Is an R42TS plug too cold for my engine? Help please.
05-07-2005, 02:24 PM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FL
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is an R42TS plug too cold for my engine? Help please.
This is a 355 TPI with Sanderson headers, around 10:1 compression with flat pistons and Crane HR-276-2S-12 IG cam (PN: 109821). I have a Crane Hi6 ignition with matching coil and MSD wires. I'm using AC R42TS plugs with .045 gap and the ceramic insulator is almost black and they smell like fuel. I think they are too cold a plug for this combination. Please recommend me a good plug for this combo. I like NGKs but not sure which. Thanks 
05-07-2005, 10:00 PM
#2
Supreme Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Bonner Springs, KS
Posts: 1,751
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Car: 1995 Corvette
Engine: LT1
Transmission: 6 spd Manual
Axle/Gears: Dana 44, 3:45:1
how about the stock plugs for the application?? I don't see anything that really dictates using a different plug... maybe one heat range colder, but not that far... I think the stock is an r45ts...
05-08-2005, 01:33 AM
#3
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,133
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 88' IROCZ
Engine: 388 TPI Motown 350 Race block
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 2.77
Originally posted by thirdgen88
how about the stock plugs for the application?? I don't see anything that really dictates using a different plug... maybe one heat range colder, but not that far... I think the stock is an r45ts...
how about the stock plugs for the application?? I don't see anything that really dictates using a different plug... maybe one heat range colder, but not that far... I think the stock is an r45ts...
Last edited by rgarcia63; 05-08-2005 at 01:50 AM.
05-08-2005, 01:49 PM
#5
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,133
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 88' IROCZ
Engine: 388 TPI Motown 350 Race block
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 2.77
There's not much difference between the v-power & splitfire.
I modify my plugs by unshrouding the electrode ( side gapping, ) that's basically cutting the width of the electrode off of the end of the ground strap so there wouldn't be any room for a v, or a split.
FYI
The FTC alleged that SplitFire did not possess and rely upon a reasonable basis to support the claims, that SplitFire’s claims that surveys confirm gas mileage increases were false, and that Splitfire did not have a reasonable basis to claim that the testimonials used in its ads reflect the typical or ordinary experience of consumers who use SplitFire spark plugs.
The consent order to settle the charges would prohibit SplitFire from making fuel economy, emissions, horsepower or cost savings claims without competent and reliable scientific evidence to support them. It would also prohibit misrepresentations about the existence, contents, validity, results, conclusions or interpretations of any test or study. Finally, in connection with testimonials, the settlement would require that SplitFire have scientific evidence to substantiate claims in endorsements or testimonials; that Splitfire disclose what the typical or ordinary consumer experience would be; or that the company disclose the limited applicability of the endorser’s experience -- that is, that consumers should not expect to experience similar results.
In conclusion without competent and reliable scientific evidence it's up to the consumer to decide if the product satisfies his requirements, and expectations.
I modify my plugs by unshrouding the electrode ( side gapping, ) that's basically cutting the width of the electrode off of the end of the ground strap so there wouldn't be any room for a v, or a split.
FYI
The FTC alleged that SplitFire did not possess and rely upon a reasonable basis to support the claims, that SplitFire’s claims that surveys confirm gas mileage increases were false, and that Splitfire did not have a reasonable basis to claim that the testimonials used in its ads reflect the typical or ordinary experience of consumers who use SplitFire spark plugs.
The consent order to settle the charges would prohibit SplitFire from making fuel economy, emissions, horsepower or cost savings claims without competent and reliable scientific evidence to support them. It would also prohibit misrepresentations about the existence, contents, validity, results, conclusions or interpretations of any test or study. Finally, in connection with testimonials, the settlement would require that SplitFire have scientific evidence to substantiate claims in endorsements or testimonials; that Splitfire disclose what the typical or ordinary consumer experience would be; or that the company disclose the limited applicability of the endorser’s experience -- that is, that consumers should not expect to experience similar results.
In conclusion without competent and reliable scientific evidence it's up to the consumer to decide if the product satisfies his requirements, and expectations.
Trending Topics
05-11-2005, 12:04 AM
#8
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sin City, NV
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 88 RS
Engine: 2.8 untill the 3800 swap
Transmission: Auto
Originally posted by rgarcia63
FYI
The FTC alleged that SplitFire did not possess and rely upon a reasonable basis to support the claims, that SplitFire’s claims that surveys confirm gas mileage increases were false, and that Splitfire did not have a reasonable basis to claim that the testimonials used in its ads reflect the typical or ordinary experience of consumers who use SplitFire spark plugs.
The consent order to settle the charges would prohibit SplitFire from making fuel economy, emissions, horsepower or cost savings claims without competent and reliable scientific evidence to support them. It would also prohibit misrepresentations about the existence, contents, validity, results, conclusions or interpretations of any test or study. Finally, in connection with testimonials, the settlement would require that SplitFire have scientific evidence to substantiate claims in endorsements or testimonials; that Splitfire disclose what the typical or ordinary consumer experience would be; or that the company disclose the limited applicability of the endorser’s experience -- that is, that consumers should not expect to experience similar results.
In conclusion without competent and reliable scientific evidence it's up to the consumer to decide if the product satisfies his requirements, and expectations.
FYI
The FTC alleged that SplitFire did not possess and rely upon a reasonable basis to support the claims, that SplitFire’s claims that surveys confirm gas mileage increases were false, and that Splitfire did not have a reasonable basis to claim that the testimonials used in its ads reflect the typical or ordinary experience of consumers who use SplitFire spark plugs.
The consent order to settle the charges would prohibit SplitFire from making fuel economy, emissions, horsepower or cost savings claims without competent and reliable scientific evidence to support them. It would also prohibit misrepresentations about the existence, contents, validity, results, conclusions or interpretations of any test or study. Finally, in connection with testimonials, the settlement would require that SplitFire have scientific evidence to substantiate claims in endorsements or testimonials; that Splitfire disclose what the typical or ordinary consumer experience would be; or that the company disclose the limited applicability of the endorser’s experience -- that is, that consumers should not expect to experience similar results.
In conclusion without competent and reliable scientific evidence it's up to the consumer to decide if the product satisfies his requirements, and expectations.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
