are subject to corrosion and intermittent electrical connection. Clean and solder spark plug wires to their respective terminals. Inspect spark plug wire insulation and replace if worn or cracked. Route spark plug wires to maintain a minimum of 1 inch clearance between the spark plug wire and any metal object. Keep all other wires at least 1 inch from spark plug terminals on either end of the spark plug wire.

Coil Box – Disassemble, clean and retighten all coil box terminals. Inspect coil box power connections to ensure they are properly soldered to the bottom buss bar. Inspect and clean all coil box terminals. Make sure they have sufficient resilience to remain in contact with the side coil contacts at all times when the coil is installed. Inspect the coil box lid to ensure the cover keeps all coils seated to prevent intermittent connection due to vibration and bumps. Verify the nothing metal touches the coil points when the cover is properly installed. Inspect wooden coil boxs for signs of arcing or carbon tracking on or around the spark plug terminals. Check for arcing due to carbon trails on or just under the surface by running the car at night and looking for sparks or flashes on or around the spark plug terminals. Replace old or suspect coil box wood with Delrin plastic inserts to rule out coil box arcing.

Magneto – output performance is directly proportional to spark energy. Weak spark energy can cause incomplete or irregular combustion. Test magneto output is sufficient to properly operate coils using a St. Louis Magneto Tester or ECCT to rule out magneto performance from degrading spark ignition.

Compression/Carburetor/Valves – Weak compression or poor Carburetor performance will reduce engine power and limit top speed but I would still expect variation in spark ignition timing to make a difference in what that top speed was. A possible exception would be sticky valves that introduce variability cylinder to cylinder compression with time but think that seems unlikely. Comments or experience otherwise?

Engine Performance Testing
Having established all other variables capable of contributing to spark ignition variation are operating properly, here are some suggestions to improve performance data accuracy when doing A/B comparisons such as sets of coils tuned using various methods.

Spark Lever and Throttle Setting – install stops on the quadrant to ensure spark lever and throttle are set to the same positions for each trial run.

Establish Repeatability – Repeat each test run at least 3 times to determine the performance repeatability. A single gust of head wind, tail wind or lateral wind gust, pot hole or other road variable can impose significant performance variation. Conclusions really cannot be made unless one test condition (set of coils for example) out perform another by an amount greater than the measurement variation.

Timed Runs – Consider capturing start and stop times at the same points to gauge acceleration performance. Measure time directly or by reviewing video footage depicting the same physical points on the test course to compare how long it takes to reach the same point on the course.

Here is an example of how I conducted engine performance testing:
https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/f76807 ... 4279364482

Here is a link to the MTFCA Coil Testing and Tuning Webinar which you may find helpful:
https://youtu.be/RYcGD-8Ol3s?t=364

Great discussion. Looking forward to further ideas, suggestions and your future test results!

Posted: **Thu Nov 16, 2023 2:18 pm**

Mike certainly some strong observations / suggestions & I like where those opportunities could go . Full disclosure I have the ECCT Package, Strobo Spark, HCCT, Jefferson multi test coil tester & a homemade buzz box.
I would think just from a quick comparison perspective the structure of this particular test was similar though I’m not sure why the variables of the ECCT coils were not in the excellent rage based on the available computer test offered with the programs analysis. The test not being blinded which would have add yet another opportunity to be non-bias. Same everything with minor variations with the exception of a warm engine. All that said & as you stated many folks perceive or experience a marked difference including friends of mine locally. It would be interesting though to see a standardized test comparison. Best John

Posted: **Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:44 pm**

MKossor wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:28 am
Steven, Thank you for an excellent production and presentation. Your well planned methodical approach and narration was a pleasure to view. I applaud your curiosity, motivation and willingness to share what you learned here on the forum. Many great replies, valid considerations and thought-provoking suggestions for future performance testing which you are receptive.

In that sprit, I offer the following observations and suggestions for your consideration in planning future testing...

Thank you for the excellent reply! I am humbled by its thoroughness. I read your paper explaining the scientific process you used to test the ecct versus the hcct coils using the data acquisition system: facinating! Real data, with a many variables controlled as possible. Respect.

