Replace electronic ignition?

I currently have the factory installed Lasar electronic ignition system on my Lycoming IO360M1B......RV8
Have about 700 hrs and 6 plus years. Runs fine but recently have experienced non starts because of "low voltage" sensor activating even when battery seems strong. Did start however after turning off key and the retrying..
Am a little apprehensive about getting stranded someplace and am considering replacing with two 'standard' mags.
Any thoughts about electronic vs mags?

In my experience I've found the Laser ignition to be the least performance of all the electronic ignitions. Also, using Slick mags, they still need the 500 hour overhaul. There's a Glasair III in my group that uses a Laser ignition and he's having starting problems, with about 400 hours on the system. He ran a battery dead a few weeks ago when we stopped for fuel, it would not start, nothing. We're talking about tossing the Laser and going with an ElectroAir and a mag. Much better system.

With 700hrs in 6 years you have far more experience with the LASAR system than I had, but I started with a LASAR system and had a major failure (sheared mag shaft) with less than 100 hrs on it that made it necessary to decide whether to buy a replacement for the failed unit or change horses to something else. I went with 2 PMags (now simply called Emags) and am very happy with them.

Others have had good luck with LASAR. In my limited experience and reading, it seems that those with problems never seem to be able to solve the problems with confidence and are better off changing systems. I think the most common replacement choices that are electronic are Emags, Lightseed, ElectroAir. There may be a few who went to traditional mags but my sense is that most people who want electronic, continue to want the benefits even if they have to change makes. I also get the impression that the most common change is from LASAR and/or Slicks to ANYTHING else. I think Lightspeed has the longest track record, both Lightspeed and ElectroAir require electrical architecture that provides for emergency backup of power to the ignition and the Emags provide the closest thing to what LASAR promised, being an internally generated backup power in case of electrical failure.

One consideration is the 500hr inspection and repair as necessary on Slick mags. Many who consider the change from Slicks to electronic, do so when coming up on this inspection. The benefits from electronic are well documented. The benefits from slicks are perceived (not actual) simplicity, reliability and the weight of experience. When talking about the pros and cons, I point out to the Slick proponents that when they talk about reliability, that their argument is undermined by the fact that 2 are required for redundancy for a very good reason. I would love to see an actual study of the compared reliability of all of the various ignitions, but the fact of the matter is that all of us have 2 ignitions of various kinds and double failures of any of them is extremely rare. That leaves cost, installation, maintenance, efficiency and power as the main concerns. I think electronic wins. Yes there are plenty of great aircraft that are very fast and efficient using Slicks but I think that is because they are great aircraft, not because they use Slicks.

This may belong in the never ending debate section but thats my 2 cents worth!

Just curious: did the LASAR require the same 500 hr inspection and replace as necessary as the standard slicks? It seems they should...

There is something to be said for having 2 different types of systems on the airplane. I agree that a slick mag is likely not as reliable as a pmag, or lightspd etc, but it is different and a known quantity and reliable if properly cooled and maintained, so it is a good backup. With a slick and an electronic unit i think one has the best of both worlds in terms of redundancy. But that is a gut feeling and I have no numbers to back it up.

The problem with running different ignitions is that they fire at different times because of their different timing curves. Thus, you are really ony running on one ignition at any given time.

N941WR said:

The problem with running different ignitions is that they fire at different times because of their different timing curves. Thus, you are really ony running on one ignition at any given time.

Click to expand...

That is true but I got better performance with an ElectroAir and Bendix mag then I have with dual PMags. If the EI performs well the mag is just a backup.

Gator, check your ground connection. I had a LASAR system that got to be very hard to start. I decided to go with one electroair and one slick. During the conversion I found that my single point ground bolt was loose. I went ahead with the conversion but I'm 99% sure that was the starting problem. That being said I really liked the electroair. From previous discussions it turns out the Lasar and electroair have a very similar advance curve. I could run much leaner with the electroair. I attribute that to the much hotter "automotive" spark vs the weaker "mag" spark. Personally I suspect the greatest benefit of EI is the hotter spark and not the advance. I'm planning to install an electroair in my 9A and will probably lock the advance to 25 deg (due to concerns with running mogas and extra advance).
GZ

Just a data point for you Lasar users.

Last year at OSH, I spent a lot of time talking to Joe Logie who is the guru of things Lasar. I was concerned about the timing/CHT/Compression relationship of my engine and this is what the discussion centered around.

During this discussion, I mentioned that I was having issues running LOP. Joe flatly stated that he would not run a Lasar equipped engine LOP----------when I asked why, he said that during the certification process they did not test in that mode, as the FAA did not require it. Therefore, the Lasar timing curve is only set to ROP operations, and any LOP operations with Lasar are a total unknown---------may work fine, may not.

N941WR said:

The problem with running different ignitions is that they fire at different times because of their different timing curves. Thus, you are really ony running on one ignition at any given time.

Click to expand...

I think we established a couple months ago that most people were seeing pretty good gains with one EI and one mag. The EI will light things off earlier and the mag start up the second flame front a few degrees later. With proper settings, you should get PCP happening at close to the best moment.

I've now swapped a couple of airplanes from Slicks (which I have flown behind for over 40 years) to dual PMags. I really do like the advantages of EI, and the various EI systems have become much more reliable than in the early days. Things that contribute to reliability are generally mechanical robustness - fewer connections, fewer points to fail. I prefer the PMags for one major reason - once the engine is running, they are self-energizing, that is, they are not dependent on ship's power to keep running, similar in nature (but different in implementation) to mags. I'm not enough of an expert in the ignition world to discuss the merits of various timing schemes and maps, energy, and the like - the ability to keep running once they are going is the big discriminator for me.

Paul

rv6ejguy said:

I think we established a couple months ago that most people were seeing pretty good gains with one EI and one mag. The EI will light things off earlier and the mag start up the second flame front a few degrees later. With proper settings, you should get PCP happening at close to the best moment.

Click to expand...

Just a thought.. There actually might be a slight benefit to having the timing between an EI and a mag. One of the main features of using racing ignitions like MSD's is the 20 deg spark dwell, this makes sure you get the most of the fuel burnt. Taking that same idea, if you have an EI firing before the mag you'd basically get some of this same effect. To see if there's any benefit, try shutting off only the mag at a high power cruise and see if there's any MPH change trend.

Mike S said:

Just a data point for you Lasar users.

Last year at OSH, I spent a lot of time talking to Joe Logie who is the guru of things Lasar. I was concerned about the timing/CHT/Compression relationship of my engine and this is what the discussion centered around.

During this discussion, I mentioned that I was having issues running LOP. Joe flatly stated that he would not run a Lasar equipped engine LOP----------when I asked why, he said that during the certification process they did not test in that mode, as the FAA did not require it. Therefore, the Lasar timing curve is only set to ROP operations, and any LOP operations with Lasar are a total unknown---------may work fine, may not.

Click to expand...

We have been running LOP with Airflow Performance injectors and LASAR ignition for about 9 months now with no issues whatsoever.

Going to change

Thanks everyone for your input. I think I wiil change out the Lasar for two Pmags....seems to be the best compromise for me.
Also like to add that I have been running the Lasar LOP for several years without any issues.
Lastly, guess I will have a Lasar computer and 2 slick mags for sale.. They all work with just over 600 hours on them. Installed late 2009