legacycentral bbs

http://www.haloplug.com/osc/product_inf ... GTYPE=HALO

I really am excited about testing these plugs out, here is a quick link to the ULR for Legacy's 1989-1991

No offence but that is the most retarded shit I've ever seen. Is this the same company that brought us the... http://www.turbonator.com/

Also how much of this company do you own for trying to push this so hard?

magicmike wrote:No offence but that is the most retarded shit I've ever seen. Is this the same company that brought us the... http://www.turbonator.com/

Also how much of this company do you own for trying to push this so hard?

I don't own any of the company nor do I stand to make any monies what so ever in endorsing it, also that turbonator website does have some fact to it .... but I would rather make my own and have in the past...

Vortex generators makes sense.... Hmmm VORTEC Chevy V8 heads sound familiar with the swirl technology???

Don't call someone an idiot before you do your homework..... even if an apple falls on your head! :shock:

I never called you an idiot but I am willing to. Based on that website for the plugs if you think the spark is going to "travel" beyond the "Halo" ring you are an idiot. Also if you think the turbonator works you are an idiot.

This shit gets better everytime

I'm not going to discredit the plugs immediately, but that is the WORST website I have seen to sell an automotive product. There's no scientific explanation of the benefits of that design...

And, I'd prefer this discussion continuing in another thread, as this is an FAQ thread meant only for informational purposes.

Wow. Some people'll buy anything. Religious spark plugs?

"Let us allow the Spark of God into our combustion chambers,
and give thanks thereof. Thank you, God, for igniting my air/fuel
mixture for me; without your divine spark, we would have to worship
the Dark Lord Diesel-bub. Amen."

Turbonator = crap, by the way. It's just very appealing to those who
don't like the idea of having to do real work to their engines. Shortcuts
are nice, but not when they don't lead anywhere useful.

The chances of the halo plugs being any better are slim.

The vortex thing. Do some searching on here, and the net, and you'll find that it's not really cracked up to what it claims to be.

That's all I want to hear on either of those subjects in this thread!

Josh........... your thread is SPARK PLUG FAQ, not anything in particular.

With the halo plug, one dones not know until it is tested. Just like platinum plugs, vortex generators, iridium plugs or copper ones.

I think "most of us".... at least that are adult can talk in an un-biased way about automotive technology. Unless you want to close these threads fear of name calling and adolescent behavior, which I can thoroughly understand on an subject......

I wanted to print my piece of my memberships rebuttal...

Thank you.............[/img] :D

This thread is a little specifically geared towards the NGK's.

Try them out by all means if you want, and let us know how they work.

What I won't tollerate is belittling of other users......there are more tactful ways to say some of the things that were said.

I don't think the website owners even know how it's supposed to work. It makes no sense to me and seems to show and describe two different things. I upgrade cell sites, so I think I have a basic understanding of electricity enough to not see how this would do anything but reduce the likelyhood of ignition with it's lack of a clear sharp edge to jump from. And if it worked like they said, it would maybe contribute to detonation unless the computer pulled timing. Doesn't sound like that would help power or fuel economy to me. If this plug workes as advertised and you needed it then you'd probably just be masking some problem. Poor ignition system? Plug fouling?

Steve

Steve I will pass your answer to the engineering department at Halo and see what they have to say about that.

Also I figuire I will try them out since they have a 100% money back guarantee. You test them out don't like em, money given back and I think they give you 90 days or more.

I like the idea of Halo's tests after 100K miles on ones they sold to the public prior. I don't know what they did for improvements, but would love to find out....I plan to test them in my 10 ton 1976 GMC C-60 ramp truck, with the 366 V8. It has a 4-barrel carb so no electronics, except the ignition.

Also I hate it when people belittle one another just because something is out of the norm, different, unproven or un-tested.

