Agree but they really are misleading people into running without a ballast resistor when they should. :(
"Quite simply, if your distributor has breaker points the answer is yes; if not, the answer is no.":eek:
They also skip how it works - cooling off at higher speed thus allowing more current at higher rpm, and that compensates for less time available to saturate. This is right out of the Chrysler tech bulletins.
Ignition System Analysis (Session 259) from the Master Technician's Service Conference Explained on pages 4-5.
And again in the era electronic ignitions
"This protects the ignition coil against high current flow at low engine speeds" 1972 Imperial & Chrysler Ignition System Service Book (Session 292)
If it wasn't needed, Chrysler and Ford whould have saved a heck of a lot of money. LOL. GM's HEI module controls the current. Can't tell you how many guys on the IFSJA forum had problems after following the 'hot tip' for swapping in a "TFI Coil" and bypassing the resistor wire. Works for bit, and then it doesn't.
"In their electronic ignition systems Chrysler utilized a dual ballast resistor,"
Only partially correct. Single ballasts were also used.
The dual resistor was to protect the ECUs.
1973 Chrysler and Imperial Electronic Ignition Diagnosis and Repair Service Book from the Master Technician's Service Conference (Session 312)
So removing a the ballast resistor on those Chrysler boxes will send them to an early grave. I'm sure the magazine will give those owners a refund :rolleyes:
