Tweet
anyone seen these Brisk spark plugs? they have
a surface and air gap spark. depending on version,
2 or 3 sparks PER ignitor pulse.
I guess similar principal to Mikes plasma coil
that was mentioned a week ago...the one that
creates 10 or so ignitor pulses (but of diminishing
amplitude) instead of just one pulse.
The life expectancy of the Brisk plugs are about half
of that of a normal single spark per single ignitor pulse
plug. That makes sense.
They also give A BIG FAT WARNING. Paraphrased: "if your
engine is already quite modified, e.g. uprated cams,
custom ignition timing, etc., then application of these
spark plugs must be determined on an invividual basis"
"otherwise SERIOUS engine DAMAGE may result".
Ok, I have some plots showing how the "colder" vs. hotter plugs
affect the boarderline between good ignition and detonation.
This is just general info though.
Lets say you already have a high spec motor and are looking for
new plugs, besided the common ones we already know about.
Who can tell you which one is correct AND safe?
Some plugs from Brisk e.g., run wider gaps or protrude further
into the chamber. All of that has an effect. Im running
surface gap plug like they did in the old days, it is RECESSED
so nothing is protruding into the cylinder chamber like on
a street spark plug.
Increasing spark energy is another subject.
I think once you have custom ignition, highly tuned engine,
it is critical.
Also, Im not sold on the idea of 10 sparks per ignition pulse.
With high compression you already need lots less ignition advance...
If my ignition is already well tuned, I dont want to change the
speed of the burn. To increase efficiency, the only thing
interesting is to ensure a more complete combustion.
if you have a stock car, then changing the spark to achieve a
change in timing increases power. much like, if you cant tune
fuel curves, but found some more airflow, you can just increase
the fuel pressure. so you found an easy knob to turn to
find some power. tuning the fuel directly is perhaps too time
consuming. in tuning fuel, you see this argument all the time:
bigger injectors or higher fuel pressure etc. messing with
spark is the dual to this? now having a system that has sufficient
spark energy to ensure "ignition misses" do not happen, is good.
as long as that is not happening, why mess with the spark as opposed
to tuning ignition directly?
Thats my current view atleast. ideas?
John
a surface and air gap spark. depending on version,
2 or 3 sparks PER ignitor pulse.
I guess similar principal to Mikes plasma coil
that was mentioned a week ago...the one that
creates 10 or so ignitor pulses (but of diminishing
amplitude) instead of just one pulse.
The life expectancy of the Brisk plugs are about half
of that of a normal single spark per single ignitor pulse
plug. That makes sense.
They also give A BIG FAT WARNING. Paraphrased: "if your
engine is already quite modified, e.g. uprated cams,
custom ignition timing, etc., then application of these
spark plugs must be determined on an invividual basis"
"otherwise SERIOUS engine DAMAGE may result".
Ok, I have some plots showing how the "colder" vs. hotter plugs
affect the boarderline between good ignition and detonation.
This is just general info though.
Lets say you already have a high spec motor and are looking for
new plugs, besided the common ones we already know about.
Who can tell you which one is correct AND safe?
Some plugs from Brisk e.g., run wider gaps or protrude further
into the chamber. All of that has an effect. Im running
surface gap plug like they did in the old days, it is RECESSED
so nothing is protruding into the cylinder chamber like on
a street spark plug.
Increasing spark energy is another subject.
I think once you have custom ignition, highly tuned engine,
it is critical.
Also, Im not sold on the idea of 10 sparks per ignition pulse.
With high compression you already need lots less ignition advance...
If my ignition is already well tuned, I dont want to change the
speed of the burn. To increase efficiency, the only thing
interesting is to ensure a more complete combustion.
if you have a stock car, then changing the spark to achieve a
change in timing increases power. much like, if you cant tune
fuel curves, but found some more airflow, you can just increase
the fuel pressure. so you found an easy knob to turn to
find some power. tuning the fuel directly is perhaps too time
consuming. in tuning fuel, you see this argument all the time:
bigger injectors or higher fuel pressure etc. messing with
spark is the dual to this? now having a system that has sufficient
spark energy to ensure "ignition misses" do not happen, is good.
as long as that is not happening, why mess with the spark as opposed
to tuning ignition directly?
Thats my current view atleast. ideas?
John
Comment