as I have been saying

I don't remember all the theory
I just know what is the truth

 

Now why didn't the rest of us think to ask Lingenfelter?
After all they are the end all be all for "race cars"

Not trying to be a jerk but LPE is not the holy grail of info. They may have done this test and may have found absolutely no gain, and you can rest easy that you may have gotten factual data. I for one just don't put all my eggs in 1 basket.
Did you ask them if they saw any increase in engine efficiency?
Was the "NO GAIN IN POWER" at peak levels?
Did it have any effect at all in the rest of the RPM range?


I for one found the above mentioned video far more relevant than just the simple statement of "No Gains in HP"
Ask yourself this. If there is no gains at all to be had then what was the purpose for GM to have different coils for different applications? Why isn't it a 1 size fits all?

 

That's it. I'm going to get the right answer once and for all.

I'm calling Boyd Coddington.....

 

Can you help us out and point out which of the areas were BS? Inquiring minds want to know.

 

Dammit. Just found out Boyd is dead.......

Maybe I'll ask Mr. Owl.....

 

Well just thought i would post what someone else had already found out as they tried this test once before in 2002. BUT since you know it all BUY EVERY COIL you CAN!!!!!!!!!!! Cuz You DA MAN!!!! I totally forgot that you have made magazines year in and out for making some of the fastest street legal GM cars IN THE WORLD!!!

Think about Fanzi if it provided gains in Efficency or/and Overall Power improvment anywhere, would a company whos goal is to make the Fast most Reliable Street Cars in America use them??? Especially if it is this cheap ($140) to add around 10rwhp and 15+ RWTQ???? A FAST 90/90 barely yeilds those gains and your looking at spending close to 1k for a used step-up. Thats not even dyno time figured in the mix. But if you dont believe me call Seth at Hinison Super Cars or Steve at SNL performance they will tell you the same thing. Or buy in to the BS. I dont really care.

I was posting info to a source that has done the test and told me that there was nothing to be had from changing coils. If you want to know more call the number i posted.

 

another factual RACE CAR builder in post #94

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/dynamo...k-coils-5.html

 

what part don't you understand ?
bad coils cost hp
good coils don't add any

my auto tech classes were almost 30 years ago
the school I went to took first or second every year in the national troubleshooting contest

now , my cars just win races
you wanna hold a trophy or sumthin

 

Again, what I would really like is to actually see you put some facts behind some of your shouts of BS. I already know which posts are factually inaccurate, or have no basis in physics. I'd just like to see if you can find them also, and back up your reasoning with factual evidence. But, then again, I've asked several times before and haven't seen anything yet.

 

well have you proven they make HP ?
NO
Why ?
Cause you can't

 

Few more technical questions that might be relevant to the thread topic, whatever that is, I’ve lost direction of it somewhat.

The Mopar Hemi uses dual spark plugs. What is the advantage over one spark plug and why doesn’t the LSx line of engines use it?

 

I was scanning the thread and the person admitted that car was having problems starting and that he seafoamed the car and changed the coils and the car was running much better.


Sounds like he had bad coils to begin with.

 

What I can't get is any technically based answers out of you. You profess to be an automotive expert. Show me. I've shown my work several times. Now it's your turn. Show me.

And again, point out any of my posts (by number!) where I have made any incorrect points, and state (with actual technical reasoning!) why I was wrong. I'm always interested in learning new things, or correcting erroneous beliefs. Here is your opportunity. Do not waste it.

Remember, I want technical reasoning, not junior high icon postings.

 

Chaase

Ive been working on C5 LS1/LS6 engines for a LONG time and I have never seen coils all go bad. The either work or fail. I never seen one fail in person but, I have seen post where someone had ONE fail and had to be replaced. I know of several people that have over 200,000 miles on there LS1 and the coils work fine.

BC

 

The posts I have read related to a bad coil....have been aftermarket....

 

They were most likely MSD Coils. There known to be EXPENSIVE and NOT reliable and DO NOT improve performance.

Ive seen numerous post where people have had them and switched back to stock. They look pretty.

BC

 

Think about the coil over plug these cars have and plug wires with almost no resistance. Compare this to the old single coil setups of the past-seems to me you getting all there is to get as far a spark today-adding other coils is highly unlikely too do anything unless your adding so much fuel the stock system can fire it (like the dual magnetos in dragsters).

I watched a video once showing the inside of a dragsters cylinder on 1 fuel pump (coming up to the line) and when the 2nd pump was on for the race. I thought the single pump looked like a fire hose was shooting gas into the cylinder but when that 2nd pump kicked on-MAN it was like Niagra Falls inside the cylinder. Takes a LIGHTNING BOLT to fire that.

For any street application I can think of, the stock system even seems like overkill.

 

There's always a cost/benefit reason for engineering choices and direction. Obviously, twice as many coils and plugs is a significant additional cost. So, what is the benefit? Slightly reduced pumping losses. (I am purposely leaving out the option that the Chrysler coil reliability was so poor that it needed a redundant backup coil for each cylinder.)
I spent a lot of dyno time several years ago working on a prototype V6 with dual plugs, but I'll start the single plug discussion first.
In a single plug engine, quite often the plug is located towards one side of the cylinder. When you light off the air-fuel mixture, the burn (ignoring the effects of swirl for this discussion) has to travel the length of the bore to burn all the mixture. To give the combustion sufficient time to build peak pressure at the correct point (15* ATDC), the combustion needs to occur quite early (let's say 36* at WOT and some particular RPM). Productive power from the piston happens after TDC. Therefore, the piston is doing negative work (as far as the crank/flywheel is concerned) from BDC on up to TDC. If the piston, in addition to normal compressing of the 14.7psi atmospheric air, now has to work against a rising additional pressure due to combustion, increased negative work is going on. Not a desired thing.
So, we would like to minimize the negative work the piston is doing. If we can delay the point of ignition (say, changing from 36* down to 20*), the piston can go an additional distance up the cylinder before it has to push against the combustion pressure. If you add a second plug, and position it on the opposite side of the cylinder, you have two flames occuring at ignition, and they only have to travel half the bore distance to consume all the mixture. A faster burn results, along with increased pumping efficiency (or actually, reduced pumping losses).
I would guess the reason Chevrolet stuck with one plug was a combination of several things. If you have high swirl, you'll get faster burn rates, and possibly approach the same result as two plugs. Or, perhaps two plugs wouldn't package in the LSx heads, so it wasn't an option. Or, perhaps the power/torque increase in the LSx engine due to two plugs was insufficient to justify the doubled cost of plugs and coils.

These are just my opinions. I do hope there was an engineering reason for the dual plugs in the Chrysler engine, and that it wasn't merely for marketing and advertising.

 

what you can't do is prove coils make HP.
/thread

 

Why don't you guys throw up a flag of truce and agree to disagree...