Well, I think I succeeded partly, that is at least in getting the pot is simmering. Thought
I’d wait a while before stepping in again, but from most of the replies it appears that I
failed in getting my original intent across, either because of the heading I put on it or in
the way I worded it.
The original intent of the thread was to take aim at what I conceder myth as far as
electronic conversion and special spark plugs increasing fuel mileage when used as a
replacement in a stock Stovebolt Six.
It was not to say that SS electronic ignition or systems controlled by an engine ECU with
multiple coils were inferior to the Kettering system of ignition. Nor was it to say that the
Kettering system was not an obsolete system compared to the modern electronic systems.
It’s obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense (even a self appointed expert like
me) that a system with more components will require more maintenance. And with more
components to fail will not be as reliable as the ignition systems that have evolved over
the hundred years since it’s invention. There is no sense in getting into the theory of
inductance here but the bottom line is that a high-tension spark gets weaker in proportion
to the rpm, because it takes ‘T‘ amount of time for the field to build in any particular coil.
As the engine speed increases a single coil simply doesn‘t have enough time to fully
saturate. However, that really isn‘t a significant factor in an engine that rarely exceeds
3,000 rpm which is what I was aiming at and a well tuned stock ignition system in a
Stovebolts is certainly up to the task.
So, it’s Fuel Mileage guys. Whether or not these SS systems and super plugs contributed
to better fuel mileage in a Stovebolt six, that was supposed to be the focus.
Ya’ll have a good Thanksgiving,
Denny Graham
Sandwich, IL
Last edited by Denny Graham; 11/24/2011 3:07 PM.
