Tri Spark woes

Status
Not open for further replies.
So, you don't know and don't care about the specifications of the product you are selling?
Amazing.
Sure I do, just not the one you mention. Also, if you look at later posts, you have been provided the curve (not done by me) and supporting information by me. You have also been provided some incorrect information and opinions.
 
Last edited:
Sure I do, just not the one you mention. Also, if you look at later posts, you have been provided the curve (not done by me) ..
Thanks, but I plotted the Trispark myself, some 10 years ago.
Just wondering if something was changed in the later versions.
I would think that, when talking about EI modules, it is nice to know the advance curve.
Since we are not getting this info from producers or dealers, we have to rely on the work of 'amateurs' ( like myself..)

Tri Spark woes


Edit: I wouldn't call DD an amateur though..
 
Last edited:
Thanks, but I plotted the Trispark myself, some 10 years ago.
Just wondering if something was changed in the later versions.
I would think that, when talking about EI modules, it is nice to know the advance curve.
Since we are not getting this info from producers or dealers, we have to rely on the work of 'amateurs' ( like myself..)

Tri Spark woes


Edit: I wouldn't call DD an amateur though..
A dealer is no different than you in this regard. Tri-Spark does not publish the info to the public or dealers. Anecdotally, I think this curve is much closer than the other one in this thread. Tri-Spark does say 3500 and then implies that is stays there as I posted earlier - that came from the manual that comes with the current version. I posted my own knowledge a few posts ago. I think it is like this curve but full advance happens a little later than shown. The exact curve up to full advance is unknown to me and since it works very well, unimportant to me - knowing would change nothing for me.
 
Hello


I like the idle stabilsation and the low power-consumption of the Trispark.


After the first unit had failed, I get the improved replacement from Trispark (with test the button) in 2013.
Since then no popblems anymore , I made about 10`000 km and the summers were realy hot in central europe
I don`t care about the advance curve, I think the curves of the AA-Units can also differ depending on the state
and the maintenace of the contacts and springs.
In the meantime I had also blown up a powerbox-regulator/rectifier because of not
tight connections, but no Problem for the Trispark.


Regards Marcel
 
"I think the curves of the AA-Units can also differ depending on the state
and the maintenace of the contacts and springs."

Certainly true! The points/AAU require periodic maintenance while E-ignitions essentially do not. But why most of the e-ignitions can't produce an ignition curve that best compliments the engine is a mystery to me.

The importance of the advance curve is equal to that of carburetor jetting as far as getting the best engine performance throughout the rev range.
 
Edit: I wouldn't call DD an amateur though..


In this case I would not even take any offense to "amature":

"1. a person who engages in some art, science, sport, etc. for the pleasure of it rather than for money; a nonprofessional; "

Rather than "make money" it had cost me approximately $2500 in some cash but mostly time to do my 2nd article: http://atlanticgreen.com/boyerevolved.htm
I was disappointed that the requested up dated article, to my original article: http://atlanticgreen.com/boyerexposed.htm
The new article was rejected as "too technical". Since then posted only on my website it has gotten hundreds of thanks and questions.
I enjoyed the learning process immensely it's now part of my library
 
Last edited:
Does sombody know what is the best advance curve for the bike.

Did sombody mesure it on a dyno, and will suit it to other nortons and other weather condotions and altitude ?


If so, no problem noadays, there are such modern ignition with progammable curves , but it costs a few $$$,

or even better take a brand new bike, everything is solved.

Marcel
 
Just wondering if something was changed in the later versions.

From the author of the curves I previously posted (@napanorton ), "I then tested two Trisparks. This is a digital ignition. I had an older one and a new one. (Apparently it was redesigned to better tolerate the heat in the timing cavity with more robust components.) They ended up with basically the same curve. You can clearly see the idle stabilization effects in the 1000 - 1500 rpm range. The Trispark seemed to manage the coil on times to minimize current load, but maintain a good spark. It seemed like they were trying to keep the on time to around 8ms. "

Tri Spark woes


https://www.doovsprojects.com/projects/commando-ignitions
 
Also, it is interesting to read the notes on his test harness failures, and what he did to solve that:

"Although I got it all working, it would crash often. I tracked it down the way I was capturing rpm - by using the coil negative. I was getting some sort of noise, either RF from the spark plugs or maybe back EMF from the coil or something. I could figure it out and it made the project unstable.

Roll forward a few years. I ran across some info on this and found a reference to someone having a similar problem. They solved it by making sure the ground from the coil negative interface circuit went back to the battery, not the circuit board as the voltage spikes from the coil collapse and subsequent ringing would cause the processor to crash. "

I am not an electronics amateur even, but I wonder if a similar problem relates to earlier TS failures?
 
I suspect that the curve isnt so critical on these bikes.

I've got bad old analog Boyer installed for the PO by Poke's cycle it 1988. I've never touched it and the bike runs perfectly to 6500 rpm.
Gets up there quite quickly too.
There is likely a range of curves which are ideal.