Show me facts and figures, drawings and dyno results and it all is relevent then. As far as NGK.... I will try them and let everyone know on the dyno if they make any difference and driving too, between the halo and them..... I do hate Bosch platinums, have tested them all and they load up my Tahoe's engine and after a while of some 25 miles or so my ECM will throw a code!

Scouring the Halo Plug website for information turns up nothing useful. They've just got stories and figures. The technical page is like 20 words long and does not help.

OK, if you are actually willing to try these plugs, then dyno results are definately in order. I'll eat my words if you can prove these plugs yield a performance increase anywhere, just compare them to the proper NGK copper plug so we can look at a side-by-side dyno comparison. The only difference should be the plugs. Even give your ECU the stated 15 minutes needed to adjust to the new combustion characteristics before the Halo run.

Do the Halos even have heat range indices? There's like no useful information anywhere on that site.

I just don't see how the Halo plug could result in "more complete combustion" than a standard "L"-shaped plug. A spark is generated at the proper time and the air/fuel mixture ignites. It's not like the spark plug itself could be responsible for how much of that mixture ignites; unless it's maybe not working at all. Any spark will ignite the compressed mixture in the combustion chamber; hell even with no spark, enough compression would cause ignition.

Legacy777 wrote:
That's all I want to hear on either of those subjects in this thread!

Which part of this did people not understand?

legacy92ej22t wrote:

Legacy777 wrote:
That's all I want to hear on either of those subjects in this thread!

Which part of this did people not understand?

Probably everything.

The spark plug hasn't changed very much for 100 years for a reason. If there really was a design that would enable much better fuel economy and everything else that these "Fancy" plugs offer, then they would be in every OEM application on the planet. Because manufacturers spend millions to met CAFE standards on economy. End of subject on "Fancy" plugs.

One thing though. If you want a hotter spark, widen your gap a little. A hotter spark does equal more complete combustion. But on a DI, like our Legacy's, you could delay ignition timing to much and cause a CEL. I had an MSD 6A on my '84, and only noticed a power difference when I opened my plug gap to .06". The car ran smoother with the MSD 6A, but wasn't anymore powerful untill the plug gap was widened.

One thing though. If you want a hotter spark, widen your gap a little. A hotter spark does equal more complete combustion. But on a DI, like our Legacy's, you could delay ignition timing to much and cause a CEL. I had an MSD 6A on my '84, and only noticed a power difference when I opened my plug gap to .06". The car ran smoother with the MSD 6A, but wasn't anymore powerful untill the plug gap was widened.

Explain to me how widen the gap makes a "hotter" spark......

Simple knowledge of what makes a spark happen will debunk any bullshit claim that the Halo plug is any better.

I bet it works, like a regular shitty plug does, and I bet they just attribute the fact that it works saying that there is some lightning bolt technology involved.

GT8, I thought you left us for good.

Legacy777 wrote:

One thing though. If you want a hotter spark, widen your gap a little. A hotter spark does equal more complete combustion. But on a DI, like our Legacy's, you could delay ignition timing to much and cause a CEL. I had an MSD 6A on my '84, and only noticed a power difference when I opened my plug gap to .06". The car ran smoother with the MSD 6A, but wasn't anymore powerful untill the plug gap was widened.

Explain to me how widen the gap makes a "hotter" spark......

From PM's:

Dr.Outback...

"Sure.

When you widen the plug gap, it takes more voltage to jump the gap. Giving you a more powerful, "hotter", spark. A hotter spark gives more complete combustion and delays the ignition timing slightly. A stock ignition coil probably gives at least 50kv. Which under even the most extreme driving conditions is more then enough to fire the plug, no matter how much cylinder pressure there is. Engineers would rather have more available voltage then the car will ever need.

A spark with more voltage is also less likely to get blown out by high cylinder pressures, i.e. when a turbo spools up. But the hotter spark will take a toll on the life of the plugs.

In other words, a stock coil has enough capacity to handle a wider gap then what the specs call for. At the spec gap, the coil is probably only using 30kv-40kv."