I read that your scientific tests confirm my quick empirical seat of the pants video test: coils can be tuned quite well by non electronic means, yielding no significant perceptable performace differences. But I expect you would also agree that the ECCT is an excellent and convenient way to get the coils tuned well, to avoid mistuning that other methods might overlook.

Thanks again for taking the time to participate in this discussion.

Posted: **Thu Nov 16, 2023 7:18 pm**

....... " I read that your scientific tests confirm my quick empirical seat of the pants video test: coils can be tuned quite well by non electronic means, yielding no significant perceptable performace differences. ". . .... Could you please take time to expand on your non-electronic means of setting coils?.. with no perceptible performance differences of ECCT adjusted coils. Thanks.

Posted: **Thu Nov 16, 2023 8:02 pm**

A T will run best with accurately synchronized coils.

Posted: **Fri Nov 17, 2023 12:28 am**

I read that your scientific tests confirm my quick empirical seat of the pants video test: coils can be tuned quite well by non electronic means, yielding no significant perceptable performace differences.

An unanticipated conclusion not supported by the TDAS data in my view.

The data presented in the TDAS article does, however, support the conclusion; Coils adjusted for equal and consistent firing time using the ECCT performed equivalent to HCCT adjusted coils by an experienced HCCT professional user. Establishing that conclusion was a major milestone at the time given the dwell time to fire method of coil point adjustment was a little known or used method compared with the time tested HCCT method. Non-electronic means of coil adjustment was not covered in the article.

Like your car, my 1927 Touring engine at the time was well worn. It had notable rod knock, low compression and weak magneto output (13.5 ECCT scale). The New Day timer and champion spark plugs and vaporizer carburetor were cleaned but came with the car so don't know how old they were. I also learned later the coil box suffered from carbon track arcing I found due to the inability to repeat engine performance results day to day without any parameter changing. My engine has since been fully rebuild and broken in. The Ideal timer has since evolved and well suited for engine performance testing. There has been little motivation to re-instrument the car for coil performance testing due to considerable, impartial and consistently positive user feedback touting the merits of the dwell time to fire method of coil point adjustment. Your video capturing a well planned and methodical testing renewed my interest and fond memories conducting engine performance testing.

Posted: **Fri Nov 17, 2023 12:42 am**

Mike, I am so pleased you finally made comment on this post. I was recalling my very early days of Beta testing your ECCT and remembering that it did initially have the the current setting function on it which would have happily satisfied all those who rely on current draw setting alone to set up coils. Perhaps you could explain, better than me, why in the production version the current setting reference was deleted and why when the parameters you settled on, pretty much ensured when a coil is set up correctly the current draw will look after itself.
For the interest of others that have commented on this post, you may recall, I introduced a hill climb test into the testing program. I had a test hill that would ensure that most cars had to get down to low gear before cresting the hill. On occasions after changing over to coils tested and tuned on the ECCT the car would be able to crest the hill in high gear or at least get closer to the top.
Of course, as you suggest, best results are obtained with a perfect timer, wiring loom, spark plugs, rebuilt coil box etc.
I run both my cars with all of the above in great shape with ECCT tuned coils and have enjoyed thousands of miles of reliable starting and driving.
Just my thoughts and I certainly enjoyed the original posters videos and all the other videos he has produced.

Posted: **Fri Nov 17, 2023 8:48 am**

Once I adjusted my coils with an ECCT, my on-going (New Day) timer issues disappeared. The poorly adjusted coils were destroying my timers. Based on the fact that ECCT coil adjustment ended that problem, I'm satisfied that coil current draw is well within satisfactory bounds. I have driven the car several thousand miles since adjusting with the ECCT, and not only does the engine run very well, but I have not done anything to the (abused) New Day timer since. I have a new I-Timer, but I have yet to install it because the car runs so well as-is.
I had NO success attempting to adjust the coils by ear, but I did ruin a couple of good timers.

My problems began when one of the (new-looking) point sets lost a contact. By the time I discovered that rather unusual problem, I had timer problems, which I compounded by attempting to adjust the coils by ear.

Posted: **Fri Nov 17, 2023 10:40 am**

This is an interesting visual and read. And thank you for the presentation.

But what is a proper smooth running motor with a set of induction coils?

For me the proof of a proper adjusted set of coils is real world performance.

I adjust my coils using the traditional buzz box, and making certain the cushion spring is free, points are aligned and I have a current draw of 1.3 amp.

