1200 ignition modual on 1100?

Classic Goldwings

Help Support Classic Goldwings:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

jdegase

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
489
Reaction score
0
Location
Shepherd, MI.
ok first I know this might not be the popular way to go, but bear with me...
I noticed the 1200 has almost the same pickups and wireing, but with the advance unit mounted in differnt place.
also no rubber diaphragm. and you can get (or make) programmable advance kits for the newer icm.

anybody got any thoughts on this... hopeing for some input.
 
jim i went the other way ...the 84 1200 ignition is in the same spot as 1100 ...i put that in a 1100 and the 1100 rear ignition in and it worked ....mostly cause it was my only option ...im sure also and 84 1200 set up with picups only will fit right in a 1100 ...and yes then you could spend your way to a adjustable advance system ...id say costly though....idont think later front crank shaft picups will work on 1100s i have two but have never looked to see if there might be a way to use them on 1100 ...im sure they pic up something on the crank pullies that 1100 dont have ...im guessing here but certainly doable on 84 1200 ignition just as you say
 
you got that right ....if i had all the 1000 ignitions i need i would have done what you did david ...the ignition fromt the 1000 went from user friendly to no friend at all in the 1100 and all wings since
 
the reason I asked was because I was reading somewhere about a DIY programmer that might work on the 1200 ignition.
I'm pretty sure I can get all the stuff to put a 1000 iggy on my 1100 ...
just wondering about the vaccume advance?
no vaccume advance on the 1000 just mechanical?
 
Yep , no vacuum advance but she purrs like a kitten and roars like a lion when thrashed. Besides nearly all cars and bikes used just mechanical advance with NO ill effect until the development of vacuum advance. I really notice no real difference with the way she runs without the vacuum advance. Sometimes I wonder why technological advances just seem to complicate things. Simple sometimes really is best.
 
That would be a first if it is possible Jimand I'm sure it is.. ...Now make it happen... No more points for you 1000 guy's, now that's cool...
 
David Mantle":3gr29fco said:
Yep , no vacuum advance but she purrs like a kitten and roars like a lion when thrashed. Besides nearly all cars and bikes used just mechanical advance with NO ill effect until the development of vacuum advance. I really notice no real difference with the way she runs without the vacuum advance. Sometimes I wonder why technological advances just seem to complicate things. Simple sometimes really is best.

The purpose of vacuum advance was to increase gas mileage @ part throttle (cruise) rpm's, and lower NOX emissions during acceleration. But it's no concern, and not needed for racing applications. So it must have been added to our bikes to comply with EPA standards for emissions and fuel consumption during that era. Eventually, the task of ignition timing became the job of a programmed electronic control module. This method is more responsive and precise.

Just my own personal opinion, and it's ok with me if anyone elses differs (?) Vacuum advance is not a bad thing. Like anything else, it has to be working properly to do any good. Any time someone mentions "better gas mileage" I start listening and studying the pros and cons. Does it work? And what am I willing to sacrifice to get better miles per gallon? What I want is the most MPG I can get, and still have plenty of "umpf" to get up the hill.
 
Back in the day I would use the stock timing mark for reference then bump the distributor more advance to squeeze every last bit out of it.
Once it started to crank a bit slow firing against itself I'd back of a hair til I found the sweet spot.
Every time I had to get a smog cert it had to go back to stock setting to pass. Not sure why it had to go back to pass but it dogged the motor.

When I put the 1000 cams in my 1100 I tweaked it the same way, same thing I'm planning to do after modding the stock vac advance.
I like to play.
 
Yeh, this is one big ass sandbox isn't it...ha ha Some of us take our toys and go home ha ha....I'm guilty ha ha as I'm the biggest baby of all....ha ha
 
Someone needs to wire in a 1200 ignition into an 1100.
Besides the module wiring, the 84 1200 ignition looks identical to an 1100.
I'm wondering about the advance curve, 1200 vac advance is built into the module.
 
dan filipi":6d6b7ar3 said:
Back in the day I would use the stock timing mark for reference then bump the distributor more advance to squeeze every last bit out of it.
Once it started to crank a bit slow firing against itself I'd back of a hair til I found the sweet spot.
Every time I had to get a smog cert it had to go back to stock setting to pass. Not sure why it had to go back to pass but it dogged the motor.

When I put the 1000 cams in my 1100 I tweaked it the same way, same thing I'm planning to do after modding the stock vac advance.
I like to play.
Advancing the base timing moves the entire event forward. The spark occurs sooner, allowing more time to burn in the cylinder. This increases cylinder heat and pressure. This condition is where NOX (nitrates of oxide) is born. Keeping in mind that as you compress a gas, the temp rises proportinately. Bring the temperature up to just before it ignites, then add the spark to ignite it at the desired time. With the "early" spark, the mix has more time to burn "inside" the cylinder. As it's burning, the temp and pressure is increasing. Since nothing really "burns"- RAPID OXIDATION is what's actually taking place. Think of this as chemicals changing form. Given enough pressure, at 2500+ degrees, molecules start to chemically fuse together, forming a poisonous byproduct. (NOX) This is the reason you had to move the base timing back to spec for a smog inspection. As for why it caused it to bog down.... could have been a few things, perhaps being masked by timing advance. On many cars I solved the hesitation tip in by moving the vacuum advance supply hose from ported to manifold source.
I've also seen a lot of Chevy starter nose cones busted as the result of just a little too much advance, causing a kick back during starting.

I really enjoy reading and learning from you guyzez experiments. I'm just offering what I got for the thought process. Hopefully in the end, we'll all understand what and why something made an improvement.
 
As I said in a previous post ( number #6 ) my bike runs perfectly fine. My fuel figures have not suffered much either - I still get 47 mpg on a steady run. I know and appreciate that a vacuum advance is a leap forward and I do know enough to understand why it is there in the first place but I honestly believe that sometimes , in some cases , it is unnecessary.
The main reason I converted to the 1000 ignition set-up was purely for ease of maintenance . When the standard 1100 ignition is working correctly is it a piece of magic but I had mine fail on me once when I was touring Scotland :deadhorse: and it would have left me stranded but for my ability to sort it out by the road side. With the conversion , should it happen again , it will be easier to fix . I did not do this conversion for fun , even though it turned out to be just that , I did it just in case it packed up again and I was miles away from anywhere . Simple is best sometimes. :moped:
 
my thought was this .....
use the 84 1200 ignition module on the 1100 pickups with an adjustable timing advance where the vacuum advance is now... to set the baseline ignition timing.

looking for the 1200 module now.
I have a nice big partsyard close by but cash is king around there :D

anyway, thanks for all the input guys..
will try to keep you all posted on my progress.
 
Boy.....reading youse guys posts.....I feel so conventional! :crying: (Biggest step we took was putting the '83 engine in the '82 frame...man I tought that was thinkin outside the box! :smilie_happy: )
 

Latest posts

Top