NGK Non Resistor Spark Plugs vs Resistor Plugs
Hi there I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with non resistor plugs in a 5L V8 Commodore fuel powered SS. NGK BP6EFS vs NGK BPR6EFS
In theory the Non resistor plug should fire a bigger spark at the cost of possible electronic interferences.
Need to replace my plugs and am curious to know what people with more experience think ?
I put in the NGK recomended BPR6EF resistor type plug. I didnt want to test the non resistors only to find they interferred with the efi system.
I gapped the plugs to .98mm as they appeared to be gapped to around .8mm from the box which surprised me as I thought they were supposed to be 1mm.
The V8 had 7 x 1.5mm V6 spark plugs and 1 x 1.5mm non resistor type plug installed. With the correct spark plugs installed the car runs alot smoother it makes the engine feel alot more modern and not so old school.
Later on Im going to try the electrodeless Brisk premium plugs GOR15LGS : Brisk or PREMIUM GOR15LGS SPARK PLUG - $0.00 : Brisk Spark Plugs
The 360 degree spark should be benificial as it will ensure no electrode is shielding the spark.
Has anyone tried these ? Im pretty much sold and am tracking down a price in NZ and will try them in the near future and post results as its clear to me now that spark plugs have quite an effect on the engine from my experience with the incorrect gap sizes.
Hand over the dog bikkies
This thread is filled with misinformation. Put in the plugs the factory specifies. Nothing else is needed. At worst if running pressure will need to lower the gap.
Welcome to the internet where people have opinions that you might not like
sorry wraith what aspect in my thread is misinformation ? Ive put in the NGK recomended plug for 5L v8s , BPR6EF and enquiring about the non resistor version. Also wondering if anyone has used the brisk electrodless plugs. My car previously had the 1.5mm V6 gapped plugs in them so the previous owner was misinformed I assume.
What "runnning pressure" are you referring to where you need to lower the gap and what gap would you recomend under those circumstances ?
Hey 92 VP SS, I have been using the Brisk GOR15LGS plugs for some time now. Long story short, I love them. They are a little more expensive than Iridiums, but the Brisk allow a far wider scope for fuel and spark trims than the standard plugs or Iridiums.
When I run a standard plug in my L67, I have to close the gap to .9mm to stop the spark from getting "blown out" under boost conditions. The Brisk has a 3mm gap and the spark never gets "blown out".
These plugs let me run very lean mixes for highway and around town under light throttle, currently I am running 18.2:1afr happily on the highway with no issues.
At the end of the day if you are going to use them, make the most of them, they are worth every cent.
There is a member on here Blown V2, he has some sort of connection with Brisk, might be worth sending him a PM.
Be warned though, you will have many arm chair experts trying to tell you these don't work and that they are a waste of money and blah, blah , blah.
On the subject of resistor less plugs, these will make a hell of a lot more electrical noise but can be suppressed so there is no interference with the ECU.
If you are up for some reading have a surf around looking for Plasma Spark discharge.
Here is a good start Performance Ignition - Ignition Modules and Ignition Systems
Cheers
Last edited by Decicrate; 19-06-2011 at 05:13 PM.
When you do things right, people won’t be sure you’ve done anything at all,,,,,,,,,
353RWHP L67 VS S Pack 6 Speed
Kalmaker Tuning Software N03 N04 N05 N06 N07 N08 W00 W10 W20 W21 W30 W31
W40 W41 W45 W46 W50 W51 W55 W56 W81 W85 W86 W91 W95 W96
Thanks for the info, I know for sure that spark plugs have an effect on the performance of your car. Just the difference that I got from gapping the 1.5mm plugs in my V8 down to 1.1 was amazing. Smoother and more powerful, also the engine was quieter. From that I realised the spark has a huge influence over the performance of the engine. I read the information on that plasma spark ignition system and it looks awsome. I think with that system running you could tune your engine to really harness its potential in both economy and performance.
