Electronic Spark Advance System Analyzer Model 2

68 4spd Fury

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
1,396
Reaction score
993
Location
Syracuse, NY
Salesman I deal with had this thing. He's more of a "Ford" guy so had no use for it. You guys with the late 70's lean burn cars may have some input. Electronic Spark Advance System Analyzer Model 2, used in Chrysler Dealer Service areas. I plug it in and hit the power button and the lights come on, now you know as much as I do.
IMG_8023.JPG
IMG_8024.JPG
IMG_8025.JPG
IMG_8028.JPG
IMG_8033.JPG
IMG_8037.JPG
Any info?
Use?
Interest?
Value?
(That silver thing with the wire looks like some kind of microphone so that may not go to this, didn't see any matching connector)
 
The ELB system could be tested with a volt/ohm meter, but it was laborious and time consuming. This "box" did it all in seconds. In many cases, it "failed" the existing computer and a replacement was ordered.

As great as the ELB was, it had some issues. If a ground was flaky, it might cause a performance issue and resulting "limp-in" mode to activate. Turning the ignition "off" and restarting would clear any "codes".

By 1980, it was just a "Spark Control Computer". Many of the earlier systems had been altered in some manner by that time, too, IF there were any issues. Sometimes, with incompatible carbs and ignition items. A good time for a Mopar Perf electronic ignition system and an aftermarket carb (usually not the orig TQuad, or a generic replacement).

At this time, unfortunately, this former "cutting edge" bit of Chrysler's Advanced Engineering would only be of use to those with unaltered ELB systems. Not sure of the distinction of the original "model" and "Model 2". Perhaps others can expand on that? Could be that it goes back to 1976 as the "new and improved replacement" for the original model?

A neat piece for what it is! In the same orientation as the NOS 1978 ELB TQuad I bought at a swap meet from a former dealer, back in the middle 1980s. A bit of history.

CBODY67
 
Thanks. In 78 I bought a 78 Magnum, it had a 360 2bbl w/lean burn. I kept the car well past 100k and never had a issue with the lean burn. At one point I swapped the motor for a mild built 318 with standard electronic ignition, I don't recall exactly but it was an easy swap, just plug in the new distributor and spark box using the existing connectors. Sometime later I put the 360 back in and the lean burn still worked fine. From what I understand, the 4bbl versions had some issues, a NYS trooper friend I know that started in the late 70's said there were issues in 400/440 police versions as well.
 
Many computer geeks (at the time) strongly criticized Chrysler for putting ANY computer in such a hot environment, when they were used to seeing them in 68 degree F controlled environments. The B/RB police engines were certainly NOT in that environment. I understand that Chrysler put out a TSB on relocating the computer box to the inside of the car, rather than hanging over the lh exhaust manifold. Many boxes had a section of reflective material to deflect the heat.

When I saw the first ELB engine in a New Yorker, at the dealership's service dept, being prepped for its first sale, they started it and it sounded much more "happy" and "eager" than prior engines. More like a '66 than a '76. It was Chrysler's electronic leadership that made it happen. I was impressed! Especially knowing how antiquated GM and Ford were in comparison. Olds had a limited production of a similar product on one year of later '70s Toronado. The fact that Chrysler could get the engines past emissions without the dreaded and noisy air pump was a major plus, to me. Continued to give the GM engine programs fits (from the GM accountants!) as to why THEY couldn't do that!

As with so many Chrysler engineering things, they seemed to be more sophisticated than they could have been AND as they were so different from Ford or GM, a BETTER EDUCATION of dealership techs should have been done so they knew how to troubleshoot them (which the box does, although it seemed that anytime it was hooked up, it failed the computer) easily. Too much technology too soon?

As with other things, Chrysler (engineering) and Ford (marketing) do the first things in an area, then GM frantically studies and dissects it to wring out the last cent of cost, simplifying it in the process, then introduces it as an evolutionary necessity and people just take it as necessary and don't complain about diagnostics and such, nor "operational problems". But by observation, when Chrysler or Ford brought something new to the market, its "teething period" was pretty short compared to GM's 2-3 year pattern back then. Chrysler with the highest general level of execution, as GM was much more mediocre in how they did things back then. BUT GM sold more vehicles to people who didn't know or understand how Chrysler products were better and operated differently than their similar GM vehicles. EACH manufacturer's products still had their unique and different feels, unlike today where they mostly "feel" the same. Not everybody appreciated Chryslers back then, as we still do. Find a good Chrysler dealer was much more important bac then!

CBODY67
 
Many computer geeks (at the time) strongly criticized Chrysler for putting ANY computer in such a hot environment, when they were used to seeing them in 68 degree F controlled environments. The B/RB police engines were certainly NOT in that environment. I understand that Chrysler put out a TSB on relocating the computer box to the inside of the car, rather than hanging over the lh exhaust manifold. Many boxes had a section of reflective material to deflect the heat.

When I saw the first ELB engine in a New Yorker, at the dealership's service dept, being prepped for its first sale, they started it and it sounded much more "happy" and "eager" than prior engines. More like a '66 than a '76. It was Chrysler's electronic leadership that made it happen. I was impressed! Especially knowing how antiquated GM and Ford were in comparison. Olds had a limited production of a similar product on one year of later '70s Toronado. The fact that Chrysler could get the engines past emissions without the dreaded and noisy air pump was a major plus, to me. Continued to give the GM engine programs fits (from the GM accountants!) as to why THEY couldn't do that!

As with so many Chrysler engineering things, they seemed to be more sophisticated than they could have been AND as they were so different from Ford or GM, a BETTER EDUCATION of dealership techs should have been done so they knew how to troubleshoot them (which the box does, although it seemed that anytime it was hooked up, it failed the computer) easily. Too much technology too soon?

