question about spark plugs

[takatasan]

im looking to put in some performance plugs into my 2003 corolla with the hope of improving fuel economy and maybe performance. i have been looking at the NGK V power and G power plugs so my question is are these plugs worth getting, do they make any kind of a noticeable difference in fuel economy or performance?

 

[Beeblebrox237]

I doubt that they'll make a noticeable difference, but I have no experience with them.

 

[Slash]

The gap size is what makes the difference, not the plug itself. Any plug will be fine.

 

[Perfect Balance]

On your stock car? no.

 

[Slash]

On your stock car? no.

Should have added that in my post as well. If its stock you won't see much.

 

[takatasan]

Yeah its stock all I have in it is a K&N filter

 

[Slash]

Then it won't really do anything. Save your money and buy cheap plugs. They are all the same. All it is is really just brand names that make the difference in prices.

 

[BrutherSuperior]

The only benefit to "performance" spark plugs is that they typically last longer. Performance-wise, they often do worse than the cheapie copper plugs b/c their electrode is smaller in size.

If you're looking for a better running engine in a 10 year old car; change the o2 sensors. Those get lazy with time. While you're at it, switch to synthetics in the trans and engine if you haven't already. You'll notice a difference right away. Other things, like changing the fuel filter & cleaning the MAF, can make a difference as well. On their own, these are just spits in the ocean...but gather all the spits up and you have a little lake.

Lastly, inflate your tires a few psi higher and you'll get better fuel mileage as well. That one is cheap & easy.

 

[1stlsx]

I've had good results with E3's in a couple of cars. I havent dynod any of the cars or anything, but I was able to add 2* timing on my dad's Earnhardt Monte Carlo SS with E3's over standard plugs. More timing = more power

Just thought I should Add I run Vpower or Autolite standards in my race car. No spark drop to 7800....

 

[takatasan]

Great advice guys thanks

 

[MustangManiac]

More timing = more power

This is not always true, what you need is proper timing all things considered, and there is a lot to account for in a system. You can advance the timing to far, attaining ignition while the piston is still traveling upward, this causes knocking, pinging and can/will damage the motor. It is actually more damaging to the motor to run it too far advanced rather than retarded, all the latter does is rob you of power and efficiency while the former will destroy your motor.

 

[1stlsx]

This is not always true, what you need is proper timing all things considered, and there is a lot to account for in a system. You can advance the timing to far, attaining ignition while the piston is still traveling upward, this causes knocking, pinging and can/will damage the motor. It is actually more damaging to the motor to run it too far advanced rather than retarded, all the latter does is rob you of power and efficiency while the former will destroy your motor.

Would you like me to rephrase? "I was able to get 2* more usable timing", is that better?

When tuning a car on a modern fuel injection, which is what the car in question is, you are going to tune it to eliminate all knock retard which can be monitored.

When tuning the car I was only able to acheive 18* timing in the upper range before getting knock retard. After a plug change to the E3 plugs I was able to increase that to 20* before getting any retard. More timing = more power...

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

How old were the plugs you were taking out 1stlsx? If they were old and fouled, that would make much more of a difference than the construction of the plug itself.

I'm fortunate, in a way, to be limited to (essentially) just two plugs for my 13b. Both are made by NGK. One is made for racing, and the other is made for street use. Easy enough decision. I don't even have to gap them.

 

[1stlsx]

How old were the plugs you were taking out 1stlsx? If they were old and fouled, that would make much more of a difference than the construction of the plug itself.

I'm fortunate, in a way, to be limited to (essentially) just two plugs for my 13b. Both are made by NGK. One is made for racing, and the other is made for street use. Easy enough decision. I don't even have to gap them.

The car is a "once in a while" driver my dad has, less than 25K miles on it. It now has a K&N, Cat delete, MSD coils and Taylor wires on it.

Just wanted to add I changed the plugs and kept them for backups as I couldnt find anything wrong with them....

 

[Slash]

I know of builds were significantly retarding the timing created much high power outputs than advanced. Depends on the combo of parts on the engine itself. Retarded timing from what I've seen also puts power lower in the RPMs.

EDIT:


@1stlsx

MSD coils are were it's at IMO

 

[RVDNuT374]

In a stock 2003 Toyota Corolla, performance spark plugs will give little to no gain. Run OEM brand for the best reliability.

 

[1stlsx]

I know of builds were significantly retarding the timing created much high power outputs than advanced. Depends on the combo of parts on the engine itself. Retarded timing from what I've seen also puts power lower in the RPMs.

EDIT:


@1stlsx

MSD coils are were it's at IMO

Retarded timing, being defined as timing less than the specified amount by the manufacture.

