Question about E3 Spark Plugs For Chevrolet Engines

[Larry E.]

Hearing a lot of good things on these type of Spark Plugs(E3). Has anybody tried these on the older
high compression solid lifter type Chevrolet engines?? If so do they make a noticeable difference on>
(Starting/MPG/Performance/Longevity & etc.)??
Please comment and thanks for advance. Larry

[Duke W.]

Re: Question about E3 Spark Plugs For Chevrolet Engines

I'm not familiar with them... can you explain?

Beyond that various spark plugs designs have been hyped for decades, but I've never seen any bonafide evidence that they work better than a plain vanilla appropriate heat range "two-dollar" spark plug as long as the OE ignition system is in proper working order.

I recall back in the sixties some outfit was advertising heavily what I recall they called "Fire Injector" spark plugs. Turns out they were nothing but surface gap type plugs used on light airplane engines, but way too cold for automotive use.

Duke

[Larry E.]

Re: Question about E3 Spark Plugs For Chevrolet Engines

[QUOTE=Duke Williams (22045);808190]I'm not familiar with them... can you explain?

Duke>Thanks for response. This guy on YouTube can explain it better then me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PStrsHD1dc8

Just a side note: E3 are used a lot by NHRA ProStockers(Chevy DRCE). Most of them are reporting that since
they change to them not one spark plug failure has been reported.

One more YouTube that explain them well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTRy_pVtE1g

[Michael W.]

Re: Question about E3 Spark Plugs For Chevrolet Engines

Not many people report failures of any plugs, and they out number E3 users by at least 10,000:1.

Read the comments below each of the two videos you posted. Don't fall for marketing scams.

[Duke W.]

Re: Question about E3 Spark Plugs For Chevrolet Engines

I'm highly dubious of the claims. As far as Pro Stock "failures" are concerned, when was the last time a spark plug failed on your vintage Corvette?

Over the years there have been various "fancy electrode" designs that are usually priced high and a lot of the profit goes into advertising hype. Big ground or multiple ground electrodes don't help propagate a spark. In fact they can quench a flame kernel because their mass is an effective heat sink. That's why OEMs have never used such plugs. Many modern cars use small platinum electrode plugs because platium is more erosion resistant than common nickel electrodes, and their small mass is a small heat sink, so the OEMs can increase the change interval to 100K miles and misfires are rare.

OEMs can go to extremes to get to the next EPA fuel economy whole number and very low emissions, so if these designs were actually effective at reducing misfires or lowering fuel consumption they would be standard equipment.

At the rate vintage cars accumulate mileage, they aren't worth the price. If you use unleaded fuel, your carburetor (or FI system) is in good working order along with the ignition system a common set of nickel electrode "two-dollar" spark plugs should last 20-30K miles, which might be a decade or more.

Back in the sixties I read the SAE papers on both the Delco TI and CD ignition systems. In the general discussion it was stated that as long as sufficient voltage and energy is delivered to the plug, more will not "improve" combustion, power, fuel economy, or any other performance parameter. Of course, fouling increases both the breakdown voltage and bleeds away energy, so systems need "reserve" to fire worn or fouled plugs, and the advantages of the TI were that it delivered double the per spark energy as the single point system, so plug life was extended.

The CD system was short lived, probably because CD systems are not a good architecture for road engines that usually run "lean" and throttled. Since such lean and low density mixtures are more difficult to ignite. They need a long duration spark, which are best provided by inductive systems. CD systems can deliver more per spark energy, but their sparks are very short duration compared to an inductive system, so misfires may be more common. That's why modern cars still use inductive systems.

I just laugh at MSD's "multiple spark" hype because even if engine revs are low enough to allow multiple sparks, the second or third is so retarded that it's not much better than a misfire, yet hundreds of thousands of guys have been drinking the Kool-Aide for decades.

Corvette distributors were for the most part sloppily assembled. Add to that decades of service with usually nothing more than points condenser, cap, and rotor changes, and they are likely in need of a "blueprint overhaul"... replace the bushings, if required, correct any breaker plate wobble, shim up the end play to the two to seven thou spec, and optimize the spark advance map for your engine configuration. The result is better performance, fuel economy, and smoother operation. Also make sure RFI wires don't have more than about 5K ohms resistance per foot and are properly routed per the service manuals, which will minimize the chances of cross fires.

So I don't use or recommend such "fancy electrode" plugs, but it's your car and money, and you are free to do as you wish.

A quick web search yielded the following link as the first independent review, and I'm sue there are others if you go to the following pages of links.

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/21/d...-money-on-gas/

Duke

[William F.]

Re: Question about E3 Spark Plugs For Chevrolet Engines

Back in the day of leaded premium, I had a "66 L79 which sure as everything got a LOT more mileage on plugs without missfires with an MSD 6L box than with standard ignition. Don't know if was ust the amplified voltage or the multi spark or combination. Most others with high compression engines back then had to clean or change plugs about every 500 miles with stand ignition. But back to E3 spark plugs, do we know that pro stockers really use them or just plug them since they are a sponsor???