LTCC vs Delteq
Re: LTCC vs Delteq
Delteq isn't even in business anymore. Even then their later models had some issues so that's not really an option. The LTCC is nice, but even then it provides no real measurable advantage over a properly working optispark setup.
And FYI, both of those systems require a functioning optispark optical sensor, so it is NOT an opti-delete kit. If you're looking to eliminate the opti, your only option is the EFIconnection.com kit, which is VERY pricey if you're starting from scratch.
And FYI, both of those systems require a functioning optispark optical sensor, so it is NOT an opti-delete kit. If you're looking to eliminate the opti, your only option is the EFIconnection.com kit, which is VERY pricey if you're starting from scratch.
Re: LTCC vs Delteq
Delteq is dead, and it had issues when it was still alive. Based on my direct past experience with the designer, it has been abandoned just like his earlier product - the Opti-Eliminator/Super Direct Ignition for the LT1. I had one, and I got stuck with it, when he stopped supporting it.
Bob Bailey has been committed to the LTCC, and continues to support it.
The advantage, even though it still requires the Opti's functioning optical cam position sensor, is the elimination of the high voltage function from the Opti - no ozone, no dielectric breakdown of the cap insulation, no burned rotor or contacts, no rotor screws coming loose. That's a tremendous advantage. I've been running in this mode for 11 years now. Not an LTCC - it uses MoTeC electronics - but it functions identically, with the optical sensor and 8 LS1-style coils. I don't think there was an LTCC when my setup was built.
The advantage of the 8 coil setup is the increased dwell time, to build big voltage for systems that need the ultimate in voltage - high cylinder pressures and high RPM. In my case, its running a 300-shot of nitrous to 7,200RPM. With power adders, there is a disctinct advantage. A buddy of mine used the 8-coil setup for a 383 LT1 running more than 20# of Vortech boost, and making 1,125HP at the flywheel, turning 8,000RPM. But its not as critical in an NA application.
Bob Bailey has been committed to the LTCC, and continues to support it.
The advantage, even though it still requires the Opti's functioning optical cam position sensor, is the elimination of the high voltage function from the Opti - no ozone, no dielectric breakdown of the cap insulation, no burned rotor or contacts, no rotor screws coming loose. That's a tremendous advantage. I've been running in this mode for 11 years now. Not an LTCC - it uses MoTeC electronics - but it functions identically, with the optical sensor and 8 LS1-style coils. I don't think there was an LTCC when my setup was built.
The advantage of the 8 coil setup is the increased dwell time, to build big voltage for systems that need the ultimate in voltage - high cylinder pressures and high RPM. In my case, its running a 300-shot of nitrous to 7,200RPM. With power adders, there is a disctinct advantage. A buddy of mine used the 8-coil setup for a 383 LT1 running more than 20# of Vortech boost, and making 1,125HP at the flywheel, turning 8,000RPM. But its not as critical in an NA application.
Re: LTCC vs Delteq
I had the ltcc setup for a short while and it was a great improvement over stock. I feel the throttle response was a lot better. I went through a build over the winter and bit the bullet and went with the eficonnection 24x kit. That completely eliminates the opti and runs on ls1 pcm and coils. Im going to have $850 total in that conversion. I redone my harness my self and got lucky and scored a pcm for 40 bucks. just look around, and if your looking for some coil brackets I started making some for people after I finally got mine straight. there are pics in my for sale thread.
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/parts-...l#post14827483
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/parts-...l#post14827483
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
tommalcolm
Computer Diagnostics and Tuning
2
Sep 11, 2015 03:39 PM
Dave88LX
LT1 Based Engine Tech
16
Mar 28, 2004 09:35 AM