Im going to start basic though and try getting what I consider the perfect gap on the standard BPR6EFs. 1.1mm ran a bit better than my brand new plugs gapped at .98mm. Smoother idle and a bit more power. I know my car very well and can sense improvements easily. So im going to start by increasing the gap on my new plugs to 1.1mm and see if the results are recreated. I definiatly know 1.5mm is to much as the engine is noisy and power delivery is poor but I want to test the 1.1 - 1.25 mm range.
Ive also been reading about side gapping the standard plugs by partially cutting off the grounding electrode (apparently a racing trick from the 60s that works) I guess its a poor mans version of the Brisk Plug concept. Anyway I will experiment and take what gains I can get for free until I have found my engines perfect spark plug settings then will move onto brisk or the plasma system. I would dearly like to know how to adjust my memcal fuel and ignition maps when I get to the stage of plasma system to really take advantage of it.
I think people that doubt there is ability to improve performance with spark plugs are just trying to simplify their car hobby by ignoring that aspect, funny thing is Im sure the same people are will to go to great lengths in other expensive aspects of engine performance. Ignoring spark calibration and upgraded technologies maybe the difference between a winning and loosing engine. Or simply flushing excess fuel down the drain.
I think it pays to have an open mind when it comes to newer automotive technologies seek information from people with experience or conduct your own testing. When I finish finding the best spark plug gap for my engine I will post my results. If I had put the NGK BPR6EF plugs in straight out of the box I would of been running approx .8mm and I know that would have made my less effecient. Bad idle and less power. 1.1mm ran better at idle than .98 at this stage I suspect somewhere around 1.1 will be the best maybe even 1.2.
Hand over the dog bikkies
Sorry I meant the post about electrode less spark plugs. You are right some of the time it helps running smaller gap and as far as I am aware the stock gap is 1mm or thereabouts.
Welcome to the internet where people have opinions that you might not like
Trial and error are sometimes the best way to find the perfect setup.Originally Posted by 92 VP SS
You could also try indexing the plugs. Found a great article here with some testing and results. Spark Plug Indexing - Holdenpaedia
For tuning software I really like the Kalmaker interface, trouble is that it is a little expensive and it will take hours and hours of reading to understand how it works.
There is also some cheaper and easy to use software available for the Delco ECU, you could try delcohacking.net • Index page
When you do things right, people won’t be sure you’ve done anything at all,,,,,,,,,
353RWHP L67 VS S Pack 6 Speed
Kalmaker Tuning Software N03 N04 N05 N06 N07 N08 W00 W10 W20 W21 W30 W31
W40 W41 W45 W46 W50 W51 W55 W56 W81 W85 W86 W91 W95 W96
Ive found that going one step lower in plug temp can sometimes help if an engine gets a very hard time,like continuous high revs high load situations..I used to do this with all my bikes..Ive never had a reason really to use hotter or colder plugs in a normal road engine.But if you get whitish or yellow deposits on your plugs after high speed running,this can be a sign that the engine is running slightly hot or lean and a colder plug can help.
I got some excellent results today with gapping the recomended NGK BPR6EF to 1.14 mm from .98mm. Ive found that the engine idles more assertively and less bumpy. Accelleration and response has improved about 15% (or significantly by feel). .
I believe the recomended gap of 1mm is too small on the VP 5L V8 (or at least for my one). In total Ive tried 4 settings and my results are as follows:
1.5mm that were in my car when I bought it and I ran that way for 1 year: Ok idle but a very notchy and noisy feeling engine that had poor top end accelleration.
1.04 mm when I gapped the 1.5s down ran significantly smoother at idle and across the rev rang and felt way better than 1.5mm power wise.
.98mm with new plugs, idle was bumpier and car was slower than 1.04.
1.14mm idle is very strong and crisp, accelleration is way better than the .98 and a bit better than 1,04mm, so far this is the best setting of the 4 so far.
I can conclude at this point not to run my car at the factory 1mm setting and definiatly not to put the NGKBPR6EF plug into a car out of the box, mine came at approx .8mm which would have made my car run slow with a bad idle. 1.14mm is really awsome and the difference is very significant I would strongly recomend everyone to check there gaps and regap them to 1.14
I would like to try 1.2 mm next but am very happy with 1.14 its crisp smooth and powerful. I think 1.2 might start making the engine run abit rough in the higher rev ranges, but if I upgraded my coil I would definiatly go to 1.2. I also want to try the Brisk plugs, but ultimately I have a feeling the plasma injection system Decicrate mentioned would be the ultimate ignition upgrade so I will run my NGKs at the moment and save for that.