After setting the coils with my tester, I do a test run and there are many factors of a proper tuned Model T, but for me there are just two to enjoy the day out.

1. The car will cruise on the level to at least 30 mph, with no miss or back firing.

2. The car will do a 3 to 5 percent gradient with no miss or apparent lack of power.

As a gradient climbing abilities I found this bit of information:

"A Model T Ford will climb an 8% (1 in 12) gradient in top gear with full throttle, and will come down it in top gear with no throttle and no brake application. They can safely negotiate 20% or more grades in low range, so hills should hold no fears for Model T Ford owners, but a few words of advice at this point.

"Going up is relatively easy, just give the Lizzie full throttle and retard the ignition a little as the speed falls, and she should slog up the hill in fine style provided there is a reasonable amount of fuel in the tank. The T needs about a quarter tank full to climb a 20% grade, as the gravity feed system becomes less effective the steeper the grade. It was common practice, if the grade was too steep and the engine starved for fuel, to back a T over the grade." (https://www.fordmodelt.net/m/how-to-drive.htm)

I have always been of the opinion Henry and his crew designed an every mans vehicle that was to go from point A to B and back and not be used for Lemans or have NASCAR performance.

Posted: **Fri Nov 17, 2023 11:27 am**

MKossor wrote: ↑
Fri Nov 17, 2023 12:28 am
An unanticipated conclusion not supported by the TDAS data in my view.

The data presented in the TDAS article does, however, support the conclusion; Coils adjusted for equal and consistent firing time using the ECCT performed equivalent to HCCT adjusted coils by an experienced HCCT professional user.

Quite right. I reached too far. It is incorrect to say, as I have said here, that coils tuned with a buzz-box and gapping WILL perform with imperceptible difference to ECCT-tuned coils. I should have been more careful to say that, from this one test I did, they HAPPENED to perform with no perceptible difference. I did wonder, in the video, if this was just luck. Who knows. And I was wrong to conclude that HCCT testing is 'equivalent' to buzz-box testing; I know very little about the HCCT yet, but I accept that it does much more than a buzz-box.

I am so appreciative of everyone's input on this topic. It is a real learning experience for me.

Posted: **Fri Nov 17, 2023 11:56 am**

Moxie26 wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 16, 2023 7:18 pm
Could you please take time to expand on your non-electronic means of setting coils?.. with no perceptible performance differences of ECCT adjusted coils. Thanks.

I believe I covered this all in the video, but am happy to summarize here in written form:

My Self-Tuned Coils:
All were gapped to .008-.010, and .030 one year ago. All have new tested ~.5 microFarrad capacitors. All had good coil resistance values.
Current from BuzzBox:
1. 1.2A
2. 1.2A
3. 2A (high)
4. 1.1A
ECCT rudimentary results (after the on-road test, out of curiosity:
1. 0 to +1 from TDC - Good
2. 0 to +1 from TDC - Good
3. -4 and Double Spark - Poor, Gap had closed up
4. +3 from TDC- Poor

ECCT-tuned coils:
All were gapped to .008-.010, and .030 recently. All have new tested ~.5 microFarrad capacitors. All had good coil resistance values.
Current from BuzzBox:
1. 1.2A
2. 1A (low)
3. 1.1A
4. 1.2A
ECCT rudimentary results:
1. +/- 1 from TDC - Good
2. TDC - Excellent
3. 0 to +2 from TDC - Poor
4. 0 to +1 from TDC - Good

There was no perceptible on-road performance difference between these two sets of coils. Note this is the ONLY conclusion I made in the video, and is the only conclusion I advocate now.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2023 11:11 am**

Aussie16 wrote: ↑
Fri Nov 17, 2023 12:42 am
Perhaps you could explain, better than me, why in the production version the current setting reference was deleted and why when the parameters you settled on, pretty much ensured when a coil is set up correctly the current draw will look after itself.

When tuning coils for equal and consistent dwell time to fire spark, the value of coil current is a consequence of coil tuning not the objective. That was an alien concept to most Model T folks because for over 100 years they were taught to measure and use coil current to set coil dwell time to fire spark. Not because it was more accurate, its not. Average RMS coil current is simply an indirect approximation of coil dwell time to fire spark but can be measured accurately using Ammeters that were manufacturable and affordable back in the day. Instruments to directly measure timed events with 0.00002 second accuracy were not.

