Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Also I found this from NGK pdf file.

Using anti-seize on spark plugs will do the following:

Alters the tightening torque by up to 20% which may cause over-tightening (or breaking the spark bolt)

Reduces electrical ground contact if the anti-seize is non-conductive or semi-conductive

Isolates more heat into the spark plug therefore causing the plug to increase the heat range above specification (can cause detonation/pre-ignition)

The thing with NGK plugs is that they are already self-lubricating and corrosion resistant. They have to be installed dry. Never put anti-seize on them.

Remember to check the gap!

And CORRECT TORQUE !

https://www.google.com.au/url?q=http://www.ngksparkplugs.com/pdf/dyk_5points.pdf&sa=U&ei=rv1OVYmzNZD98QXKjoDIAQ&ved=0CAsQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNEpns05Q0jxFEOWvviPoR09Z_JXKQ

Bullshit anti seaze will insulate the plug.

Against heaps of pressure, no way.

Give me an example of when that's happened.

Hi Ben can be more specific with your quote I'm having trouble understanding witch side you coming from..... or I've had too many beers hehe

What about the shoulder of the plug?

Threads could be fully insulated but the shoulder/seal washer are going to conduct power for the ground.

But forums are great places for tossing around thoughts, so each to his own.

I like my match stick dob of nickel never seize on plug threads. (certainly not excessive amounts)

Hi Ben can be more specific with your quote I'm having trouble understanding witch side you coming from..... or I've had too many beers hehe

I'm very skeptical that you could ever put enough anti seaze to insulate the sparkplug.

When doing up the thread it will be squeezed out from the contacting surfaces of the thread, and like jiffo said the face if the plug will make contact.

As far as the torque issue, its not a critical item like head bolts.

If you decide to use a torque wrench, that's cool, and as mentioned using a lubricant does change the torque, but in reality its not that hard to do the plugs up correctly by hand. Which I will continue to do.

I always use anti-seize on stainless plug threads, I have had too many get stuck in the head. No need for it with NGK's.

As for tightening the plugs, I never use the torque method, just the half turn after the crush washer seats.

What about the shoulder of the plug?

Ok none of the leading brands NGK Bosch recommend putting anti-seize or oil on the plugs so why would you even when they give you reasons why not too......

My thoughts are how can you be sure that the wash, seal, gasket, will be substantial amount contact all you need is a bit of gunk on the face where the gasket will sit for it not to conduct. The thread is there to do 2 jobs conduct and hold in place.

Also you know that loctite silver anti-seize is made for aluminium not the nickel. Your better off using graphite 50 anti-seize from loctite.

But your choice.......

http://www.loctite.com.au/lubrication-anti-seize-4096.htm

Ok none of the leading brands NGK Bosch recommend putting anti-seize or oil on the plugs so why would you even when they give you reasons why not too......

Bosch are the ones using shitty Stainless in alloy heads, and I really don't like using breaker bars on plugs. Try it on a long thread VQ plug, it's not fun.

I will keep doing what works for me, thanks anyway.

If you were building an F1 engine or something tuned to the Nth degree, perhaps some of this argument would be valid, but certainly not here.

Getting worked up over very little.

For starters the quality control on sparklers is practically non existent.

Had a Repco spark plug cleaner/testing machine, nobody bothers these days as plugs are so cheap.

But your old plug would get a grit blast in one section of the machine, then you'd gap the plug, install it in the test section and start building air pressure all the while watching the spark through a window into the pressure chamber.

Very rare for any plug, new or used, to keep consistently sparking over 120psi. Push the pressure to 150 and the spark became very sporadic. Obviously the spark generator wasn't up to that produced by today's electronic ignition systems but the exercise showed the poor quality control of brand new plugs. It always took a lot of plug testing to end up with a decent set.

To me this also showed the benefit as much IGN advance as possible.

The more IGN advance, the lower the cylinder pressure.

Every bit helps and another reason I'm a big fan of W/M as you can add so much IGN timing.

But I digress.

The spark from your coil pack arrives at the electrode via a puny spring with a fraction of the cross sectional area compared to that of the plug's shoulder against the head.

An interesting discussion all the same.

Nah I'm not getting worked up.

I just couldn't believe that normal nickel or copper based anti-seize would be used

If you going to use it. Use the one that's compatible with alloy head and that's got a good electrical conducting properties.

That's all :D

And depending on what lengths you love ya skyline I would spark test 4 dozen to get the right set if I had the money :)

Seriously if you think a thin smear of antiseize on the thread will insulate the earth from the plug you have been eating too much of it, but like I said with stainless threads you are mad not to lubricate it with something... Or just not use shitty Bosch plugs.

The high volts and amps of your IGN won't have much trouble with a wipe of never seize.

It's when you're talking milliamps that this is a concern although I've seen anodes fizzing while the operator hit the press-to-transmit button on his HF.

When I built my boat I bolted on the anodes. (usual practice is to weld them)

Things went well for many years, zero electrolysis then during one slip I decided to give the bolts a wipe with an Epicraft product, can't remember its name, but it was like green toothpaste and was brilliant at eliminating corrosion between dissimilar metals.

Well at next slip my anodes were still perfect, hadn't done a fart of good and the prop was yum, yum, yum.

Lesson learnt.

post-73571-0-11889100-1431306630_thumb.jpg

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...