Dist. Rotor

QSHIPQ at aol.com QSHIPQ at aol.com
Mon Dec 8 12:09:45 EST 2003

This isn't a software problem, this is a hardware problem.  I'm with Bernie, 
if you mathmatically calculated this out with even the most tweeked of 
motors/ecu's, I doubt you could make a practical case for this being a software or 
ECU "read" problem.  Either rotor width appears to work fine in either the 10vt 
or the 20vt without any ECU glitches.  I will add, if you haven't changed over 
to the metal distributor gear on the 20vt, this discussion is moot.

Amazingly too, if you look at a 10vt distributor rotor that has been well 
used, the "burn" on the tip of the rotor is narrower than the 17mm of the rotor 
contact area.

Controversy?  There is none, you do what makes you comfortable.  That's 
different from "necessary".  And certainly one can make a 11mm rotor from a 17mm 
rotor in a matter of minutes and save a bunch of $.


In a message dated 12/8/2003 10:47:13 AM Central Standard Time, 
sidman at montereynet.net writes:
I went through all this rotor anxiety a few years ago, and ended
up running both the fat and thin. Truth be told I experienced no
difference. However, I now run the thin rotor because I can get
it from Rod. He will tell you the proper part has an 11 mm tip
and the other one is 17mm. 

One could make a case for better burning from a wider tip -
longer spark duration - and I would be hard put to see, from
looking inside the distributor cap, that the tip width could
possibly compromise arcing between cylinders. The cap contacts
are too far apart. I believe there are ECU monitoring issues
involved here, and religious convictions aside, I am inclined to
follow the factory reccomendation.

More information about the 200q20v mailing list