Anybody heard of side-gapping a spark plug?

Big R

Heaven is so far away.
I was browsing around last night at work and came across this site (different subject, but this site none the less):
http://www.instructables.com/id/Save-Gas-And-Incerase-Horsepower-By-Side-Gapping-S/

and after googing the idea/process I found this site: http://www.eatonbalancing.com/blog/2009/06/11/spark-plug-side-gapping/ which has the same idea, just not to the extreme as instructables.com

Seems to make sense to me in theory but I wonder if anybody has ever tried this with results?
 
We tried it once on a buddies CB750 but aparently did it wrong cuz it didn't run worth a shit afterwards.
 
Big R said:
I was browsing around last night at work and came across this site (different subject, but this site none the less):
http://www.instructables.com/id/Save-Gas-And-Incerase-Horsepower-By-Side-Gapping-S/

and after googing the idea/process I found this site: http://www.eatonbalancing.com/blog/2009/06/11/spark-plug-side-gapping/ which has the same idea, just not to the extreme as instructables.com

Seems to make sense to me in theory but I wonder if anybody has ever tried this with results?

It's not going to net you much on one of these old bikes unless you have a pretty stonkin' ignition system with spark to spare. Even then, I've not heard anyone actually having a dyno sheet to prove results, a point noted almost immediately on the Eaton balancing site. Yeah is 'feels' like it should work but doesn't gain you much since the spark is going to naturally jump from the pointiest part it can.....the edge of the cathode and electrode, so you're already getting the effect they are describing.
There may be some benefit to 'unshrouding' the spark kernel which is more like what they are getting at on the eaton site, but again you really need a powerful ignition and probably a poorly designed combustion chamber like say on old B0block flat head fork V8.

I'm a firm believer in privileging spark energy though, but I think your efforts could be directly elsewhere for larger effect. What kind of bike are you building?
 
68 CL 175. I have a few sets of plugs sitting around and figured as long as nothing detonates, can't really hurt to try it. Besides, at 175cc, every little bit could help, right?

Swagger said:
Even then, I've not heard anyone actually having a dyno sheet to prove results, a point noted almost immediately on the Eaton balancing site.

And that's one of the things that i was looking for last night - dyno proof
 
Once you get it running, take the 175 down to WestHills Honda in Moon. They have a Dyno and would pull some numbers for ya.
 
I didn't think PA had the technology to do that! I'll have to look into it....
 
I've heard of a turbulator the adds extra swirl to air as it enters the head, and I heard of a racer who intalled spark plugs at the bend of the header- the cables ran underneath the tank but didn't connect to anything.

Great psych's!

For real performance enhancement, get your exhaust pointing forward. The faster you go the more back-pressure increases! Hang on!
 
Uncle Ernie said:
I've heard of a turbulator the adds extra swirl to air as it enters the head, and I heard of a racer who intalled spark plugs at the bend of the header- the cables ran underneath the tank but didn't connect to anything.

Great psych's!

For real performance enhancement, get your exhaust pointing forward. The faster you go the more back-pressure increases! Hang on!

Very subtle Unc! hehe
 
Side Gapping Theory Article said:
On both the two and four stroke engines, the immediate benefit is typically observed in engine starting where it’s quicker or with much less starter effort.

So all my bikes would start quicker than the first stab of the button? Maybe even before I touched it??? AWESOME! Oh come on...

Side Gapping Theory Article said:
The general premise behind side gapping lies in getting the spark to fire directly on the end of the grounding electrode instead of having the spark shrouded by the electrode strap.

Either way, the cylinder head is full of a highly compressed fuel/air mixture and the exact orientation of the spark to the electrode won't really matter. It may make a very small, possibly immeasurable difference on bikes which are poorly timed, running the wrong plugs, or have carburettor or ignition issues.

Simply put, I've never had a problem with any machine thats been tuned properly and I've never used this method. You'd get more benefit by 'traditionally' regapping and cleaning the plugs and then making sure the ignition and carburettion are spot on. Once you've done that, then decide if you want to do this. Chances are you won't, because your bike will be running like a champ again.

Cheers guys - boingk
 
I don't see how it would make a difference... You still need optimal gap for your plugs to work properly and it will always ark at the closest point. Its all the same unless you have stronger ignition and even that has its limitations compared to fuel mixture, flow of gasses, timing and etc...

Question: Wouldn't that hinder your plugs? you've cut so much away that if and when you get build up on em there wont be any other path of less resistance...

You would almost think that the guys who make spark plugs for a living know what they are doing.
 
Shorter side electrode means a shorter heat path so it will run cooler.
More airspace means it could 'light up' a leaner mixture as there is more chance of some fuel/air mix being in proximity of spark (its why plugs used to be 'indexed')

PJ
 
More airspace means it could 'light up' a leaner mixture as there is more chance of some fuel/air mix being in proximity of spark
Really? If so, I'm interested.

But, having said that, consider for a moment a relatively average bike running 9:1 compression ratio. It sucks in fuel and air mixture, and for the purposes of this example we'll stick to cylinder volume only (well designed & tuned engines should manage more than cylinder volume). Atmospheric pressure is 14.7psi, so times that by 9 to get your cylinder head pressure. It equals 132.3psi in this case. Allowing 5% leakdown you'd still get 125.7psi, and thats not even taking into account expansion due to engine heat.

