Times Have Changed: Cold Starting

In article ch.edu>,
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, Don Bruder wrote:
>
> > > Cranking speed is pretty irrelevant unless an engine is so whipped
> > > that the compression pressure leaks past the rings so fast that a high
> > > cranking speed is needed. GM proved in the early 1960s that a typical
> > > passenger car engine (of the day!) would start at cranking speeds as
> > > low as 6rpm.
>
> > Hell, my old, but reasonably healthy, '82 Mazda 626 will push-start in
> > third gear with somewhere between three and five feet of roll
>
> My '91 Spirit R/T would reliably start by just turning the ignition "on",
> putting the trans in "Reverse", releasing the parking brake, rolling a few
> feet down the driveway, then releasing the clutch. Two compressions was
> all it took.

Yep, that's about what it takes with this beast of mine. As soon as one
cylinder even half-assed fires, the engine is running, and keeps on
running until I turn off the key. I *LIKE* that in a vehicle.

--
Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004.
Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the
subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
See <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html> for full details.

my OLD DATSUN 66 or so had a HAND CRANK that went through a hole in the
bumber to the fly wheel...hard starting, tired battery, NP

even had a "dog" to kick it out after it started.......... opened up some of
the "oldtimers" eyes in town, when for chuckles, I crank started it......
it was a bullet proof OLD PICKUP......no comfort, no pep, but was reliable
for many miles!

even like going mudding.....and easy to find mud here!

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, Matt Whiting wrote:

> Richard wrote:
>
>> Has anyone in the north country noticed that on very cold, below zero F
>> mornings almost every vehicle starts right up. Twenty years ago and back,
>> it was very typical for many if not most cars to die during the starting
>> process. Possible reasons:
>>
>> Near universal use of 5W-30 oils and more common use of synthetics.
>> (10W-40 used to be the most common oil used).
>>
>> More efficient starters.
>>
>> Better battery/charging technology.
>>
>> More common electronic ignitions and distributors.
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>
> I think computer controlled fuel injection vs. carburetion is the main
> reason, but I don't disagree with anything you list above.

I would suggest that the biggest improvement is the elimination of
distributors and hence the much improved insulation of the HT path from
the coil to the spark plugs.




>
>
> Matt
>

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, Whoever wrote:

> I would suggest that the biggest improvement is the elimination of
> distributors and hence the much improved insulation of the HT path from
> the coil to the spark plugs.

Wrong, unless you were dumb enough to try to start English or Italian cars
somewhere other than Tucson, AZ.

In article
domain>,
Whoever > wrote:

> I would suggest that the biggest improvement is the elimination of
> distributors and hence the much improved insulation of the HT path from
> the coil to the spark plugs.

Nope. The insulation of the HT path hasn't changed in over 30
years and many modern engines still use distributors and cold
start just fine, as the OP opined.

Steve Lacker hit the nail on the head, it's the advantages of
having a fuel injector right above the intake valve that makes
the biggest difference.

In article
ich.edu>,
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, Whoever wrote:
>
> > I would suggest that the biggest improvement is the elimination of
> > distributors and hence the much improved insulation of the HT path from
> > the coil to the spark plugs.
>
> Wrong, unless you were dumb enough to try to start English or Italian cars
> somewhere other than Tucson, AZ.

I've been to Tucson, it gets dark there at night.
That rules out the English cars, no?

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, aarcuda69062 wrote:

> In article
> domain>,
> Whoever > wrote:
>
>> I would suggest that the biggest improvement is the elimination of
>> distributors and hence the much improved insulation of the HT path from
>> the coil to the spark plugs.
>
> Nope. The insulation of the HT path hasn't changed in over 30

Maybe the insulation has not changed, but removing the distributor is a
major change to the HT path. Removing an air gap and a number of
connectors (all of which are affected by dirt and damp) is clearly a
significant change.

> years and many modern engines still use distributors and cold
> start just fine, as the OP opined.

