Pulstar Spark Plugs

[bradrs]

Yes, I designed ignitions for them. Not THE OEM ones though

 

[Brianawd]

I have tried lots of plugs over the years and I always came back to ngk. When I got my discovery it had this miss. So I replaced the wires first to see it that would fix it. Nope still has a miss. So looked up plugs and all the disco forms said to use bosch. But all the forms also talked about how they still had a miss here and there. So I went with NGK. In the 50k miles I put on it. I never once had a miss. My friend has is not and he had the plugs changed my a landrover shop. They put bosch back in and it started missing. So he made them put NGK back in. Runs perfect.

In my galant I ran bpr6es when on e85 and bpr7es when on pump.
In the evo I run 7s for both pump and e85

 

[GSTwithPSI]

Quoting bradrs:
Yes, I designed ignitions for them. Not THE OEM ones though



Then which ones?

 

[bradrs]

One of the aftermarket ones

 

[GSTwithPSI]

Which one?

 

[cheekychimp]

Average life for a set of plugs?

I know that's subjective but I probably change mine out less than I should. There are a lot of different views in here, so I'm going to do a bit of research on this but despite the warnings, I'd like to leave the Pulstars in for a bit so that I can post up some pics of them after they have been used for a few months to see if any of you lot can see any tell tale signs of degradation/problems.

When the time comes, I'll swap the Pulstars out for something else (need to do a bit more research on this) and see if I notice any difference, but I'd like to do that before they reach the end of their life so I'm not making a comparison with shagged plugs.

 

[bradrs]

As far I have seen, there is only one aftermarket ignition that was designed for the 4G63. Everything else is just adapted from universal boxes.

Anyhow, I said I wasn't going to make this a commercial, and I also don't want to make it into a discussion about other stuff like ignition boxes.

Things to watch for on the Pulstars over time, is whether or not the heat range really is good for the car. There are some really good documents on reading plug heat ranges out there. The other potential issue would be misfires. Since they probably have to make a custom ceramic body, there is always the possibility of it being not a great fit in the spark plug boots. And if it's not a tight seal, you will develop misfires over time. Did you say which plug wires you are using?

I'd personally see if I could get as much as possible for a barely used set on ebay. But like I said, I've seen this exact same sort of technology appear many times before, and disappear after a while because any claims made can't be proven, and any testing done is questionable at best.

 

[prove_it]

Your still not coming clean about your credentials. Your making bold statements sir.

I hope you didn't just slap a COP kit together and claim to have built ignitions.

 

[bradrs]

No, I don't consider that building an ignition either. Which is why I said there was only one out there that was designed for a 4G63. But we are digressing from the topic of how useless these Pulstar plugs are.

My only point in bringing it up, was that the Electric Field concept is part of how plugs jump the gap and create the spark. It isn't just marketing points, the marketing people get that from the engineers that design the system. Prior to the spark, the current is not flowing, and the lower resistance is not as meaningful. Even afterwards, the difference in resistance values of copper vs. platinum is fairly meaningless when you have a coil with several thousand ohms of resistance in series, along with plug wires of up to a few K each.

I don't see anything bold about stating things that could be easily looked up in any book on physics or electromagnetism.

 

[toybreaker]

Quoting prove_it:
Your still not coming clean about your credentials. Your making bold statements sir.

I hope you didn't just slap a COP kit together and claim to have built ignitions.





credentials?

... are you f***ing serious? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/banghead.gif



I've been working with this man on a key part of one my own projects, and guru does not even come close to describing him or his abilities.



This man is on a whole 'nother level.




... one of the few men of the web who's information is drawn from personal experience at the deep end of the pool.



In all my years in the business, (working with some pretty damn savvy cats,) I have never met anyone that even approaches this man's hands on knowledge.

... especially when it comes to ignition systems




We are incredibly lucky to have him posting here on the .org.



'nuff said? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

[prove_it]

Hey, I didn't know him. He's new here and I had no way to know. If you says he's all that, then I'm all ears.

No hard feelings. It's the internet you know, can't always know who is who and who knows what. I'm glad to hear there is another badass engineer on here. It's why I love the ORG.

 

[GSTwithPSI]

Quoting toybreaker:
credentials?