Given both dwell time to fire spark and coil current, the natural tendency is to gloss over the unfamiliar reading and use what has always been used to tune coils; coil current! That lead to mistuned coils and disappointing results. The solution was simple; don't display coil current which was supposed to be just FYI. Coil current is still measured and displayed along with the spark energy (how hot it is) in the single spark test.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2023 12:34 pm**

Thank you Mike for clarifying the topic of the importance of equal ignition coil dwell times for all 4 coils.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2023 4:30 pm**

MKossor wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 18, 2023 11:11 am

When tuning coils for equal and consistent dwell time to fire spark, the value of coil current is a consequence of coil tuning not the objective...

Interesting. Thanks!

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:07 am**

Not mentioned often, is the fact that comparing the ECCT to the HCCT is like comparing apples and oranges.

With the HCCT, the spark happens with the pistons at slightly different levels.

With the ECCT, the spark happens every time with the pistons all at the exact same level.

The ECCT makes a much smoother running engine with a slight increase in horsepower.

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:39 am**

J1MGOLDEN wrote: ↑
Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:07 am
Not mentioned often, is the fact that comparing the ECCT to the HCCT is like comparing apples and oranges.

With the HCCT, the spark happens with the pistons at slightly different levels.

With the ECCT, the spark happens every time with the pistons all at the exact same level.

The ECCT makes a much smoother running engine with a slight increase in horsepower.

There is no direct firing connection to the pistons.

The ECCT tuned coils fire at the same times that the timer makes contact.
IF the timer accurately fires at exactly 90 degrees, then you have accurate firing in each cylinder.
That is based on the timer itself &/or if its centered perfectly in relation to the brush making contact.

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:50 am**

speedytinc wrote: ↑
Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:39 am

The ECCT tuned coils fire at the same times that the timer makes contact.
IF the timer accurately fires at exactly 90 degrees, then you have accurate firing in each cylinder.
That is based on the timer itself &/or if its centered perfectly in relation to the brush making contact.

Only true when running on battery. On Mag, the timer essentially decides what coil will fire. When it will fire is dependent upon the occurrence AC current pulse generated by the magneto.

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 1:26 pm**

Knives out....

All things being equal, and using the magneto as a source of power, spending enough money on a battery powered device that cost 100 gallons of fuel to be told the coils are working is mind blowing.

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 2:16 pm**

speedytinc wrote: ↑
Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:39 am

With the ECCT, the spark happens every time with the pistons all at the exact same level.
Clarification; the timer activates a coil to begin the process of charging up and firing spark. Tuning coils for equal and consistent firing time minimizes ignition timing variation contribution due to the coils only.

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 2:21 pm**

Been Here Before wrote: ↑
Wed Nov 22, 2023 1:26 pm
Knives out....

All things being equal, and using the magneto as a source of power, spending enough money on a battery powered device that cost 100 gallons of fuel to be told the coils are working is mind blowing.

Well, if that's your reasoning, why own a Model T at all? Not owning a T could buy you somewhere around 2750 gallons of gas, on top of the gas you won't need to burn by driving it.

Is a $1200 HCCT better?

What if the battery powered device told you your coils weren't working? Is it worth it then?

Happy Thanksgiving!

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 2:31 pm**

Jerry VanOoteghem wrote: ↑
Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:50 am

speedytinc wrote: ↑
Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:39 am

The ECCT tuned coils fire at the same times that the timer makes contact.
IF the timer accurately fires at exactly 90 degrees, then you have accurate firing in each cylinder.
That is based on the timer itself &/or if its centered perfectly in relation to the brush making contact.
Only true when running on battery. On Mag, the timer essentially decides what coil will fire. When it will fire is dependent upon the occurrence AC current pulse generated by the magneto.

I am not the best guy with a complete understanding of these things, but........
Even on mag, when the timer makes contact, the coil fires. Where the spark lever is set in relation to the center of the node will determine an optimal or less than spark. The coil doesnt wait for a full charge to fire.
There are typically 3 nodes in the spark lever operation. A +,-,+ or -,+,- charge of electricity is going to the coil. The center of the node (+) for example will give the strongest spark. As you move closer to the - node there is less charge strength until you hit the null point right between the 2 charges. As you advance further into the - node voltage strength rises to its peak @ the center, peak power of that - node. Hence 3 specific spots where the coil will spark @ maximum available voltage on the quadrant. Thats a result of the AC cycle.