Legacy777..."I'm still not convinced....especially with turbo engines. The conventional wisdom I've heard is that if you run high boost you may want to reduce the gap to keep the spark from blowing out.

I do typically run my plug gap at the higher end of the range, but don't go too far. There's bound to be a limit at what the stock ignition can do. The larger the gap, the more the resistance grows, and the more energy that's needed for the spark to jump the gap."


Dr.Outback..."Of course there is a limit. I don't think that the stock ignition could handle a gap wider then .050".

The more energy or voltage accross the gap, the "hotter" the spark.

If you narrow the gap it will take less voltage to jump the gap. But the spark might be blown out by the cylinder pressure. (Edit: You will also advance the ignition timing slightly.) At the very least you will not be getting the most efficient combustion. And remember, a stock ignition only gives you one spark per cycle.

MSD recommends widening the gap of the spark plugs to take full advantage of the extra power their ignition has. On the MSD 6A it was a maximum of .060. But it burned up the plugs in 12k miles."

I've read thru this, but I'm not quite sure what's correct for my build.
I've got an ej20g shortblock underneath our stock ej22t stuff. Due to the heads and the sb, the compression ratio sits around 9:1.
From what I'm told, I could stand to lose 1* of timing per psi of positive pressure. I'm still not sure what a colder plug is, but is it proper for my application? Can a colder or hotter plug help my detonation problem?

Take a look at this thread, too, Tristan:

http://bbs.legacycentral.org/viewtopic.php?p=173184

Basically, you have to pull your plugs and look at them. If you see heat damage to the porcelain then you may need colder plugs. You could also just try putting colder plugs in. If they help the detonation problem and don't get fouled, then keep them.

So I'm correct in assuming colder plugs decrease cylinder temperatures, thus, decreasing the chances of detonation under boost?

tris91ricer wrote:So I'm correct in assuming colder plugs decrease cylinder temperatures, thus, decreasing the chances of detonation under boost?

Tristan,

Are you experiencing detonation? If not, run the normal plug for the ej22t.

As for what you posted, yeah that's pretty much correct.

Well, I guess my reply didn't go thru, so let's try this again. . .

I'm not sure whether or not I'm detonating; its only hearsay, and I'm hearing two different stories.
Eric at FF built my motor. He's driven it and doesn't hear anything. ('Cept my front diff clunking )
Nick (555bcturbo) has ridden with me this past New Years' and he says he heard some detonation, enough he was worried.
My thoughts on this:
Since I'm running a franken-motor -- ej20g shortblock with ej22t heads-- my compression ratio is approximately 9:1, which, is a little too high for turbos. (The low end and throttle response are great, though! I love this setup!) with the high-compression, I'm assuming my chances for detonation are high-er, because the cylinder temps are hotter than normal.
And because of this, I understand it could stand to lose ~1°/psi of boost? Does widening the gap really alter the timing?

In any case, I put in the BKR7E-11s, and gapped them about .046, each. I know I can't go any higher than .050, so I'm trying a close, but conservative setting. I bought two sets (they're cheap!) so I'm running the first set gapped by me, and if it causes problems, I've got another boxed-up set I can be safe with.
Hesitation is still there, but not nearly as noticeable. Car feels smoother, but only time will tell.
I'll reset the ECU and read some codes, too. With the SM, I'll also be able to tell what the timing's doing.

As I said on AIM, I think your gap is too big. I use .040 gap in my nonturbo, and that's right in the middle of the acceptable range.

You're on boost too, so you need to go smaller.

After a couple of onramps, I think I'm at a good place. It could be the new plugs, period, but I'd like to think the colder range and the bigger gap help.
Car feels faster, boost seems smoother than before, so I'm happy.

tristan, i didnt know you had the EXACT same setup. i thought u were running full ej20g. so the car feels way better? i may have to try that. i just recently changed my plugs though.