Glen
 
Also, it is interesting to read the notes on his test harness failures, and what he did to solve that:

"Although I got it all working, it would crash often. I tracked it down the way I was capturing rpm - by using the coil negative. I was getting some sort of noise, either RF from the spark plugs or maybe back EMF from the coil or something. I could figure it out and it made the project unstable.

Roll forward a few years. I ran across some info on this and found a reference to someone having a similar problem. They solved it by making sure the ground from the coil negative interface circuit went back to the battery, not the circuit board as the voltage spikes from the coil collapse and subsequent ringing would cause the processor to crash. "

I am not an electronics amateur even, but I wonder if a similar problem relates to earlier TS failures?

Interesting post - it does indicate that the nature of the earth return does impact the behaviour of the EI.
As previously stated, using the frame as the earth return may be OK for most purposes, but not for this?
 
Interesting post - it does indicate that the nature of the earth return does impact the behaviour of the EI.
As previously stated, using the frame as the earth return may be OK for most purposes, but not for this?
Anecdotally, all I know is my old RITA was a PITA for kick backs, bit it ran fine at the end of the day.

AND, I have learned a bit about having solid ground in a number of applications, so I think I have done a reasonably good job of it on my rebuild.

So, no issues so far (knock wood) with my newer version TS. And it doesnt kick me.
 
I suspect that the curve isnt so critical on these bikes.

I've got bad old analog Boyer installed for the PO by Poke's cycle it 1988. I've never touched it and the bike runs perfectly to 6500 rpm.
Gets up there quite quickly too.
There is likely a range of curves which are ideal.

Glen
I bought my first Commando from Pokes.
 

Attachments

  • Tri Spark woes
    IMG_20200401_195056.jpg
    266.1 KB · Views: 174
Is not the use of the frame for ground just a way of using less wire? If you ran a ground for every purpose as a home run back to the battery
is that not, theoretically, the same thing?
As for the advance profile, would you not have to run each profile whilst on a dyno to ascertain just what is best? And with respect to kickbacks,
if the initial position of firing at start up was one degree ATDC would that not make a kickback impossible?
 
Is not the use of the frame for ground just a way of using less wire?
Sure, and on many non-Norton bikes, the frame is a part of the ground. However, it is important that the paint be scraped from all ground points and that corrosion doesn't develop at those ground points. For powder coated frames, that becomes an even bigger issue.

Even on Triumph where the frame is partly used as the ground, the Zener, rectifier, and headlight shell usually have their own ground wires and on some models, there is a ground to the rear fender and probably more that I'm forgetting.
 
Is not the use of the frame for ground just a way of using less wire? If you ran a ground for every purpose as a home run back to the battery
is that not, theoretically, the same thing?
As for the advance profile, would you not have to run each profile whilst on a dyno to ascertain just what is best? And with respect to kickbacks,
if the initial position of firing at start up was one degree ATDC would that not make a kickback impossible?

Yes, this advance profile does not give kickback. I can program the ignition curve myself. Set it static to 2 degrees ATDC.
I´m happy with the ignition curve adapted to my 750 short stroke. MSD ignition system.

Tri Spark woes
 
Last edited:
Thanks, but I plotted the Trispark myself, some 10 years ago.


Tri Spark woes

Since you got me interested in advance curves, I wonder which is correct, yours or the other one.

As I said earlier, my time with a timing light makes me think yours is more right but that max advance happens a little earlier than shown - also as I said, I'm one old guy doing it on a real bike by himself so it's not very scientific.

Tonight I tried it on a fully broken in, Tri-Spark equipped, 850. At 3500 I was at 31 degrees and at 4000 through 5000 I was at 32 degrees. I didn't go any higher. Using the bike's tach for the RPM.

BTW, TDC was carefully found and the AN tool for cchecking the timing scale was used - the scale was off two degrees for which I compensated.
 
Also, it is interesting to read the notes on his test harness failures, and what he did to solve that:

"Although I got it all working, it would crash often. I tracked it down the way I was capturing rpm - by using the coil negative. I was getting some sort of noise, either RF from the spark plugs or maybe back EMF from the coil or something. I could figure it out and it made the project unstable.

Roll forward a few years. I ran across some info on this and found a reference to someone having a similar problem. They solved it by making sure the ground from the coil negative interface circuit went back to the battery, not the circuit board as the voltage spikes from the coil collapse and subsequent ringing would cause the processor to crash. "

I am not an electronics amateur even, but I wonder if a similar problem relates to earlier TS failures?


It is important that in the above statements the author has rewired his bike to use NEGATIVE GROUND .
 
Since you got me interested in advance curves, I wonder which is correct, yours or the other one.

As I said earlier, my time with a timing light makes me think yours is more right but that max advance happens a little earlier than shown - also as I said, I'm one old guy doing it on a real bike by himself so it's not very scientific.

Tonight I tried it on a fully broken in, Tri-Spark equipped, 850. At 3500 I was at 31 degrees and at 4000 through 5000 I was at 32 degrees. I didn't go any higher. Using the bike's tach for the RPM.

BTW, TDC was carefully found and the AN tool for cchecking the timing scale was used - the scale was off two degrees for which I compensated.

Isn't full advance on the TriSpark 28/29 degrees? I thought 31 was for Boyers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top