MZB / Powerdynamo Ignition

[Teckhardt]

OMG - I am sick to my stomach...

I have spent hours installing this system. Just finished up the last of the wiring last weekend. Looked at their website for some info and now it says "not suitable for 450". What the hell?

Sent them an email to ask why and when I can expect my refund. Their site said nothing about not for 450 when I ordered it. Even if they give me my purchase price back, it does not cover the money/time I have spent on wiring this thing.

Guess this is the price I pay for being the guinea pig on a product.

I want to scream...

[Eldert]

must have something to do with the advance range . just tell the guy to make another black box with the correct range
he has to make them sooner or later anyway so why not now

Eldert

[DewCatTea-Bob]

" Looked at their website for some info and now it says "not suitable for 450". "

____ I wouldn't be too concerned about that ! _ If the reason has to do with the particular advance-curve, no matter what it is, it likely wouldn't give-up much more than 1-HP (less than optimum), only somewhere within that range (between idle & 4-grand).
(It's fairly clear [now] that they never did any dynamometer-testing [on the 450] to determine the best advance-curve for that engine, anyhow.)
And if it's (more likely) due to the 450's (more retarded) factory-recommended static-timing of '0-degrees' BTDC, the 450s actually perform better with their static-timing set at 4-degrees BTDC.
So that should be closer enough to then fall within the range of adjustment that their system must allow for, (since the 350 & 250 don't share the same static-timing and the 350-model's static-timing is as little as 5-degrees BTDC).
__ I say go-ahead & try it out (so long as you don't have the static-timing set too far advanced). _ Cuz you might as well take advantage of having the chance to learn if there are any other short-comings with their system, (to help make all your work pay-off for at least something!).
____ Please let us know what they tell you their excuse is !
(If my guess is actually right, then their w.site's new-message should've instead read: 'Not suitable for 450s with dual-plug ignition'.)


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

[Teckhardt]

Reply from Pwerdynamo


"we did stop offering the system not because it does not work, but because we had complaints from customers about violent kickbacks during starting. once started it runs well, but starting was described as "frightening" by one customer.
when we developed the system it was done on a 250 and there the problem did not manifest.
unfortunately we did listen to ducati experts telling us that all wide case engines are same for ignition. turned out they are not same. 450 needs a different curve.
we are working on that, but that may take a little time."

[DewCatTea-Bob]

" unfortunately we did listen to ducati experts telling us that all wide case engines are same for ignition. turned out they are not same. "

____ Seems to me that this smells a little of incompetence... I'd think that besides assuming that outside sources are correct, that a little in-house research would also be done to confirm everything, way before production & marketing.
What I believe their outside-sources told them was that the advancer/AAU (of the battery-powered ignition 450-models) was the very same unit as used in the 250 & 350 as well, (which is actually indeed true!). _ However I find it hard to believe that any (so-called) DUCATI-expert would not at the same time also make it clear that the static-timing is not the same for all models.
__ I suppose that a 450 (which the factory probably chose their recommended 0/TDC static-timing for, so as to prevent such kick-backs), likely would be capable of quite a wallop if the static-timing was set to the 8-degrees (or more) BTDC as recommended for the 350.
I would expect that their set-up would allow for at least a little adjustment of the static-timing but, it seems that the set timing must be locked-in, since they no longer wish to sell their existing system for the 450 rather than simply adjust the set timing.
__ And while it's very likely quite true that the 450 could slightly benefit with a slightly different advance-curve (for optimum performance), they would need to do extensive dynamometer-testing to plot that exact curve (for obtaining that small improvement), which really wouldn't be worth all their trouble of searching for.
____ So I'm still wondering what they told you that they can do for your situation !??
Why can't they just suggest some method to alter their mechanical setting which determines the ign.timing? - Ought to be simple enough. _ Unless their system has an even shorter advance-curve span than that of the stock mechanical-advancer's 28-degrees, (which I must say then would really suck!).
Even for a 250, I'd expect a modern electronic advance-curve to be able to span at least from TDC up to a max-advance of 40-degrees BTDC. _ And if not, then some way to still retain use of the stock (or other) mechanical-advancer should be found.
__ How about a pic of their ign.triggering-device?


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

[Teckhardt]

The timing can be advanced/retarded by adjusting the placement of the rotor. The question is how much to move it. More research and emails to them. Will advise.

[DewCatTea-Bob]

" The timing can be advanced/retarded by adjusting the placement of the rotor. The question is how much to move it.

____ Then I can't understand why they just merely didn't send-out an update-notice telling of that and exactly what adjustment is required !
__ Assuming that their system produces wasted-sparking -(double-timed / excess, at EVERY TDC), the rotor then merely need only be retarded 4 to 8 degrees (from the standard 350-setting).
I expect that you could rotate that rotor clockwise 1/64th (of a complete 360-degree) turn, to then retard the ign.timing (about 5.6-degrees), which should bring the ign.timing in line for a 450 (which ought to have it's static-timing set anywhere between 4-degrees BTDC & 0-degrees/TDC).


