Ford Mustang Ecoboost Forum banner

21 - 40 of 76 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Same here, NGK 6510s gapped to .028", haven't heard of a different gap for various fuel setups though. If you find something out let us know please...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
The benefit to running pre gapped vrs factory is the factory has a big variance in gapping. Running a colder plug will not hurt the car and I’m my opinion is a must for any tune on the car including ots Cobb/sct tunes.

As far as other fuels, I believe you close the gap even more with e85.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,895 Posts
The two Ecoboost Mustangs I have had, had factory plugs gapped between .028" and .032". The two sets of NGK 6510s I put in those cars were gapped .035" from NGK. Quite easy to regap them to .028" with a few taps on a wooden block.

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
this is an older thread.. the factory plugs being gaped between .029 and .031 is a difference of .002 thousands of an inch right. how is that a problem?

in a picosecond light travels 0.011803 inches. A picosecond is one trillionth (10e12 ) of a second or 1/1,000,000,000,000 of a second. we are talking about the speed of light (not in the vacuum of space) so even if you chop the first number in half. so lets say that light at the end of the spark plug travels .0059015 inches in a picosecond. that is more than double the variance of the factory plugs..

are you guys saying that combustion is timed in the engine to the a smaller value than a picosecond? even if that was possible it would be massive overkill..

i know i am missing something here but I dont know what it is. can someone help me understand how a variance of 2 thousands of an inch is trouble for timing in the engine?

sorry for geeking out about numbers..

thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,193 Posts
this is an older thread.. the factory plugs being gaped between .029 and .031 is a difference of .002 thousands of an inch right. how is that a problem?

in a picosecond light travels 0.011803 inches. A picosecond is one trillionth (10e12 ) of a second or 1/1,000,000,000,000 of a second. we are talking about the speed of light (not in the vacuum of space) so even if you chop the first number in half. so lets say that light at the end of the spark plug travels .0059015 inches in a picosecond. that is more than double the variance of the factory plugs..

are you guys saying that combustion is timed in the engine to the a smaller value than a picosecond? even if that was possible it would be massive overkill..

i know i am missing something here but I dont know what it is. can someone help me understand how a variance of 2 thousands of an inch is trouble for timing in the engine?

sorry for geeking out about numbers..

thanks
No worries. I like the way you reasoned out your conjecture. I, unfortunately, cannot help your conundrum. I also have been amazed about how such a small variance in gap can be so critical, but did not give it the type of analysis that you have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,618 Posts
this is an older thread.. the factory plugs being gaped between .029 and .031 is a difference of .002 thousands of an inch right. how is that a problem?

in a picosecond light travels 0.011803 inches. A picosecond is one trillionth (10e12 ) of a second or 1/1,000,000,000,000 of a second. we are talking about the speed of light (not in the vacuum of space) so even if you chop the first number in half. so lets say that light at the end of the spark plug travels .0059015 inches in a picosecond. that is more than double the variance of the factory plugs..

are you guys saying that combustion is timed in the engine to the a smaller value than a picosecond? even if that was possible it would be massive overkill..

i know i am missing something here but I dont know what it is. can someone help me understand how a variance of 2 thousands of an inch is trouble for timing in the engine?

sorry for geeking out about numbers..

thanks
Its not the timing, it getting the spark to jump across the gap in massive atmospheric pressures reliably at high rpm.

At 6000rpm with 20 pounds of boost that spark can be extremely fussy about how big the gap is and the condition of the electrode.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
697 Posts
Its not the timing, it getting the spark to jump across the gap in massive atmospheric pressures reliably at high rpm.
Like he said. As a for instance, the 5.0 uses the same plug as the Ecoboost, but runs a plug gap of .049-.053" naturally aspirated. As pressure goes up, the voltage needed to jump a given gap increases. Bigger gaps help to insure the fuel mixture ignition, but you can only get so much out of the ignition system. So, with boost, the only other option is to decrease the gap.

