Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Unlike the RB20 & RB26, the RB25 engines use a BKR style plug not BCPR. Although in most situations these type plugs can be interchanged. If you want a long life plug than go with either a set of NGK BKR5EIX-11 Iridium IX or PFR5G-11 Platinum otherwise a set of BKR5E-11 or BKR5ES-11 copper core units will do the trick.

Unlike the RB20 & RB26, the RB25 engines use a BKR style plug not BCPR. Although in most situations these type plugs can be interchanged. If you want a long life plug than go with either a set of NGK BKR5EIX-11 Iridium IX or PFR5G-11 Platinum otherwise a set of BKR5E-11 or BKR5ES-11 copper core units will do the trick.

Why so cold?

The tip is actually denoted by the suffix i.e. E, ES, EIX... The prefix i.e. BKR, BCPR... refers to plug thread and body height.

and there is bugger all difference between bkr and bcpr in body size. both have same thread size and pretty much the same body size (I think the bkr is something like 2mm taller from memory)

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 9 months later...

Just looked at a mates 32 as he is having detonation issues. First check was the plugs and coilpacks. He has NGK PFR6G 11. I haven't ever used these plugs in either of my RB's and was wondering if they are suitable. The engine is a pretty stock one with exhaust, fmic and stock everything else with standard boost. I always thought the .8 gapped plugs were best and have used BKR6E in both my RB's being a redtop HR31 20 and S2 25, I am changing to BCPR7ES as I am runing a bit more boost. I have a pic of my new plugs yet to go in compared to the ones I pulled out of his 20 to compare. He plans to get some splitfires anyway but wanted to cancel out the plugs as an issue.

post-40211-0-99423000-1397795457_thumb.jpeg

Plugs rarely cause detonation unless they are too hot a heat range. His plugs look in reasonable shape. Detonation is usually caused by either running too lean or too much timing. Coils won't have anything to do with causing detonation. A misfire yes, but detonation no.

As for gap, the bigger the better. Standard gap is 1.1mm. You only need to reduce the gap when running much higher boost and/or the coils can't cope.

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...