Ok Thanks Wraith. I didnt think I was to far off the mark with what I was doing.
Decicrate, cheaper and easier to use sounds ideal for me so I will check out that delco hacking link, what I would like to do is lean off the idle a little and increase the base timing to 12 degrees as I think Im wasting a bit of fuel at idle and unfortuniatly with the traffic in Auckland NZ i have to idle quite a bit. I did index the plugs as best as I could without washers, well I just made sure the open end was facing in towards the center of the combustion champer as best I could by trail and error as all the plugs were a bit different.
Brett, I run the vehicle pretty easy so I think the standard 6 rating in NGK should be ok.
Haven't yet put a decent ignition on my car but what I have found over the last 34 years of fiddling with ignitions is that the bigger the plug gap the better, up to about 1.5mm. Above that, the spark tends to run down the side of the insulator (when under compression) instead of across the gap. If you run a big gap you also need to have decent coil primary current - 6 or preferably 7 amps. Blue motor HEIs for example were 6 amps. Use an inductive discharge ignition because they have a nice long duration spark. CDIs in my opinion have a far too short duration spark. MSD6 for example has about 1/4 mS compared with 1.5 to 2 mS for a good conventional system. If you want proof, look at the emission readings upstream of the cat with a CDI then inductive.
Except that the cat will be doing squat because it is so far away from 14.7:1
What sort of improvement in fuel consumption figures do you get?
Not really to concerned about the effectiveness of the cat convertors, I would rather save fuel.
With the fuel figures, I have only recorded them once, on a long trip to Tassie and back, they can be found here, l67 fuel consumption
When you do things right, people won’t be sure you’ve done anything at all,,,,,,,,,
353RWHP L67 VS S Pack 6 Speed
Kalmaker Tuning Software N03 N04 N05 N06 N07 N08 W00 W10 W20 W21 W30 W31
W40 W41 W45 W46 W50 W51 W55 W56 W81 W85 W86 W91 W95 W96
Did you get up to 1.5mm in the same 5L engine as mine with standard ignition ? I found an improvement from the 1.5mm when I reduced the gap size down to 1.05 Im going to try 1.2 tomorrow from the 1.14 Im at at present to see if I get a further improvement.
I only moved up to the 5 litre world 3 months ago. The previous 8+18 years were spent on a 179 (not 173) HQ on petrol and 202 HJ on gas. I get the distinct impression that the standard ignition on the VP is a bit weak so it won't really tolerate much of a big gap. I'll be interested to read what you find when you change the gaps.
Yeah my VP SS, did not like the 1.5mm gap. It ran like that for a year , it was unbeknown to me it had that size spark plug and I didnt know any better as it was my first holden v8. Anyway when I changed it to 1.05 it went heaps better. Anyway these are my results this far and i will try 1.2 tomorrow.
1.5mm that were in my car when I bought it and I ran that way for 1 year: Ok idle but a very notchy and noisy feeling engine that had poor top end accelleration.
1.04 mm when I gapped the 1.5s down ran significantly smoother at idle and across the rev rang and felt way better than 1.5mm power wise.
.98mm with new plugs, idle was bumpier and car was slower than 1.04.
1.14mm idle is very strong and crisp, accelleration is way better than the .98 and a bit better than 1,04mm, so far this is the best setting of the 4 so far.
Also my VP doesnt have a cat fitted it even has a sticker to that effect on the strut tower. In NZ we dont have to have cats on our cars and can readily remove them if we want !!!
Ive developed a theory that takes into consideration the effect the ECU and the 02 sensors play in spark plug gaps and fueling.
I think that a small variation in gap size makes a big difference to the combustion of the fuel. I think the max you can run in the 5L V8 is 1.2 and it will yeild power gains by more burning more of the gas that enters the cylinder the engine will become noisier and and the throttle becomes more of an on off switch. I also think that the 02 sensor picks up that there is less unburned fuel and the ecu adds more fuel to compensate during closed loop mode thus increasing power and fuel useage.