Nathan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
If the electrical energy going to the electrode remains the same...
Then a wider gap means the 'spark' will be thinner than if that same spark has to cross a smaller gap.
It is harder to 'blow out' (under the pressure of boost) a smaller but 'fatter spark' than it is a thinner longer one.

Thus the case for a smaller gap when boost levels are increased with a tune.

The other way to have a fat spark with a larger gap is to therefore increase the electrical power and energy that produces the spark.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
If the electrical energy going to the electrode remains the same...
Then a wider gap means the 'spark' will be thinner than if that same spark has to cross a smaller gap.
It is harder to 'blow out' (under the pressure of boost) a smaller but 'fatter spark' than it is a thinner longer one.

Thus the case for a smaller gap when boost levels are increased with a tune.

The other way to have a fat spark with a larger gap is to therefore increase the electrical power and energy that produces the spark.
So your saying its not timing? the issue with having spark plugs that have a .002" difference between them is more about the "shape" of the spark?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,348 Posts
The strength of the spark will effect timing. The ecoboost ecu is self correcting, so when it sees a weak spark at high rpm it pulls timing which decreases high rpm horsepower
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
697 Posts
I want those plugs (6510) but I don’t have a tune....?
Please understand the colder plugs are used as a means to help ward off detonation, regardless of whether or not you're running a tune. Without a tune, the engine's not so likely to detonate, so the colder plugs probably won't make any difference. As a number of forum members have discovered, however, installing new plugs alone seems to help with performance. Don't expect switching to a colder heat range in itself will do anything for performance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,895 Posts
Do you have a tune on your car... I want those plugs but I don’t have a tune....?
The post you quoted was from 2016. That was my 2015 Ecoboost Mustang and it had a tune. Shortly after the car was totaled. On my 17 Ecoboost Mustang i installed a tune at 1000 miles and did the 6510 plugs again. In both cases there was no performance increase but on the 17 i started experiencing misfires at 10k miles. I put the factory plugs back in and now have 22k miles on those with no issues.

Since this thread started a concensus has been developing on the forums that the 6510 plugs are only good for 10 to 15k before they start misfiring. For here on out i will be using stock heat range plugs in my Ecoboost Mustang. To change to a plug that lasts less than 1/2 as long as the factory plug and provides no performance benefit in hopes of warding off detonation that there is no evidence that it is happening does not make sense to me.

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
The post you quoted was from 2016. That was my 2015 Ecoboost Mustang and it had a tune. Shortly after the car was totaled. On my 17 Ecoboost Mustang i installed a tune at 1000 miles and did the 6510 plugs again. In both cases there was no performance increase but on the 17 i started experiencing misfires at 10k miles. I put the factory plugs back in and now have 22k miles on those with no issues.

Since this thread started a concensus has been developing on the forums that the 6510 plugs are only good for 10 to 15k before they start misfiring. For here on out i will be using stock heat range plugs in my Ecoboost Mustang. To change to a plug that lasts less than 1/2 as long as the factory plug and provides no performance benefit in hopes of warding off detonation that there is no evidence that it is happening does not make sense to me.

Dave
I was just about to order the NGK's for my 17 EcoStang. It has C&L cold air intake, Magnaflow Cat back system, and the Ford Performance tune. I forgot the plug number to order, so I searched. Now thanks to dgc, I will save my money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
I have the NGK 6510 colder plugs. I gapped them to .028”
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
I've heard people say that having the FP tune doesn't warrant the colder plugs. Also I heard you would have to re-tune (flash or calibrate) the car after adding the colder plugs, is this true?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
I’m running stock heat, ruthenium hx plugs. No issues

Gapped .028

They come .032 so need slight adjustment
I never heard of ruthenium plugs. what are they?

Also, is your car stock or tuned.

my 15 ecoboost has the aftermarket Procal 3 tune and CAI from Ford performance. Im unsure of using the colder NGK plugs. The current plugs are factory motorcraft. Im looking to replace them. Im thinking of staying with the stock plugs. the NGK 6510 are popular with ecoboost enthusiasts but I've heard bad things about them.
 
21 - 40 of 76 Posts
Top