This is pretty much what I was talking about in my previous post. In the example I was using with the Monte Carlo, stock timing tables put the timing at 24* in the higher RPM. Running stock timing tables we would see 8-10* of KR, running an actual timing of 14-16*. Changing the advance to a max or 18* eliminated KR and allowed 2* extra timing than the factory tune. Changing the plugs allowed an additional 2*, 20* advance, 4* retarded.

No complaints so far from him on those. We've raised the limiter and changed some shift points and shift pressures so its much more fun to drive now. Next is a set of higher ratio rockers and maybe some dyno time.

My brother just picked up an 09 Saturn Sky Redline about a month ago. Its got the GMPP stage 1 on it and a cat back. So were gonna do a CAI and up the boost on it, maybe some colder plugs, hoping itll put 350+ on the ground when were done. 👍

I live in TX now and they are all in AZ so when I go back to visit in June we should be doing the mods on the cars.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Cold plugs on a street car? I wouldn't advise it.

From mazdatrix:

A common misconception of many people are the terms "Hot" spark plug, and "Cold" spark plug. The temperature rating of the plug refers to the running temperature of the physical spark plug - i.e. a "Hot" plug will retain more of the combustion heat in the plug itself, meaning not transfer the heat to the engine itself. This is why a "Hot" plug is needed for slower city type driving so the carbon deposits will be burned off the plug, and clean firing will still be possible even when combustion temps are low (idling, stop & go etc.). At the same time a "Hot" plug used in a highly modified engine that is driven hard consistently will simply retain too much of the extra combustion temperature and burn itself up (usually cracking the porcelain, and potentially doing major engine damage).


A spark plug that is too "Cold" for the engine/application will start harder, foul much easier, and generally be a pain to work with.

For engines that are not significantly modified for racing, we have had very good luck just running the stock plugs. For street ported engines driven hard on the street, the most we have had to do is move one or two heat ranges colder. This lack of change is because the engine is still driven at normal speeds and loads for 99% of the time.


Racing engines, for the most part, are above 7000rpm 100% of the time - these are the ones that require the colder plugs. Quite often a set of "hotter" plugs must be used to get the engine started and warmed-up, because the race plugs will not fire consistently below 4000rpm.

Spark plug choice, for any given engine, can then be stated as "Hot" enough to fire consistently at the lowest RPM and load normally needed (without fouling), and not overheat (and burn-up) at the highest RPM/load for the given application. This translates to : The "Hotter" the engine (turbo, modifications, load, usage, etc.) the "Colder" the spark plug needed.

 

[1stlsx]

Cold plugs on a street car? I wouldn't advise it.

From mazdatrix:

"For engines that are not significantly modified for racing, we have had very good luck just running the stock plugs. For street ported engines driven hard on the street, the most we have had to do is move one or two heat ranges colder. This lack of change is because the engine is still driven at normal speeds and loads for 99% of the time."

This. While I appreceiate your recommendation, Ive worked on many a Mustang, Camaro, Supra, RX7 running forced induction and have had good sucess with running a 1 heat range colder plug on the street, which is our intent with his car.

On my car with gas + nitrous i go 2 heat ranges colder, with E85 only stock heat range and with nitrous 1 heat range colder. Ive experimented and those are the best results for my application. When I first switched to E85 in my car I had the 2 heat range colder plugs in it and it still ran great, just didnt like to sit and idle in the morning so I went back to a stock plug and its idles like a stock car now...

 

[BrutherSuperior]

I know of builds were significantly retarding the timing created much high power outputs than advanced. Depends on the combo of parts on the engine itself. Retarded timing from what I've seen also puts power lower in the RPMs.

EDIT:


@1stlsx

MSD coils are were it's at IMO

I think you might be confusing cam timing with ignition timing. Retarding cam timing usually gives you better power higher up in the revs. Advancing ignition timing a few degrees usually gives you a few more ponies and better torque. The chips and piggy-backs you used to see in OBD1 cars basically advancing timing via the ECM instead of manually moving the distributor.

 

[1stlsx]

I think you might be confusing cam timing with ignition timing. Retarding cam timing usually gives you better power higher up in the revs. Advancing ignition timing a few degrees usually gives you a few more ponies and better torque. The chips and piggy-backs you used to see in OBD1 cars basically advancing timing via the ECM instead of manually moving the distributor.

