Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys

i was recommended the NGK BCP6ES spark plugs.

i rang a few auto stores and they only have NGK BCP6E which they rekon are the same plugs, but i was told to watch out to make sure its the NGK BCP6ES with the S on the end.

anyone (in perth?) know where i can get hold of them?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/41035-ngk-bcp6es/
Share on other sites

If i could tell you one thing it would be this. PLEASE buy the BCPR7E(S) and gap them to 0.8mm if they aren't already.

If you run more boost than stock (or intend to) you'll be much better off. They're the same thing as the plugs you mentioned but one heat range cooler. They are no more expensive.

Adrian

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/41035-ngk-bcp6es/#findComment-842659
Share on other sites

Hey Adrian,

I found I was worse off with the 7 heat range. For a daily driver, they fouled a-lot quicker before I got my SAFC than the 6 heat range would. The standard heat range for an RB25 is 5, so 6 is one cooler. I would disagree with getting the 7's unless you got quite a few mods 200rwkw++, and stick with 6's for basic mods, and 5's if completely stock...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/41035-ngk-bcp6es/#findComment-843300
Share on other sites

guys, if you've ever tried calling NGK for a recommendation, they have actually told me to sell BKR6E plugs to skyline drivers if they want a cheaper copper core option to the more expensive Platinum and Iridium tip long-life plugs (only differerence is the greater resistance to fouling)

Reason behind the "K" instead of the "CP" is that the "CP" is a projected tip type plug and NGK have discovered that the "K" recessed type plug seems to complete combustion more effectively due to the shape of the cylinder head "squish zone"....

that will add more discussion to your thread (adding to the numerous hundreds of other spark plug threads on here) Oh, and yes totally agree with the gapping and heat range advice above. Buying NGK plugs without the "-11" should give you the default 0.8mm gap.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/41035-ngk-bcp6es/#findComment-844378
Share on other sites

  • 8 years later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Latest Posts

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...