As with other things, Chrysler (engineering) and Ford (marketing) do the first things in an area, then GM frantically studies and dissects it to wring out the last cent of cost, simplifying it in the process, then introduces it as an evolutionary necessity and people just take it as necessary and don't complain about diagnostics and such, nor "operational problems". But by observation, when Chrysler or Ford brought something new to the market, its "teething period" was pretty short compared to GM's 2-3 year pattern back then. Chrysler with the highest general level of execution, as GM was much more mediocre in how they did things back then. BUT GM sold more vehicles to people who didn't know or understand how Chrysler products were better and operated differently than their similar GM vehicles. EACH manufacturer's products still had their unique and different feels, unlike today where they mostly "feel" the same. Not everybody appreciated Chryslers back then, as we still do. Find a good Chrysler dealer was much more important bac then!

CBODY67
Yes the time I left Chrysler and went to Oldsmobile. Boy what a learning curve that was. I have always said that G.M. likes to take a system like this and over complicate it with way to many sensors, the 1981 model year was proof of that, G.M. had twice as many sensors on their cars as Chrysler did.
Also the transition from mechanic to Technician. God how I miss the 60's and 70's.
 
Actually, Olds was the worst GM division for using vacuum lines and sensors. Almost as bad as Ford. That poor 307 Olds motor was covered in vacuum lines. A customer had one in his shop for a valve cover leak. Conventional wisdom would dictate taking everything off over the cover, but he got enough slack in it all to be able to snake the cover out over the rocker arms and under the vacuum/wiring harnesses. Worked pretty neat, coming out and it all went back together and looked like nothing had really changed.

CBODY67
 
Salesman I deal with had this thing. He's more of a "Ford" guy so had no use for it. You guys with the late 70's lean burn cars may have some input. Electronic Spark Advance System Analyzer Model 2, used in Chrysler Dealer Service areas. I plug it in and hit the power button and the lights come on, now you know as much as I do.View attachment 143388 View attachment 143389View attachment 143390 View attachment 143391 View attachment 143392 View attachment 143393 Any info?
Use?
Interest?
Value?
(That silver thing with the wire looks like some kind of microphone so that may not go to this, didn't see any matching connector)
That would make great "garage art"... but I bet there would only be a couple of folks who could find use of it in the next decade... and they will have fun finding parts and/or ultimately switch over to an earlier ignition they find on EB...
Many computer geeks (at the time) strongly criticized Chrysler for putting ANY computer in such a hot environment, when they were used to seeing them in 68 degree F controlled environments. The B/RB police engines were certainly NOT in that environment. I understand that Chrysler put out a TSB on relocating the computer box to the inside of the car, rather than hanging over the lh exhaust manifold. Many boxes had a section of reflective material to deflect the heat.

When I saw the first ELB engine in a New Yorker, at the dealership's service dept, being prepped for its first sale, they started it and it sounded much more "happy" and "eager" than prior engines. More like a '66 than a '76. It was Chrysler's electronic leadership that made it happen. I was impressed! Especially knowing how antiquated GM and Ford were in comparison. Olds had a limited production of a similar product on one year of later '70s Toronado. The fact that Chrysler could get the engines past emissions without the dreaded and noisy air pump was a major plus, to me. Continued to give the GM engine programs fits (from the GM accountants!) as to why THEY couldn't do that!

As with so many Chrysler engineering things, they seemed to be more sophisticated than they could have been AND as they were so different from Ford or GM, a BETTER EDUCATION of dealership techs should have been done so they knew how to troubleshoot them (which the box does, although it seemed that anytime it was hooked up, it failed the computer) easily. Too much technology too soon?

As with other things, Chrysler (engineering) and Ford (marketing) do the first things in an area, then GM frantically studies and dissects it to wring out the last cent of cost, simplifying it in the process, then introduces it as an evolutionary necessity and people just take it as necessary and don't complain about diagnostics and such, nor "operational problems". But by observation, when Chrysler or Ford brought something new to the market, its "teething period" was pretty short compared to GM's 2-3 year pattern back then. Chrysler with the highest general level of execution, as GM was much more mediocre in how they did things back then. BUT GM sold more vehicles to people who didn't know or understand how Chrysler products were better and operated differently than their similar GM vehicles. EACH manufacturer's products still had their unique and different feels, unlike today where they mostly "feel" the same. Not everybody appreciated Chryslers back then, as we still do. Find a good Chrysler dealer was much more important bac then!

CBODY67
I always assumed the vibration of the imbalanced air cleaner shook the failed ones to death. I had one die in the 80's(400 Cordoba)... the replacement was worth several times the value of the car at the time(2 digit car, 3 digit module)... drove her to her final resting place with an incorrect module (360 St Regis)... she was very unhappy about it, but made it there.
Yes the time I left Chrysler and went to Oldsmobile. Boy what a learning curve that was. I have always said that G.M. likes to take a system like this and over complicate it with way to many sensors, the 1981 model year was proof of that, G.M. had twice as many sensors on their cars as Chrysler did.
Also the transition from mechanic to Technician. God how I miss the 60's and 70's.
All I remember changing was having to learn how to spell a new word...:rolleyes:. I was informed during a job interview that I was no longer a mechanic or they couldn't use me.:D
 
I would like to buy the Analyzer. I need it for my 1977 NYB. All of my cars are original, we need it to keep the lean burn going. 9073509493 jack
 
I would like to buy the Analyzer. I need it for my 1977 NYB. All of my cars are original, we need it to keep the lean burn going. 9073509493 jack
Hi Jack
I too would like to keep my lean burn going.
Would like to have one of these boxes as well, but they seem to be rare. Would you be able to help with an issue I have on hot starting?
 
Back
Top