These are 2 entirely different concepts. Usually cam timing will be retarded to make more power up top where it is usuable, no sense in making 400 lbft tq at 2500 rpm as there is no way you can put it to the ground in most cases. Same thing with advancing cam timing, my car for example, has the cam ground w/ 4* advance and is installed with antoher 4* advance giving a total of 8* advance, why because it spins forever and makes power high, but no tq low, since its a street car I need power in the lower RPMs too. Again lower being a relative term seeing as the converter is a 5K stall.

As for ignition timing, yes adding more timing will give more power, as stated previously, but only to a point. Again, through dyno tuning, on my car I was able to find the optimal timing for both HP and TQ and increse it a degree or 2 at a time under varying load conditions. With modern fuel injection and the extreme adjustability of timing curves you can make as much or as little power as needed at virtually any RPM.

Again, like I said, Im willing to bet that my dads Monte Carlo would make more power with less timing than the factory set it up for, thus retarded ignition timing making more power.

 

[Slash]

I think you might be confusing cam timing with ignition timing. Retarding cam timing usually gives you better power higher up in the revs. Advancing ignition timing a few degrees usually gives you a few more ponies and better torque. The chips and piggy-backs you used to see in OBD1 cars basically advancing timing via the ECM instead of manually moving the distributor.

It depends entirely on the setup of the engine. Head, intake, cam combo etc will rely on both settings. As 1stlsx said cam timing retarded makes more power up top. Toying around with these can be tedious work but worth it in the end.

These are 2 entirely different concepts. Usually cam timing will be retarded to make more power up top where it is usuable, no sense in making 400 lbft tq at 2500 rpm as there is no way you can put it to the ground in most cases. Same thing with advancing cam timing, my car for example, has the cam ground w/ 4* advance and is installed with antoher 4* advance giving a total of 8* advance, why because it spins forever and makes power high, but no tq low, since its a street car I need power in the lower RPMs too. Again lower being a relative term seeing as the converter is a 5K stall.

As for ignition timing, yes adding more timing will give more power, as stated previously, but only to a point. Again, through dyno tuning, on my car I was able to find the optimal timing for both HP and TQ and increse it a degree or 2 at a time under varying load conditions. With modern fuel injection and the extreme adjustability of timing curves you can make as much or as little power as needed at virtually any RPM.

Again, like I said, Im willing to bet that my dads Monte Carlo would make more power with less timing than the factory set it up for, thus retarded ignition timing making more power.

Not entirely true. You can put down that kind of torque at 2500 rpm. I put down in the ballpark of 465ft-lbs right around that RPM (might be slightly lower). That's factoring in a 25% drivetrain loss through my C6 transmission etc. That was on the last dyno when the engine was built. It's less now that it's got about 50k on it since it was built and needs to be rebuilt again (despite top end rebuilds each fall). Then again it's a truck and it needs low end power to move that tank. I have a rather steep RV cam installed as well. Cam is up around 4*, can't remember. Then again it was built for torque over horsepower. Horsepower was around 310 at the crank last dyno.

My ignition timing I believe is quite a ways up there. 14* IIRC, I think stock was 10* or so. That's running an MSD Blaster 5900 and a Blaster II coil. 18-19* at idle.

I believe 34* is the max you can go at 3500rpm with my application, within a few degrees or so. Best bet is to work out detonation and then work it back 2* more or so to be safe.

I agree with most of what your saying though but as I said I think it depends more on the application and setup of the engine you are working on.

 

[1stlsx]

It depends entirely on the setup of the engine. Head, intake, cam combo etc will rely on both settings. As 1stlsx said cam timing retarded makes more power up top. Toying around with these can be tedious work but worth it in the end.



Not entirely true. You can put down that kind of torque at 2500 rpm. I put down in the ballpark of 465ft-lbs right around that RPM (might be slightly lower). That's factoring in a 25% drivetrain loss through my C6 transmission etc. That was on the last dyno when the engine was built. It's less now that it's got about 50k on it since it was built and needs to be rebuilt again (despite top end rebuilds each fall). Then again it's a truck and it needs low end power to move that tank. I have a rather steep RV cam installed as well. Cam is up around 4*, can't remember. Then again it was built for torque over horsepower. Horsepower was around 310 at the crank last dyno.

My ignition timing I believe is quite a ways up there. 14* IIRC, I think stock was 10* or so. That's running an MSD Blaster 5900 and a Blaster II coil. 18-19* at idle.

I believe 34* is the max you can go at 3500rpm with my application, within a few degrees or so. Best bet is to work out detonation and then work it back 2* more or so to be safe.

I agree with most of what your saying though but as I said I think it depends more on the application and setup of the engine you are working on.