Many old cars also start just fine, even in cold and wet conditions. They
all (well, mostly) started just fine when new. It was always the cars that
were marginal in some way that did not start properly.

My point is that your premise that (some) new cars with distributors start
fine does not negate the point that the distributor is a significant cause
of reduction of HT voltage at the plug, especially in wet conditions and
especially with older cars that may have dirty distributor caps.

In article
domain>,
Whoever > wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, aarcuda69062 wrote:
>
> > In article
> > domain>,
> > Whoever > wrote:
> >
> >> I would suggest that the biggest improvement is the elimination of
> >> distributors and hence the much improved insulation of the HT path from
> >> the coil to the spark plugs.
> >
> > Nope. The insulation of the HT path hasn't changed in over 30
>
> Maybe the insulation has not changed, but removing the distributor is a
> major change to the HT path. Removing an air gap and a number of
> connectors (all of which are affected by dirt and damp) is clearly a
> significant change.

The rotor air gap increases firing voltage.
Comparing spark patterns on an ignition scope, the DIS voltages
(all else being equal) are lower, lower ionization voltage and
lower voltage across the plug gap compared to a distributor type
ignition system.
An old tow truck drivers trick when trying to start a stubborn
engine in the winter is to pull the coil wire slightly loose from
the distributor cap, this increases the voltage output from the
coil secondary (greatest gap theory).

> > years and many modern engines still use distributors and cold
> > start just fine, as the OP opined.
>
> Many old cars also start just fine, even in cold and wet conditions. They
> all (well, mostly) started just fine when new. It was always the cars that
> were marginal in some way that did not start properly.

Marginal because of neglect, or marginal because of design?
Any properly operating ignition system will put out 24 KV from
the ignition coil (even breaker points) , that's more than enough
spark energy to start an engine no matter how cold it is. It's
the intake and fuel system that varied so much that made the
difference.

> My point is that your premise that (some) new cars with distributors start
> fine does not negate the point that the distributor is a significant cause
> of reduction of HT voltage at the plug, especially in wet conditions and
> especially with older cars that may have dirty distributor caps.

Now you're talking about vehicles that aren't properly maintained.
A DIS system is just as subject to not working properly due to
damp conditions as a conventional system was, maybe more so if
the design of the DIS is such that the ignition coil placement
necessitates extremely long spark plug wires such as would be
found on the early Chevrolet built 60* V-6 engines (2.8 and 3.1)
and dirty distributor caps can be directly compared to dirty DIS
coils, hell, I see more problems now with carbon tracking on DIS
coils than what used to be 30 years ago on distributor caps.
You're not making an 'all things equal' comparison.
The first PFI GM engines used the exact same ignition system as
the previous years carbed versions (Chevy Camaro for example),
the cold start characteristics were night and day, the cold start
drivability was night and day, the hot drivability
characteristics were night and day, it all had to do with how the
fuel was handled.
In the winter of 81, we were stacking flooded Chevy Citations and
Cavaliers up like firewood, in 82 when both vehicles went TBI
injection, the problems for a large part went away as long as
people followed the proper cold start procedure, the ignition
systems were exactly the same.

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, aarcuda69062 wrote:

> > > I would suggest that the biggest improvement is the elimination of
> > > distributors and hence the much improved insulation of the HT path
> > > from the coil to the spark plugs.

> > Wrong, unless you were dumb enough to try to start English or Italian
> > cars somewhere other than Tucson, AZ.

> I've been to Tucson, it gets dark there at night. That rules out the
> English cars, no?

Well, it rules out *driving* them. They sometimes don't fail to start
after dark there, though.

Have to go with Daniel on this one.. I can remember some research in the
70's having to do with pour points and cold start/running.. and they found
at certain temperatures.. they could crank an engine @ 600rpm and it just
wouldn't produce enough power to keep itself running with the heavier oils..
darned if I can find a reference to it on the web though.. don't remember
who did it either.. but think it was one of the oil companies.