... are you f***ing serious?



I've been working with this man on a key part of one my own projects, and guru does not even come close to describing him or his abilities.



This man is on a whole 'nother level.




... one of the few men of the web who's information is drawn from personal experience at the deep end of the pool.



In all my years in the business, (working with some pretty damn savvy cats,) I have never met anyone that even approaches this man's hands on knowledge.

... especially when it comes to ignition systems




We are incredibly lucky to have him posting here on the .org.



'nuff said?



John, can tell us where his hands on experience comes from then, since he won't? I agree that everything he said is totally correct, and as he said, can be found with a quick Google search. When you enter a conversation claiming to be an ignition designer though, people are naturally going to want to know what ignition he designed. Avoiding the question for one reason or another is pointless, and doesn't make him look credible. Just because you know he's a legit dude doesn't mean the rest of us do. You roll in here with 6 posts claiming to be "a guy who actually designed ignitions for a living" and people are going to start scratching their heads and asking questions. I don't think prove_it was trying to be a dick, he's just legitimately curious like the rest of us. A wealth of knowledge is always welcomed here, and we are grateful to have guys like you (and him) at our fingertips.

 

[bradrs]

Avoiding the question isn't pointless. If I told you I designed the XXX-X ignition, then the thread would derail asking about that ignition. And if I didn't mention anything about my knowledge, based on your comment you would judge the value of my input based on my post count. My first post in the thread had everything you needed to know about these Pulstars, no comments on that.

Someone made it sound like my comment was something I learned from commercials, I simply pointed out that with my experience, that isn't the case. Unfortunately, instead of getting back on topic, now this is derailing to ask me about my resume. While I don't think any great technical information on Pulstars will be lost if the thread derailed, i don't want to go over my entire life history in this thread.

Here's a good derailer. I just saw people talking about putting LS2 coils on DSMs. Do it, and you are risking blowing your motor. Isn't that a more interesting derailer?

 

[GSTwithPSI]

You write 3 paragraphs about not wanting to derail the thread while still derailing the thread. One sentence saying "I designed the XXX-X ignition" would have sufficed. Even more ironic, is now people are probably judging the value of your input based on your post count <i>because</i> you said you're an ignition designer. If your aim was to reinforce your credibility, you aren't doing a very good job convincing anyone. People on the internet claim to be a lot of sh*t, and usually end up sounding like your last few posts. So, see why people might be scratching their heads?

It's clear that you know what the hell you're talking about. And, if John vouches for you, that carries weight with the community. But not all of us are ignition designers. We don't understand the "why" of what you are saying. Your reply, albeit being technically sound, doesn't really give a lot of explanation "why" what you are saying is true. Telling us all to go look in some physics books feels like you are being condescending, and people typically don't take well to that.

Electrons prefer to jump from a smaller and/or pointed electrode. Why? f*** if I know, that part is still way over my head; maybe you can explain it. What I do understand, however, is that a smaller electrode is only good up to a certain point. You can't have sharp needle pointed spark plug tip. While it would be easiest to pull electrons from a sharp pointed electrode, a sharp pointed electrode of any material exposed to combustion would erode after only a few seconds, and would be useless to conduct anything. This is why spark plugs use square ended electrodes (square edges, not square electrodes). Electrons that bridge the spark gap are emitted from the sharp edges at the circumference of the electrode’s end. Over time, these edges erode on ALL spark plugs, but materials such as platinum and iridium erode slower than precious metals such as copper and nickel/chrome. As the edges wear, the spark becomes weaker and less reliable. Hence, you will get better ignition with a smaller center electrode, however, conventional metals like copper electrodes cannot be made smaller because of their poor resistance to erosion. This is why it's commonly thought that iridium and platinum materials extend the service life of a plug, because they actually do. These materials have a higher resistance to erosion. Using a material with a higher resistance to erosion allows for a smaller electrode design to be implemented, thereby increasing performance of the plug. Most people don't realize this fact. Iridium and platinum plugs are simply marketed as "improving performance", without providing consumers as to the why or how. And, you can bet they damn sure aren't going to go look in any physics book to find out. We are no different here. Unless you take the time to explain yourself, you are going to simply get dismissed, regardless of how much you actually know. Simply being "a guy who actually designed ignitions for a living" and having John vouch for your expertise doesn't really help anyone comprehend what you are trying to convey to all of us. It also doesn't make you look credible in my book, as we are on the internet after all. If you have a wealth of knowledge to share, that's awesome. Like I said earlier, we welcome it here. But if your intent is to make believers out of us, you're going about it the wrong way.