Happy-Cheers,
-Bob

[Teckhardt]

What I believe their outside-sources told them was that the advancer/AAU (of the battery-powered ignition 450-models) was the very same unit as used in the 250 & 350 as well, (which is actually indeed true!).

This was one of my questions. If the advance "curve" for all models the same, the only difference is the static timing starting point. The total amount of mechanical advance is the same.

I expect that you could rotate that rotor clockwise 1/64th (of a complete 360-degree) turn, to then retard the ign.timing about 5.6-degrees, which should bring the ign.timing in line for a 450.

Exactly what I was thinking. I should be able to mark the stator plate with the correct amount the rotor needs to be adjusted to make up for the advance unit.

[DewCatTea-Bob]

" If the advance "curve" for all models the same, the only difference is the static timing starting point. The total amount of mechanical advance is the same. "

____ That's correct... 28-degrees (of auto-advance for all models with battery-powered ignition) plus whatever static-setting, to create the total-advance.
However in the case of the 450, I suspect that Ducati's continued employment of the same (stock) advancer-unit forced them to compromise the 450's optimum ign.timing.


" I should be able to mark the stator plate with the correct amount the rotor needs to be adjusted to make up for the advance unit. "

____ I really can't say that I'm able to follow what that means to indicate exactly, but in any case, I trust that you'll first wait & see what the makers (of your non-stock system) have to say about our conceived (& simple) solution to the kick-back issue, before bothering to go-through with changing any of your previously completed work.
As at this point, we're allowed to conclude that everything's okay if your 450 is simply push/bump-started every time.
__ For anyone who may wonder why I suggested the 1/64th turn, it was simply because it was 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 of a full turn, which would make it convenient for plotting a reference-spot, without bothering with a degree-wheel.
If the std.set-up for their system leaves the static-timing at 8-degrees BTDC, then in that case, 1/64th of a turn would alter the adjusted setting to be about 2.5-degrees BTDC, which should not leave any kick-back (from a properly done kick-through task).
__ It certainly would be helpful to know what the exact timing-specs -(static & full advance) are supposed to be for their (pre-existing) system ! _ So hope you can find-out that info !


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

[LaceyDucati]

Hi,
I saw this thread and thought I might add a bit of info. I was given one of these ignitions to fit to a customers engine and the system is designed to be set at 38 degrees BTDC at full advance with a starting (static) timing of 9 degrees BTDC. Obviously 38 degrees of advance is not going to be suitable for a 450, in practice I have found that somewhere between 28 to 32 degrees on a single plug will usually cover most 450 engine set-ups. The system is set up at TDC to a mark which will give you 38 degrees BTDC. However, if you align the marks with the engine at 9 degrees ATDC this would give you a maximum advance of 29 degrees BTDC and a start advance position of zero degrees. Basically the system has a total advance of 29 degrees and without another box, that cannot be changed. As to whether this start point of the advance in this position of zero degrees can be compared to the static timing of a 450 at zero degrees, I don't know. The only thing you could do is try it and see.

I did not end up fitting the ignition as the engine build remit was to supply an engine that the customer could just slot in the frame, fuel up and go. In this position, I could not guarantee the customer that this would be the case so I chose to fit another ignition which I could guarantee would work first time. Unfortunately my communication with MZB did lead me to believe that the system had not been tried on a 450. They did however offer to produce a different box but by this time I had deadlines to meet and I wasn't in a position to carry out any experiments! As you already have the ignition and I presume it's fitted, I would try setting the ignition as above and just see if it works. This is of course all at your own risk, not that I think it will hurt the engine.....

My only other reservation about this ignition and other crank triggered ignitions available, is that in a perfect world you will of course have assembled everything perfectly and the flywheel will never move. Unfortunately things are not always perfect and you only need to look at a few second hand cranks to know that there are a lot of guys with flywheels on the move. If your flywheel moves or even creeps, with these ignitions, your timing is gone.

I see also a comment about Elderts café racer and what sort of ignition timing would you need for push starting. You may be interested to know that we have run pretty much all our race bikes on fixed ignition, and it's never given us any problems push starting. In fact all of our own bikes can be started by pulling the back wheel and that includes the 493cc race single. A lot of the ignitions available for Ducati Singles reach their full advance by 3000 revs so for most sporting singles and race bikes once you are started, the advance curve is pretty irrelevant.

Whatever, MZB seem to be prepared to get this problem resolved so one way or the other you should be able to resolve the matter.

Hope some of this helps,
Best Wishes
Nigel