Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey,

My R34 GTT sounds like the spark is starting to brake down when boosting under heavy load, getting progressively worse over the weekend. (Started off only going up hills at high rpm, now doing it when overtaking etc..)

It started after i washed the engine bay so i thought it may just have water somewhere, it went away after ~1 hour but came back a few hours later and has carried on all weekend.

I was going to do plugs anyway and perhaps send the coils away to get bench tested?

Im not 100% on what plugs to use tho, after searching i am leaning towards BCPR6ES - likely gaped to .8mm (Running 21psi) or would a 7 heat range be a better choice over 6?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445588-which-spark-plugs/
Share on other sites

I can pretty much guarantee that's it's water sitting in saturating the spark plugs underneath the valley cover. Have seen multiple other RB's with the same symptoms (misfire that gets progressively worse) and it's because the spark plugs are partially submerged.

Also I was told by Trent at Chequered tuning BCPR6ES for 15psi or less, and BCPR7ES for 16+psi

I ran the 7's in my car at .8mm with 21psi no issues.

Dont be afraid about closing up plug gaps if you need to do it, especially with alcohol fuels like methanol/E85. We run 0.020"(0.5mm) on the race car. Using a CDI with crane Fireball CDI coil packs. bcp10es plugs, 9:1, methanol, 23psi 495rwkw. No ignition problems, even if it goes super rich which it does on cold start quite often going richer then 9:1 afr. We found going smaller on plug gaps didnt change power made, only stopped any missfires which would pop up if we tried going any larger then 0.025".

It is possible the plugs may have gotten damaged from the water, maybe the porcelain body has developed a hairline crack somewhere, possible thermal shocking. Plugs are quite delicate, it doesn't take much to damage them. Its also surprising how easy it is to crack one when removing one while hot.

What plugs do you have in there currently? Have you checked? Good chance the ones you are running are fine if they have been good up until this point.

  • Like 1

I run NGK Iridium 7's without an issue at 32psi on ethanol, I don't understand the need you guys have to change your plugs every 5000...

Microtech days, plugs would be black on 98 after a few days lol

Fuel in or no fuel in. What's resolution and control? Lol

also i would like to input that cleaning your coils is important part of preventative maintainence. as shown in this video....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qirx_G4x5i0

i've fixed three sets of deemed stuffed coils and this has worked everytime.....its not always the spark plugs or gap.

i've also gone back to a copper plug from iridium and also gone from 0.6mm gap back to 0.8mm

  • Like 1

I was running bcpr6es gapped to 0.8mm with my 20 on the stock tune fmic highflow turbo 3" exhaust at 0.9b.

Went to bcpr7es gapped to 0.8mm at 1.4b once tuned.

No misfires with the oem coilpack so far, increasing the dwell during the tune didn't brought much (i didn't felt anything), so my coilpacks seems healthy. :)

Dont be afraid about closing up plug gaps if you need to do it, especially with alcohol fuels like methanol/E85. We run 0.020"(0.5mm) on the race car. Using a CDI with crane Fireball CDI coil packs. bcp10es plugs, 9:1, methanol, 23psi 495rwkw. No ignition problems, even if it goes super rich which it does on cold start quite often going richer then 9:1 afr. We found going smaller on plug gaps didnt change power made, only stopped any missfires which would pop up if we tried going any larger then 0.025".

It is possible the plugs may have gotten damaged from the water, maybe the porcelain body has developed a hairline crack somewhere, possible thermal shocking. Plugs are quite delicate, it doesn't take much to damage them. Its also surprising how easy it is to crack one when removing one while hot.

What plugs do you have in there currently? Have you checked? Good chance the ones you are running are fine if they have been good up until this point.

Thanks for the info, good to have some actual solid info that is tried and tested. :)

Thanks for the info, good to have some actual solid info that is tried and tested. :)

Even if it's from a highly modified ignition system running large volumes of Methanol? Not really suited for comparison to stock 25's I would have thought.

The results I have seen prove the opposite about plug gap, I guess every setup is different, and people generally stick with what works for them.

  • Like 1

Even if it's from a highly modified ignition system running large volumes of Methanol? Not really suited for comparison to stock 25's I would have thought.

The results I have seen prove the opposite about plug gap, I guess every setup is different, and people generally stick with what works for them.

I run 0.5mmm gap in my nugget...

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Any difference in induction noise?
    • If I got a dollar for every flipped commuter missile I've driven past I'd have two dollars   Some people get into wild adventures on the road and I doubt it's gender or ethnicity specific. I'm just glad I don't usually drive during peak times.
    • Just got the car back and gave it a good run back home Power wise, whilst it only made a extra 5 killerwasps up top at 7200 rpm, it made more power everywhere from 2500 rpm and kept pulling much harder all the way, to the point of me relearning when to shift so I don't hit the 7200 limiter, with the old intake it seemed to take alot more time to rev out, and, throttle response is also much improved  As I didn't want to remove the bumper every time I serviced the air filter (basically every aftermarket and fabricated CAI has the filter behind the bumper) it currently has a hektic exposed pod in the engine bay sucking in hot air, this will be rectified shortly after some some of my CAD (cardboard assisted design) for a alloy heat shield feed by the OEM intake tube behind the bumper, this will cop some wrinkle black paint, as well as the intake pipe for that totally OEM look... The only fly in the ointment was that the OEM "strut" brace doesn't fit over the rear runner of the new intake with the 2.5 engine is in the engine bay, as the 2.5 raises the engine up by 20mm, it's not a war stopper, and I didn't notice any difference without it in some twisties, but....... MX5 Mania is bringing in some GWR "fancy pants" braces that apparently do fit, if it bolts up I'll grab it, it is also stiffer than the OEM one, which is a bonus All in all I'm happy with the outcome      Fancy pants "strut" brace that gives the required clearance      This is where the clearance issue was, the GWR extends out past this
    • Well, I'm back from the dyno today. Some things do partially make sense. The pod filter/airbox delete picked up between 6-10rwkw on 98 - because heat soak does kind of affect things and there was playing with tune/timing/AFR. Oddly enough, the car was running much leaner than before. So lean it was audibly pinging on the dyno which I got video of:   70de0dd5-2099-4a71-8b10-6fc833fb9d59.mp4   We're talking going from ~12.7 in the past to the first run being at like ~14.0. It is now tuned to ~12.5 on the Dyno, which correlates to about ~12.1 on my wideband in the car. These matched last time, which is very odd. The dyno plots only show the dyno's reported AFR - should be last time, yet now it no longer agrees and was way leaner. Nobody has an explanation for how a pod can make the car run notably leaner, yet not really give any more power when you add fuel in. A few different types of intake design were tested:   94c22c34-7991-4902-af85-314b5f5bf352.mp4   There was no difference other than IAT with the pod sticking out of the bay. The pod sticking out of the bay (but connected) is actually still warmer than what I usually see on the road. Removing the pod entirely lost about ~2kw. But to be fair, all of the runs could be argued to vary by that amount when temperatures climb etc etc. It's safe to say that the filter isn't causing any restrictions of any note that can be reasonably altered in any way. This is in line with what I'd expect given the Engine Masters testing. 323KW on 98 and ~335KW on E85 is actually a pretty solid result, up about ~45kw from 99% of LS1 cammed combos, with generally much larger cams/exhaust etc as well. It is after all up 42KW (98) and 54KW (E85) from before. +10KW from a pod and removing the box is cheap as chips compared to what the head work cost per kw No, I did not get to drop the exhaust and test. When it comes to exhaust... it all just seems to change frequencies and cost or gain 2hp here or there. I don't realistically think I'll drop this to test it - because there's not much else I can really do about it/route it any other way/make it bigger/just bought mufflers. Engine masters beat the hell out of headers with a hammer to deliberately kink them and didn't lose power at all, I sincerely doubt that going larger primaries would help. If it were even possible for clearance/conversion reasons... which it's not... I may throw the E85 in there at some point and do a drag run to see what MPH it traps for science. It isn't lost on me that ~320kw Skylines do trap about the same MPH that ~370kw F-Body/Corvettes do in the USA for the same  or similar weight. (122-125mph). Of course, if I go there and trap 104mph or something then I'll just 'accidentally' have an accident on the way home from the drag strip and buy a M4.
×
×
  • Create New...