My point is, the 'fuel in the vincinity of the spark' arguement is dead on its feet. Theres a very high pressure environment in the cylinder head, and this environment is made up of a very flammable gas under pressure. It takes up every available space, its not some ethereal substance thats floating around willy-nilly. Anyway, under these conditions the threshold of ignition isn't very large; hence we can set it off with what amounts to a spark measuring (in most cases) less than a millimeter.

Given the above reasoning (basic workings of an engine) I really don't think it would make much of a difference whether you 'traditionally' or 'side' gapped your plug. The 'heat path being shorter' arguement is also flawed - it would make the plug perform worse (become hotter) under load because there is less material to absorb the same amount of heat. Not to mention the main heat-path is the central electrode, the heat range being dictated by the length of the ceramic insulator around it and in the body of the plug.

I am, however, more than willing to listen to any evidence or real-life proof that anyone has to the contrary. I also agree it'd be an interesting experiment.

Cheers - boingk (hope I didn't sound like a wanker laying all that out ::) )
 
I will admit I don't know allot when it comes down to it. Suck, Squeeze, Bang, Blow is about it for me and the little things you can do to improve some of them.

However the 5.7 Chrysler "Hemi"

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/new-mopar-hemi.html

Michael E. Gemmel wrote: “Each cylinder has an ignition coil pack over one spark plug, and a regular plug wire connected to the other spark plug. Further, the coil pack also has a plug wire attached to it that extends to the opposite cylinder bank. It appears that each cylinder shares a coil pack with another cylinder. Each of the two plugs on a given cylinder is fired by a separate coil. One plug has a coil directly attached, and the other is fired via an ignition wire connected to a coil located on another cylinder on the opposite bank. The benefits would be one-half the number of coils (8 vs. 16) compared to each plug having its own coil, and of course less weight.”

“Cryptojoe” wrote: “Being the good Motech Graduate I am, I can say that the extra plug fires during the power stroke to more fully burn the hydrocarbons. Unlike the Japanese systems of the late 1970s and early 1980s, which avoided the use of catalytic converters, the second ignition allows additional power in the down stroke while lowering the need for restrictive catalyst plates in the converter. This increases breathing, adding to horsepower output as well.

“As you may recall, in the 1980s Japanese manufacturers reduced unburned hydrocarbons by placing spark plugs either in the exhaust pipe (which fired with every piston ignition) or in the exhaust manifold (which fired each time their corresponding cylinder fired). Chrysler morphed this idea to include dual fired plugs on each cylinder, which allows the firing to take place closer to top dead center, and then again when the piston is on the back side of the power stroke.”

Patrick added: “This [also reduces] NOx and O3 (ozone) emissions. Full combustion results in heat, water, and carbon dioxide. While a very small amount of NOx emissions are produced, they are only significant during incomplete or partial combustion, due to the lack of available oxygen, high temperatures, and various chemical reactions. That's why catalytic converters have been standard on cars for the past 3 decades. The extra set of spark plugs on the HEMI and on previous engines are designed to reduce emissions BEFORE a catalyst is needed. They add some horsepower, but not very much. The only exception to this rule is on top-fuel dragsters that almost literally 'pour' gas down the venturis. A single plug can't burn that much gas, regardless of the ignition’s power output.


I would digest that in to "More linear spark will not help much. Even to the point of two spark plugs per cylinder"

I would bet Daimler-Benz who spent hundreds of millions? in engine research knows a thing or two that a few yokels on the internet don't.
 
Good quote, Basement! Interesting to see that the R&D fellows of the large companies came to the same conclusion.

Another point not mentioned there is that two plugs do provide a more uniform flame front on engines that have very large combustion chambers. Big-twin cruisers are a good example of this, espcially a lot of the Japanese ones that are 1800 or even 1900cc - those are some huuuuge combsutions chambers! Again, this would be mostly for emissions and timing advantages - a chamber that big would need a lot of advance otherwise. They probably still do, even with two plugs.

- boingk
 
I AM kinda interested in the dual-stage spark though......
T'would be interesting to see what gains could be had in one of these old engines doing that. First spark at whatever standard timing is and a second spark "just after" ...dunno what timing I'd use there...to continue the burn. It would require dual coils I'd think but maybe not, certainly dual ignition or some other way of providing the second spark.

Hmmm........
 
Higher voltage than needed to create spark gives a longer duration, its why modern systems produce 50,000+ volts when only about 18,000V is needed

PJ
 
crazypj said:
Higher voltage than needed to create spark gives a longer duration, its why modern systems produce 50,000+ volts when only about 18,000V is needed

PJ

True, though from my experience you start needing "high end" plugs to cope and not burn up in short order. Ya know what I'd love to see? A dyno series in which one engine is given a series of mods. One of which I'd like to see would be spark plugs to finally lay out the hype for better or worse. I've seen guys dropping money on weird gimmicky stuff hoping for extra power only to find that the speed they wanted came more from the wallet being lighter.
 
Swagger said:
I AM kinda interested in the dual-stage spark though......
T'would be interesting to see what gains could be had in one of these old engines doing that. First spark at whatever standard timing is and a second spark "just after" ...dunno what timing I'd use there...to continue the burn. It would require dual coils I'd think but maybe not, certainly dual ignition or some other way of providing the second spark.

Hmmm........
74 Arctic Cat el tigre':

74_667.jpg


Its a 2 smoke so, the head would be quite simple... don't even know where to start with a 4 stroke.
 
well i see two plugs but is it a dual stage spark or are they firing both at the same time?
 
Back
Top Bottom