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 3:19 pm**

Well....Jerry:

"Well, if that's your reasoning, why own a Model T at all? Not owning a T could buy you somewhere around 2750 gallons of gas, on top of the gas you won't need to burn by driving it. Is a $1200 HCCT better? What if the battery powered device told you your coils weren't working? Is it worth it then? Happy Thanksgiving!"

Our current Model a 1922, was operated in them ther hills of Pennsylvania, until 1950. Parked in a chicken coop. Family bought the car in 1957 (Passed on through 3 family members), after setting for a while, only moved in reverse. Appears the coils needed to be set by rolling papers to show that it only would move in reverse. After time in the shop, and some mechanical work on the bands, coils adjusted by HCCT (HCCT is now a conversation piece) and Buzz Box tester, it has been running and maintained. Every year or so the coils are checked with the buzz box, and the status of cushion spring is given a visual . And the final test being - No missing on grade, and able to travel on level surface at 30 mph.

The only regret over the years is the price of gasoline has been increasing.

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 3:25 pm**

Geo. John D. ....... Save your money on gas!..., Go out and buy yourself a Tesla !

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 3:46 pm**

Geo. John D. ....... Save your money on gas!..., Go out and buy yourself a Tesla !

I looked in to a Tesla, found out the dealer would not take the 100 year old T on trade.

Found this on the interweb:
https://econlife.com/2020/07/comparing- ... and-tesla/

Decided in the long run the Model T would save me on buying new batteries after 100 years of future family ownership.

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 4:18 pm**

Been Here Before wrote: ↑
Wed Nov 22, 2023 3:19 pm
Well....Jerry:

"Well, if that's your reasoning, why own a Model T at all? Not owning a T could buy you somewhere around 2750 gallons of gas, on top of the gas you won't need to burn by driving it. Is a $1200 HCCT better? What if the battery powered device told you your coils weren't working? Is it worth it then? Happy Thanksgiving!"

Our current Model a 1922, was operated in them ther hills of Pennsylvania, until 1950. Parked in a chicken coop. Family bought the car in 1957 (Passed on through 3 family members), after setting for a while, only moved in reverse. Appears the coils needed to be set by rolling papers to show that it only would move in reverse. After time in the shop, and some mechanical work on the bands, coils adjusted by HCCT (HCCT is now a conversation piece) and Buzz Box tester, it has been running and maintained. Every year or so the coils are checked with the buzz box, and the status of cushion spring is given a visual . And the final test being - No missing on grade, and able to travel on level surface at 30 mph.

The only regret over the years is the price of gasoline has been increasing.

"All things being equal"
They are not.
Now I see where you are coming from. You are happy with 30mph. Good for you. Perfecting your coils will make little difference, as OP proved by his testing.
See the weak link chain explanation. You are happy with a buzz box. Happy for you. Dont matter to me, dont care.
I dont get commission checks.

For the rest of those playing along out there with an open mind, you may want optimal ignition performance.

Let me repeat my experience.

My engine had a full build with a Stipe Montana cam, high compression head, bigger carb, etc.
The motor didnt perform up to my performance expectations, that I get from my other T's similarly built with distributors.
All the chain links were strong except the ignition system. I believe I perfected a new day timer. The coils were new rebuilds HCCT tuned By the builder & personally confirmed on my HCCT. As a last resort before a distributor install, I tried with ECCT tuned coils.(all 4 @ 98%)
My top speed improved 8mph, thats about 13% (actual tested). I also noticed smoother running & better acceleration (not empirically tested)
I can only conclude ECCT tuned coils had a definite improvement in MY T. Your results may vary.

Posted: **Wed Nov 22, 2023 6:00 pm**

John... You're related truthfulness with the ECCT is just an example of what many of us went through with our results. Just like you, I do not get commission checks , but we just relate our positive "seat of the pants" results of having four equally electrically adjusted coils to give the best engine performance.... and also check the quality of other items in the chain. Hopefully "Flivver" and his friend will spend more time and experience with the ECCT for better results on all four coils with EXCELLENT readings on testing.

