Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???

Greetings everyone,

So I'm getting ready to give this Nutter Ignition Modification a try on my 1987 Wrangler I6 258 with the Carter BBD, but I was curious if others had gone with the replacement ECU as suggested on the Off-Road Jeep Tech site or if they stuck with their stock ECU?

I am also curious as to the effects of this on your fuel economy. Did it get better or worse? I am interested in doing this more for better fuel economy and smoother operation than I am about the power increase it gives the Jeep.

Lastly, I do live in California and just spent 6 months getting it to pass Smog but it did squeak by, so after I do this I plan on taking it back to a Pre-test smog station just to get an accurate comparison of it's affects on my smog readings. Anyhelp on how to disguise the modification from the smog cops would be greatly appreciated as well.

Thanks in advance for your help, I'll let the group know how it turns out.

Best, Kevin

Reply to
Kevin
Loading thread data ...

Reply to
Pi-eyed Piper

I did one in Massachusetts. My fuel economy has gotten much better, but I'm sure that's because I no longer need to keep the engine at 1500RPM at red lights to keep from stalling.

I don't know if California emmissions work the same as Massachusetts, but if they do, I doubt you'll pass. Here, they put you on a dynomometer and measure emmissions at various speeds. That's exactly what the computer was controlling. With the Nutter bypass, you've only got the proper mixture at idle. Your computer used to measure the O2 sensor and lean or enrich mixture continuously.

Reply to
Steve Foley

The nutter is best done with 2 new wires in my opinion rather than mess inside the harness.

The connections can be mad inside the wiring loom out of sight except for the one purple wire tag down on the ignition module that is visible if you can get your head way down there. (unlikely to be seen)

The connections can be done with crimp plugs and sockets so it can be reversed easy.

Gas mileage.... Well, I think I got about a 20% or so boost but I have to use 91 octane to get that increase. So basically for an extra 6 or $7.00 per tank fill, I get an extra 100 plus miles per tank AND a 'big' increase in power.

I also added an Accel 'SuperCoil' to give me a nice hot spark. Everything else is stock. If I was going to upgrade the ignition module, I would likely go HEI.

On my last emissions test, I still got 15 ppm HC's and 0.16% CO which is all I am tested for up here in Canada.

I also highly recommend you do this test and if needed fix before trying to set the carb mix. It will make life much easier. The idle tubes get plugged up easy and id clogged, the mix will change every time you start it. The venturi cluster comes out from the top with a little twist, but a complete carb kit is only $20.00 or so.

formatting link
Mike

86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

Kev>

Reply to
Mike Romain

Hiding the evidence will be the least of your worries. If you live in an area where loaded mode testing is done, you will fail the NOx portion of the emissions test miserably. Can you say "Gross Polluter"?

Reply to
bllsht

We have to pass NOx under load on a dyno up here in Canada if it is a YJ and guess what bllsht, We Pass!!!! Every 'Nutter' I have seen passes!

I don't get you new so called 'mechanics'. If it isn't computer controlled or the computer doesn't talk to you you have absolutely 'no' clue in the world.

You forget that 'real' mechanics have been tuning up carburetors for years with great success. 'Real' mechanics don't need no computer to tuck them into bed.

Mike

86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Reply to
Mike Romain

They may pass Canada's standards for NOx, but won't come close to passing California's.

I've worked on vehicles with and without computers with the same success for years. Somebody mentions computer in any context and the first thing you recommend is getting rid of it. You don't understand computers so you fear them. Face it, technology passed you by years ago. You, friend, are the one that is clueless.

LOL! I bet you even consider yourself a 'real' mechanic. LOL!

'Real' mechanics don't lose sleep over computers. They learn, adapt and appreciate what computers can do.

A wannabe will sit around and cry about them.

Reply to
bllsht

Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks online several times and we have higher standards here.

one that is clueless.

ROTFLMAO!

I only made my living off designing custom and repairing circuits for mobile data communication systems for 9 years or so, yup don't have any clue about them thar eeelectronic bits and pieces whatsoever...

I am 'not' the one here who 'claims' to be a mechanic, real or otherwise....

Yup, too bad it doesn't leave enough room in their brains to remember how mechanical systems work.

Well you do enough of that for all of us, that's for sure.... It.. it.. it.. just 'can't' work without a computer, shuudddeeerrr....

Mike

Reply to
Mike Romain

Reply to
L.W.( ßill ) Hughes III

Bullshit. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than twice what California's are.

one that is clueless.

Yeah right. If you were such an 'expert' you wouldn't fear them so much.

Oh, I still remember. Your problem is you haven't got the brain power to understand computers and what they can do. Vehicles run better and cleaner than ever because of them. Of course you won't understand that either...

Reply to
bllsht

I am familiar with the Nutter hack. Maybe you should have another look. The ignition module is just a driver for the coil. The computer that your pal recommends bypassing controls the timing. That is why the ignition wiring is modified.

Reply to
bllsht

Reply to
L.W.( ßill ) Hughes III

Reply to
L.W.( ßill ) Hughes III

Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got, there is nothing left over for real facts eh.

Mike

Reply to
Mike Romain

Reply to
L.W.( ßill ) Hughes III

The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.

Reply to
bllsht

When the going gets tough, change the subject, eh?

I'll disregard the fact that your comments had NOTHING to do with my reply and address what you just posted...

  1. It appears that you're saying that you don't want full vacuum advance when cold? If that's what you're saying, you're wrong again. You want MORE advance for cold running.

  1. There is no class A license anymore. They went away not l> We eliminate full vacuum advance for cold running only. Remember I

Reply to
bllsht

So you're saying that EGR and spark controls don't reduce NOx emissions? And air injection doesn't reduce HC and CO?

If you d>Bullsh*ter, it is the catalytic converter that chemically changes

Reply to
bllsht

Reply to
L.W.( ßill ) Hughes III

Reply to
L.W.( ßill ) Hughes III

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.