Originally Posted by Bulldust
I don't understand how running two Hall Effect sensors at the same time would result in no wasted spark? It would certainly result in a distorted signal, no matter how accuratly they are mounted it is impossible to get the signals precisely at 180 degrees to each other.
I see lots of mechanical advance problems, particularly on high mileage bikes the wear is a real problem, the bike still runs and starts but in comparsion to a modern electronic advance the power loss is very significant.
"I hear about tons of mechanical advance issues since they have electronic advance". Not sure about this one?
Advantages of a modern electronic advance over mechanical advance, everone who has tried my system has commented on the many advantages, I guess you would have to try them with an open mind to find out. If mechanical advance was so good why have all manufactures abandoned the system?
good point about difficulty of aligning up two sensor to trigger at exactly 180degrees. wiring two halls triggers together would defeat purpose of carrying spare halls inside beancan.
does carrying your spare hall sensor inside beancan age at same rate as working hall trigger? spare installed Hall sensor goes through exact same number of cycles as working sensor. logic says odds of both sensor failing at same time would be remote.
reason why mfg have switched from mechanical advance is to is lower costs and help pass EPA regulations. not due to mechanical advance failures. if mechanical advance failures was truly an issue, we'd be seeing it all the time on ADV and else where.
running an aftermarket beancan with easily replaceable Hall sensor typically costs about $400. surely there's a way to modify OEM beancan to make changing out hall sensor field serviceable.
seems there was someone that had multiple beancan failure due to magnets coming loose in Siberia. points beancan is starting to look better and better again. simple is good!