Posted: **Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:59 am**

I lost the memo, were we supposed to bring sickles, hoes, or knoves to this one?

(I did learn you don't bring a knife to a gunfight...)

- - - - - - - -

The one advantage an "ECCT" (Actually it's an EACT - Electronically Activated Coil Tester - no crank on the box!) has over a "HCCT" i can see is it fits under the back seat of a touring car... That's pretty difficult with an HCCT.

The point (semi pun intended) is to get your coils to respond to a single impulse off the magneto and provide one good, strong, fat spark per impulse... if your coil points are not adjusted right you get what I call "spark dribble" and your not getting a good, solid whammy from the coil. It's also to assire that your points are actually properly adjusted, using amperage draw when the coil pops.

I can do it with either. So for me it's a matter of convenience. The HCCT lives (well, lived) on the shop bench, if I had a EACT I would have it IN my toolbox with my other electronic test goodies...

Posted: **Thu Nov 23, 2023 9:48 am**

The ECCT will allow precise coil tuning in the field. "Time to fire" or TTF, does make a difference, and only the ECCT allows accurately synchronizing TTF among all 4 coils in the field.

Posted: **Thu Nov 23, 2023 3:23 pm**

Just wanted to chime in here with my results:
I have the Heinze version of the ECCT for my early ‘13.
When I rebuilt my coils, I used the new Lang’s provided primary and secondary windings, and the original rod cores from the old Heinze windings.
I found out right out of the gate that the car ran much better and I have an engine that hasn’t been out of my car for probably over 80 years.
Drove it all over and was quite happy with the overall results. Then I went to let it sit and idle and it would quit. Long story short my mag is weak.
I decided to test the coils again and set them so they all were 3° late. Put them back in the car and the car idles beautifully and the same results with driving, acceleration, etc.
My thoughts were if it took less mag output to make the car idle, then that’s how I would set the coil’s until the motor comes out for a freshen up. The Strobospark told me what the amp setting was and it was off its gage, he se my reasoning.
Point being, the coils are not set to the parameters they should be, but they’re all still equal.
I’m very pleased with the system.
I also have a Strobospark that I made an adapter for to use the Heinze coils on and I feel that the ECCT does a slightly better job, with no disrespect to the Reagan Strobospark. It’s a handy unit.
I too have a HCCT and it mostly just sits under the bench, but it’s what I started with and it works great too.

Steve: come over some time for a visit! It’s so nice to see my former 1926 T being enjoyed so much!!!

Posted: **Thu Nov 23, 2023 4:02 pm**

There is the advantage of setting all the coils with a low amp draw on the ecct @ say a -2 or -3 late firing.
The ignition will work very well with a weak mag or the low voltage of 6V battery.

Posted: **Thu Nov 23, 2023 4:10 pm**

That makes sense, and you retain the advantage of synchronized coils.

Posted: **Thu Nov 23, 2023 5:15 pm**

speedytinc wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 23, 2023 4:02 pm
There is the advantage of setting all the coils with a low amp draw on the ecct @ say a -2 or -3 late firing.

Slight clarification, firing with negative timing error is firing Early.

Great discussion, thanks for sharing your experience.

Posted: **Thu Nov 23, 2023 7:04 pm**

I've encountered situation with a large, hand cranked single cylinder stationary engine where it could not be started after sitting due to a weak magneto. It had a compression release which allowed getting the very heavy flywheel up to a good speed, but upon disengaging the compression release, the engine would not fire. The solution was to crank the engine up to speed with the throttle open, then disengage the compression release and close the throttle. That would usually get it started by reason of reason of reducing the compression pressure enough to allow the weak magneto to fire the plug.

Posted: **Thu Nov 23, 2023 10:19 pm**

A low coil amperage allows for easier starting when hand cranking on mag. Also when battery cranking with a weak battery.

Art Mirtes

Posted: **Fri Nov 24, 2023 2:10 pm**

Art M wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 23, 2023 10:19 pm
A low coil amperage allows for easier starting when hand cranking on mag. Also when battery cranking with a weak battery.

Art Mirtes

This is really interesting. Does this imply that coil amperage is directly proportional to time-to-fire? i.e. Low coil amperage = more negative timing (advaced of zero) on the ECCT? Coversely High coil amperage = positive time (retarded from zero) on the ECCT? I'll definitely investigate this relationship next opportunity.