I closed up my gap to 1 mm (1.02mm) today because I think that the engine becomes a bit quieter/smoother and when in closed loop mode the ecu will sense the unburned fuel, as its supposed to, and it will lean the fuel down to stoich. I dont believe the engine produces as much power as a wider gap say 1.14 but will run smoother and more economically in closed loop mode at a 1mm gap.
I think though when the car enters open loop at wide open throttle and idle I would prefer a a 1.14mm gap to make the most of the predetermined fuel input, but I cant have variable spark plug gaps, so Ive compromised between power and economy because my cars current uses are chores and some long distance travel. I would prefer slightly better fuel economy and a smoother engine.
Ultimately I would love to try a plasma spark system or the Brisk plugs but at the same time I would also like to modify the the ECU in closed loop so that the it wont simply adjust by adding extra fuel to the more effiecent burn created by the better spark this would effectively lock in the current fuel settings and increase power output and run a bit leaner at the 02 sensor, this would be the same as what would happen in a non ECU controlled vehicle that doesnt read/adjust of an o2 sensor.
If I was only using the car with out modifying the ECU in the weekends and having fun at the drag strip I would definiatly run the standard plugs at 1.15 - 1.2 or fit Brisk plugs to gain power and not worry about economy.
I would welcome a second opinion on my theory bearing in mind how the ecu runs with larger or smaller gaps and fueling/power etc
Anyway hopefully this info is useful and not off the mark as Im definiatly no expert just someone with a VP SS and a bit too much time on his hands at the moment ! :-)
Last edited by 92 VP SS; 21-06-2011 at 10:00 PM.
I think it perhaps does the other way - more complete burning means =less= residual oxygen (and unburnt fuel) in the exhaust so if anything the mixture would get leaned off a little to get back to the same residual oxygen percentage.
Yes that is another way of thinking about it but your forgetting about the fuel side of things in relation to the oxygen. The residual oxygen content is higher than the residual fuel content even after some of the oxygen is burnt to aid the fuel combustion. The o2 sensor still reads less unburned fuel remaining in the overall exhaust content.
Also the ECU doesnt know how much oxygen went into the mix it just sees the end ratio. Our 5L v8s don't have a intake air flow sensor. So if you manage to burn more fuel and the emissions become leaner the ECU will add more fuel through the injection system until it tries to a achieve a 14.7 parts oxygen to 1 part fuel ratio.
Basically a more complete fuel burn would reduce the amount of unburned fuel exiting the cylinder in relation to burned exhaust gases and the 02 sensor will read that as being leaner and should increase fueling to the point that the engine reaches its new ability to burn more fuel caused by having a bigger spark to ignite it.
That is why I experienced alot more low down torque with bigger gaps and less MPG. I just cant see it working the other way and from my experience with mucking around with spark plugs inspired by finding that my engine had 1.5mm (way to big) gaps the results support it.
Thanks for you take on this as it made me re-think my theory and now Im even more certain.
Last edited by 92 VP SS; 22-06-2011 at 11:33 PM.
Burning more fuel and less air will result in a rich mixture,whereas burning less fuel and more air results in a leaner mixture..The ECU will detect via the 02 sensors that the mixture is either too rich or too lean and will change the injector pulse width until the 02 sensors get a rreading of 14.7 : 1 A/F ratio.The computer constantly tries to keep the A/F mix at 14.7:1.
on holiday
if you burn more fuel you have to burn more air so it shouldnt really change
I tune the oldschool way fear on the passengers face and knuckle colour cant go wrong
tabbacco is still my favorite vegetable
Silly question; but do these laws and facts also apply to the VP's V6 counterpart?
Hi VP V6 use Resistor Type 1.5mm gap. I would recommend running that with the NGK plugs but just check that they are gapped at 1.5 before installation with a feeler gauge.. Someone may have experience with varying the gap sizes on the V6 but from my experience the factory recommended gap and plug works best as Wraith stated on his first reply (Im just always someone to trail and error) :-)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote