Lariat. My ignition was not DSII stock. It was EEC-IV. I made it a DSII, but I used an E coil. That was a mistake on my part, because the lower primary resistance of the E coil pulled more current and caused problems. I killed the module altogether when the ballast resistor cooked and I wired it directly. These were my mistakes, and not design flaws in the DSII setup. The DSII is a good ignition. It is just as good as the HEI. I am stating my opinon that the HEI is simpler from the perspective of someone who needs to go in redo quite a few things. If you were to do the DSII retrofit from EEC-IV, the HEI is definitely simpler.

Also, the HEI modules are about 25 bucks or less. The duralast crap heap chinese modules from Autozone for DSII are 30 bucks. Other DSII modules are more expensive, unless you know of a source that I do not. A ballast is another 10 bucks. Since the HEI and DSII are nearly equally-matched in quality, it is fine to do an HEI swap and lose the ballast resistor, which is a common fail point in the DSII system. Just because you don't like Chevrolet doesn't mean an HEI ignition is junk. I've had good Chevys and good Fords alike, so I don't happen to care if the ignition is hybridized. Anyway, I am putting all the DSII stuff back in place, because the HEI module didn't work on my truck.

 

I didn't notice that you a 1986 model. You're correct; that model would have had the EEC-IV/TFI ignition. Being a 1985 302, mine had this as well, and I retrofitted to the Duraspark II ignition myself and couldn't be happier. My truck now actually starts up quicker than any of my other vehicles that have EFI!

My conversion was very simple to do. You do realize that your truck already has the connectors for the Duraspark II ignition, right? All you need is the DSII distributor, coil, and ignition module and the correct wire harness (from a pre 1983 model) and it plugs right up to your present connectors. The resistor wire is already on your truck's harness, unused by the TFI ignition. I was pleasantly surprised at how simple it was to do, and a great improvement over what I had.

Anyway, its not that I don't like GM. Yes, I feel that Ford is better, but if I had a GM product, I would NOT put a Ford ignition system in it.

 

I would have to agree with both of you. For me it's the asthetics. I don't like wires going all over the place. When I can afford it, I plan on a DUI dizzy to clean up the engine compartment. I do agree that Ford has done some things that GM should have with the system,but I have never had an HEI fail me. I've had then on AMC,GM and Ford.

 

One thing I have noticed on this site is people complaining that the Duraspark II is "unreliable." Ford stopped with the Duraspark in the mid 1980s, so that makes the system TWENTY SIX years old at the youngest. Everything fails at some point, and if something lasts 26 years or older, it was a good system. It's not fair to replace a malfunctioning 26 - 35 year old ignition system with a brand new HEI system and then conclude that the HEI system is "better" because your vehicle is now running better.

Second, a lot people tamper with the engineered Duraspark system by trying to run a hotter coil and/or removing the resistor wire. Like sixofspades and others have found out, the Duraspark module was never designed to handle that amount of current, and it sometimes overheats and fails. Then they want to blame the system and conclude that the HEI is "better" because it doesn't have as many wires. With an HEI system, everything is stacked on top of the distributor, and that has its own set of problems that the Motorcraft Duraspark system does *not* have.

So then what happens? That person will go out and buy a cheap aftermarket ignition module to replace the one *they* burned up from AutoZone, and it proves itself to be unreliable. I don't know what the aftermarket modules are leaving out, but they are definitely *not* the same quality as the stock Motorcraft units are. Some of them do not even have the "spark retard" function built into them. These are notoriously UNRELIABLE! I strongly suggest to try to find a MOTORCRAFT ignition module, and run the complete ignition system as it was engineered.

 

Amen! I convert every single project I do, to a DSII. Only failure I've had in 30 some years was a cheap offbrand module.

 

I didnt say it has anything to do with reliability. I was looking for a way to "improve" it,no different than the engine you have listed in your signature. The only ignition I have had trouble with is the Ford TFI-module on the dizzy.
I dont want MSD because "IF" something does go wrong, I want to be able to get parts at my local parts house.
I have to agree about the DS II el-cheapo modules, THEY SUCK. I even have a Standard Ignition that I am skeptical about.

 

I'm a K.I.S.S.(keep it simple stupid) type of person. I just have found no way to improve the system other than recurving the distributor for a street driven vehicle. Even high output coils are debatable as to being any real improvement. I work on this old stuff because it's dead simple, available and reliable. EFI vehicles I couldn't fix if I wanted to. Racing applications, I may go to an MSD or something else. But, different opinions are what keep all the aftermarket vendors in business.

 

The later Ford TFI ignition module mounted on the side distributor itself is another matter entirely. These were mounted in a bad place to begin with. These modules tend to overheat and fail without warning because of their location. There was even a lawsuit brought against Ford because so many of them failed. It took Ford YEARS to decide to move these off of the distributor and to the firewall and mounted on a heat sink. The best thing you can do if you have a distributor-mounted TFI ignition module is to make sure to smear some di-electric grease on the back of it. This is essential to keep the module cool so it doesn't overheat and die.

Parts availability is the best reason to stick with an OEM system. If any component fails, you can walk into any auto parts store in any town and get replacements to get you home. Besides, the stock Motorcraft Duraspark ignition is good up to 5000 RPMs. How many people are really going to spin their trucks higher than that?

 

I agree. Don't believe all the hype the magazines try to sell you when it comes to ignition systems. The so called "high output coils" are *not* an improvement over the stock coil unless you are actively drag racing your pickup truck and spend a lot of time above 5,000 RPMs. Then of course, your motor probably isn't even stock anymore.

There's not really any room to improve the Duraspark ignition system. I "improved" my engine because my truck came to me with a hacked up feedback carburetor and a malfunctioning TFI ignition with almost all the emissions components either removed or not working. The confused EEC-IV computer that didn't know what to do with the sorry state my engine was in, and most mechanics scratched their heads because they don't know anything about the short-lived computer controlled feedback carburetor system. The stock cam and heads were "smog" components designed to run with the stock engine components. I rebuilt my engine with all non-emissions components, (except for the PCV and EVAP systems, and thermostatic air cleaner) and went with the Duraspark ignition for its performance, reliability, and simplicity. Plus you can get parts for it ANYWHERE. And like gfw1985 said above, re-curving the distributor helps as well if your engine has been modified.

 

I see this printed often when referring to the Ford TFI or GM HEI modules. The problem is, di-electric grease is NOT the same as thermal paste. The clear "goop" that is often supplied with these modules should not be used. If the packet of paste has a white paste, that's the right stuff.
I take things a bit further, and use Artic Silver thermal compound, designed for computer CPU/heatsink.

Using di-electric grease can actually lead to the module failing SOONER, as it tends to prevent the heat transfer. The white thermal paste improves the heat transfer, which keeps the module cooler, thereby extending it's life.

 

We have argued about this before, Rogue_Wulff. And you seem to be extremely passionate about the use of thermal paste over di-electric grease.

I don't have any problems with thermal paste. That should work really well. In fact, it may work even better than di-electric grease. And I will go along with what you said about what it is used for.

You may be right. But why would every manufacturer (I have seen) of these ignition modules supply di-electric grease? Why do the directions tell the buyer to use di-electric grease? Why does the Haynes and Chilton's manual say to use di-electric grease?

 

Probably because thermal grease might be not as easily obtainable. At least this one isn't about the electrical characteristics. That arguement went on for a week on another forum.

 

Well then I guess the verdict is in to keep it all stock DS II. I just didnt like having to pay $100 for the module and coil. It's Standard Ignition and not even Blue Streak! The nearest Ford dealer is 30 miles away,so Motorcraft was out of the question. Needed it like NOW!

 

2 reasons I can give for supplying di-electric grease rather than the correct thermal paste.
1, they're being cheap.
2, they want to sell you another module later. Yes, many claim to have a "Lifetime" warrentty, but read the fine print, it's void if you don't use the *correct* white thermal paste.

Di-electric grease is used for insulating purposes. As such, it inhibits heat transfer.
Thermal paste promotes heat transfer.
Try using either di-electric grease or nothing at all between a CPU and heatsink on a computer, and the CPU will fry in very short order. That's all the proof I need to justify using thermal paste on the CPU or ignition module, and since I happen to keep AS5 around for CPU's, I frequently use it for modules as well. Overkill, but beats having the module overheat 100 miles from the nearest town........

I have bought many TFI and HEI modules over the years. Most came with a packet of white thermal paste. The ones that had the clear di-electric grease, I passed up.

 

I am thinking in terms of a toal ignition rewire. In the case that you are talking about, fixing the DSII is simpler.