Im assuming with the huge difference between torque and horsepower we must be talking about a big block. I am not saying its impossible to put down those kinds of numbers, Im saying its pointless unless you can get it to the ground. Again referencing my build on my car, it makes about 360lbft on the ground, not a lot relatively speaking, however with the proper setup I am able to use all 360 lbft making the car pretty quick outta the whole 1.5-1.6 60 ft times on motor. 0-100 in 7 seconds..... Sure would 400+ lbft be cool on a dyno sheet, yup, but chances I would get it to hook, slim....

And yes a truck is a diffrent application from a car and every setup will be different. My truck is a fully forged 355 with a LT4 hot cam and other mods including ported heads. While I havent dynod the truck yet, based upon similar LT1 setups Id venture to guess it makes about 320-330 hp on the ground and 360-380 lbft tq at the wheels. Truck is lifted on 33 x 12.50 tires with 3.73 gearing. Basically anytime in 1st gear I lay in it it spins the tires be it from a stop or roll up t about 35. This is wasted power. Sure, is it needed for when I strap my trailer and load my car on the back, yup, but for driving on the street its useless. Unfortunately, Im damned if I do and damned if I dont with my truck. 👎 Because of the ****y ass Vortec intake I cant make power over about 5000 RPM at best. Im looking at combatting this by adding an intake spacer but thats down the road. Replacing the cheap shorty headers with long tubes, xpipe and warlocks is next on the list.

 

[Slash]

Im assuming with the huge difference between torque and horsepower we must be talking about a big block. I am not saying its impossible to put down those kinds of numbers, Im saying its pointless unless you can get it to the ground. Again referencing my build on my car, it makes about 360lbft on the ground, not a lot relatively speaking, however with the proper setup I am able to use all 360 lbft making the car pretty quick outta the whole 1.5-1.6 60 ft times on motor. 0-100 in 7 seconds..... Sure would 400+ lbft be cool on a dyno sheet, yup, but chances I would get it to hook, slim....

And yes a truck is a diffrent application from a car and every setup will be different. My truck is a fully forged 355 with a LT4 hot cam and other mods including ported heads. While I havent dynod the truck yet, based upon similar LT1 setups Id venture to guess it makes about 320-330 hp on the ground and 360-380 lbft tq at the wheels. Truck is lifted on 33 x 12.50 tires with 3.73 gearing. Basically anytime in 1st gear I lay in it it spins the tires be it from a stop or roll up t about 35. This is wasted power. Sure, is it needed for when I strap my trailer and load my car on the back, yup, but for driving on the street its useless. Unfortunately, Im damned if I do and damned if I dont with my truck. 👎 Because of the ****y ass Vortec intake I cant make power over about 5000 RPM at best. Im looking at combatting this by adding an intake spacer but thats down the road. Replacing the cheap shorty headers with long tubes, xpipe and warlocks is next on the list.

It's a actually a small block 351 Windsor. But it's not anywhere near stock. Then again it's not like the 351 I had before it either. My thing is I use it for work, and the occasional show off.

My build is a 351 Windsor (I won't get into specifics) that's been punched out either .030 or .045. Can't remember. All the internals are custom work and forged steel etc including internal/external balancing etc. Head work was extremely vigorous including 3 angle valve jobs, re-routed water jackets and coolant passages, full port job, switched intake/exhaust valves and sizes etc. '69 Boss 302 intake with smoothed runners, re-drilled bolts, aluminum gap spacer etc. Holley 650 4bbl with a 2 inch spacer and much much more. MSD Ignition etc. This isn't even close to listing everything. Even still this relatively weak compared to my old engine. The only thing I wish we would have done was convert it to a roller motor and throw a decent pair of headers on it. The stock manifolds are ported to hell but still hinder power quite a bit. She gets up and moves even pushing snow with skimpy 235's on it in the winter. With the steep RV cam setup I've got I don't really make much power over 4,000 rpm but for what I use it for (which included daily driving for years) it suffices. The power difference is rather large but it was built for torque, not horsepower. At the time it was built in a hurry so we could get to work and then things got bolted on later as well.

It's got a rebuilt C6 (early 2000's) and Dana/Spicer 44 TTB and D60 axles with 3.73 gears as well, all upgraded shocks and leafs (and a few added). It will spin 33x12.5R16.5's if I let it ( I took out the 3 inch body lift I had before). I just throw it in 4 low and wait for auto-kickdown to do it's thing and we are off and puts the power down nicely. If I put it in 4 high I can chirp all 4 but only for a couple feet. Don't do that too much though, don't need the added stress on the drivetrain. Not fast by any real means but it's puts it down and you can feel it. It's a 3/4 ton that's had 1 1/2 ton in the bed at one point. No problem.