Posted: **Fri Nov 24, 2023 2:11 pm**

Darren J Wallace wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 23, 2023 3:23 pm
Steve: come over some time for a visit! It’s so nice to see my former 1926 T being enjoyed so much!!!

I will! Thanks for the invite.

Posted: **Sun Nov 26, 2023 2:35 pm**

Flivver wrote: ↑
Fri Nov 24, 2023 2:10 pm

This is really interesting. Does this imply that coil amperage is directly proportional to time-to-fire? i.e. Low coil amperage = more negative timing (advaced of zero) on the ECCT? Coversely High coil amperage = positive time (retarded from zero) on the ECCT? I'll definitely investigate this relationship next opportunity.

Yes!

Coil dwell time to fire spark is directly proportional to coil current. For the same applied voltage; The sooner a coil fires spark, the lower the coil current; the later the coil fires spark, the higher the coil current.

Posted: **Sun Nov 26, 2023 5:19 pm**

MKossor wrote: ↑
Sun Nov 26, 2023 2:35 pm

Flivver wrote: ↑
Fri Nov 24, 2023 2:10 pm

This is really interesting. Does this imply that coil amperage is directly proportional to time-to-fire? i.e. Low coil amperage = more negative timing (advaced of zero) on the ECCT? Coversely High coil amperage = positive time (retarded from zero) on the ECCT? I'll definitely investigate this relationship next opportunity.
Yes!

Coil dwell time to fire spark is directly proportional to coil current. For the same applied voltage; The sooner a coil fires spark, the lower the coil current; the later the coil fires spark, the higher the coil current.

Both the use of a HCCT and the Buzz box with amperage gauge state the best setting for a Model T Induction coil is 1.3 amps.

Does this mean that with the points properly aligned, and cushion spring operating properly, the coil is with in the proper operating parameters suggested by the use of the ECCT?

Early literature suggest that if the coil is adjusted above 1.3 amps, the drain may create over heating and burnt points (and in some cased a heavy drain on the battery). If the coil amperes are set below 1.3 amps the spark may not be "hot" enough to ignite the fuel and may create intermediate , or a miss in the ignition.

And how exactly does the ECCT measure the current draw in relation to advance/retard of the timing, is it "looking" for a 1.3 amp draw?

re: http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/50 ... 1232550020

Posted: **Sun Nov 26, 2023 6:06 pm**

Been Here Before..... Take time to reread the posts. , you'll find your answer.

Posted: **Sun Nov 26, 2023 7:07 pm**

Been Here Before wrote: ↑
Sun Nov 26, 2023 5:19 pm

And how exactly does the ECCT measure the current draw in relation to advance/retard of the timing, is it "looking" for a 1.3 amp draw?

re: http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/50 ... 1232550020

George,

In Mike Kossor's words,

"When tuning coils for equal and consistent dwell time to fire spark, the value of coil current is a consequence of coil tuning not the objective."

Posted: **Sun Nov 26, 2023 7:27 pm**

Thanks Jerry !... You gave him the answer he was looking for.

Posted: **Mon Nov 27, 2023 7:20 pm**

Been Here Before wrote: ↑
Sun Nov 26, 2023 5:19 pm
And how exactly does the ECCT measure the current draw in relation to advance/retard of the timing, is it "looking" for a 1.3 amp draw?

The ECCT measures the amount of time for the points to open after 12V is applied to the coil. When the points open is when the spark occurs. It determines this by looking for the sudden drop in current when the points open.
It is not looking for a particular amount of current draw, but the time period for which current flows (dwell). The ECCT is calibrated for the ideal dwell time being 2 milliseconds.
It so happens that when a typical coil is set up for a two millisecond dwell time at 12V, that the average current at 6V will be close to, but not necessarily exactly, 1.3A.

Posted: **Mon Nov 27, 2023 10:21 pm**

John,
Thanks for the excellent explanation of what dwell is.
Controlling dwell time is extremely important to the Montana racers.

Art Mirtes

Posted: **Tue Dec 05, 2023 7:48 pm**

Wow………………….

MTFCA Forum

ECCT: Hot or Hype?

ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?

Re: ECCT: Hot or Hype?