[TR] Pertronix Failure

[Nolan]

> Is there  the possibility that 'upgrades' such as the Pertronix ignition
> unit, and other  like it, are less reliable than the contact breaker 
> points they
> replace?
>
> Have any TR folks given up on such a system and reverted to  points?


You are asking two distinctly different questions.  Any mechanic with even 
rudamentary experience has seen how much more reliable electronic ignitions 
are than mechanical ignitions.  A mechanical ignition requires adjustment 
every few thousand miles.  Electronic ignitions routinely go hundreds of 
thousands of miles without maintenance.  There is no doubt the electronic 
ignition is more reliable.  This is in fact why the industry went to 
electronic ignition. They are far more reliable and stable.

A mechanical ignition is more tinkerable.  People spend many hours 
pleasurably fiddling with points.  Filing them, coating them, making them 
out of new materials, drilling them, greasing them, and of course adjusting 
them.  Electronic ignitions have virtually none of this.  A mechanical 
ignition can function poorly, and be improved, an electronic ignition tends 
to either work, or not.  There is very little tinkering to be had with an 
electronic ignition.

To that end, the tinkerable fun of a mechanical ignition, many folks will 
stick with a points ignition.  Some will even retrofit a modern engine with 
points, going to great lengths to replace a superb oem electronic ignition 
with a points ignition.  There is nothing inherently wrong with this.  Just 
a difference of approach.

Points ignitions for automobiles haven't been used in decades.  You don't 
find replacement points sitting on the shelf of any gas station.  In fact 
many a dedicated auto parts store no longer carries them, and they must be 
ordered in.  There is also the problem of the quality of the point sets on 
the market today.  Rubbing block failures are common, as are spring 
failures.  Out of the box, many point sets don't even have the contacts 
hitting the faces squarely.