Breakerless Ignition

[Electro12WH 50]

The Breakerless Ignition from the late 60s - early 70s seems like a good idea. Why was it dropped? And, how did it differ from the M Series ignition?

[Irv 115]

I also think it was a good idea but don't know why they didn't continue to use it. I do know that a repacement coil and/or trigger switch is hard to come by and exspensive. It doesn't take much to ruin one or the other by just hooking up a wire wrong and/or crossing polarity.

[shorts 182]

As reliable as the early breakerless ignition is, I think that in a small engine application that points ignition is almost as reliable and therefore probably more cost effective.

[Jim_M 178]

Shorts hit the nail on the head. Point type ignition was just as reliable, maybe even more reliable, cheaper to manufacture and cheaper and easier to maintain, repair and replace.

The Magnum ignition is a different type. It's much simpler, and more reliable.

[Duff 206]

Since we're on the subject, on the M-series engines with the breakerless ignition systems, how is spark advance compensated for, or is it simply not an issue between 0-3,600 rpm?

Duff :banghead:

[TT-(Moderator) 1,127]

The timing is already at "full advance", Duff. The pre-ACR Kohlers had a two-piece camshaft with centrifugal timing advance. Once the ACR feature was introduced, retarding the timing to make starting easier wasn't needed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The solid-state (transistorized / breakerless) ignition used the best technology available at the time ~ which is Neanderthalic compared to the newest systems. Three components were required to make it work (dedicated stator section / trigger (pick-up) / and transformer (coil) vs. an armature/coil with integral trigger and a magnet on the flywheel.

Side note/reminder: The Kohler solid-state / breakerless ignition does not like water. Excess water inside the blower housing can/will fry the trigger unit.