What I have just said comes from things I've read and have been told. I'm no ignition designer, and damn sure no scientist. If anything above is inaccurate, please correct it in a way that allows us simpletons to comprehend it without having to seek out a physics book. Like most people here, I have always done what works. Copper plugs have never failed me, and I'll stick by that opinion until they do. On the other hand, I've tried a few sets of iridium plugs, and they worked like absolute sh*t. Don't know why, but they ran horribly. Maybe it was something unique to my setup, or the 4G63 in general. Who knows. I never cared to find out, because copper plugs always worked for me and that was all the reason I needed. At the end of the day, people do what works, no matter how much or how little science backs it up. And, like any other mod, perception of performance gain or loss is what blurs the line between fact and fiction.

I appreciate you taking the time to post here, and really put up some info that isn't talked about regularly. We're all car guys here, so quit being so defensive, and share what you know. I may be wrong, but I doubt Paul or the rest of us will care if you talk about an ignition system you personally designed for our platform. Lastly, I'm sorry if I come off as being brash. I hope you don't take offence to what I'm saying, because none is intended.

 

[prove_it]

bradrs,

Every thread gets derailed on this site. It's normal and we are all used to it, and yes I wanna know why GM coils blow up motors. I really would love to have a beer with you and soak up your knowledge.

 

[bradrs]

Quoting GSTwithPSI:
You write 3 paragraphs about not wanting to derail the thread while still derailing the thread. One sentence saying "I designed the XXX-X ignition" would have sufficed. Even more ironic, is now people are probably judging the value of your input based on your post count because you said you're an ignition designer.



I got this far, got the gist of what your post was going to be about, and now I can sincerely say

TLDR

 

[prove_it]

He's just mad.

He does that.

 

[coyotes]

I'm amazed this stupid thread is still going.

That said Bosch +4s make hella power dawg

 

[bradrs]

Quoting prove_it:
bradrs,

Every thread gets derailed on this site. It's normal and we are all used to it, and yes I wanna know why GM coils blow up motors. I really would love to have a beer with you and soak up your knowledge.



I was noticing that most threads get derailed on here. Now I guess I won't feel so bad derailing them.

It isn't all GM coils. Just the D585, which I think are the only ones with that big external heat sink sticking out of the epoxy. I was testing a batch of different LS coils on the test bench, and found a dangerous behaviour just on the D585.

Most transistorized coils build current up, but have a designed in current limit. This can be for a number of reasons - try to protect the coil, try to protect the coil driver, try to keep the ignition fuse from blowing, etc. On the earlier LS1 coils, and many other coil and driver designs, including our DSM ignitors, the transistor limits the current at a certain amount. Then to keep the current at that fixed level, the driving transistor comes out of saturation(instead of being a short to ground, it now has more resistance). This limits the current, but also generates heat in the driver. So pushing the coils to that limit will kill them. The LS1 coils die pretty quickly when you do that.

The D585 type of coil does something different. And it does save the coil. When it hits that current limit of 8-8.5A, it just fires the coil. It doesn't matter when the ECU says to fire the coil, it just fires. So as long as you keep the dwell low with the D585(like the stock ECU does for them), it should be fine and your ECU will control the ignition firing. But if you turn the dwell up so that the current limits, the coil is now controlling the firing time, not the ECU. Probably one of the worst ideas I have seen on a coil in a long time. I think the Megasquirt website or another has some more data on this. When I saw that other website, that was what made me test this out more thoroughly to verify. And it is repeatable, and on D585 from multiple coil manufacturers.

I'm always up for a beer. And I do try to help out answering questions about ignitions, wiring etc where I can.

 

[bradrs]

Quoting coyotes:
I'm amazed this stupid thread is still going.

That said Bosch +4s make hella power dawg


+1111111