spawne32

iTrader: (2)

lol What makes you think im mad or hyped about this? I just feel its important, that the facts are differentiated from the fiction. We live in a world these days where people force fiction on less knowledgeable people with the label of "science". You might want to check out page 7 of this thread if you want to talk about immaturity. Even other sponsors on this forum have called out the "nonsense" of these claims. If you think the bbq grill analogy is "crap" and the "water flowing through a pipe" that granatelli used is more valid, then there is no point in even discussing this further. Kevin97ss explained it best, yet LIL SS will continue to post his "independent testing". No matter how hard he tries, the laws of physics will not change.

LIL SS

iTrader: (9)

Here is a lab test I am going to try and complete for fun.. Any input before setting up would be welcome. Let's test some wires with real simulated RPM.


I plan to drive one of my coils at the following frequency via a PWM at 50% DTC. This should simulate specific RPM's (RPM/2/60 = sparks per second).
9hz = +/- 1,000rpm
21hz = +/- 2,500rpm
42hz = +/- 5,000rpm
63hz = +/- 7,500rpm

The supply voltage to the coil will be a constant 12v.
I believe the signal side of the coil is 5v? But I need to confirm this. This would be driven via PWM at frequencies above.

I have the current wires:
Old Stock (off a buddies motor)
2 yr old Granatelli's
Competitor A's which are on my truck

I plan on putting the test rig on a scope and looking at:
Coil output with out wire for a bench mark
Output through each wire
Voltage roll off as RPM increases with/with out wires

blk00ss

iTrader: (66)

Why not just do a back to back test on a dyno or the track?!

spawne32

iTrader: (2)

The only way to logically back up the claims that granatelli makes would be to test 3 individual cylinders with the same fuel air mix on 3 different brands of wires using the same spark plug and see if the cylinder with the granatelli's produced a higher cylinder pressure. But seeing as how that test would probably be impossible to produce, I welcome your test results regardless.

madmike9396

iTrader: (29)

On post 75. The first dyno pull shows no fans in front of the car. After the wire swap they is 2 huge fans in front of the car. could that make some difference ?

LIL SS

iTrader: (9)

Blk00ss,

I have already done back to back dyno testing TWICE, two years apart with the same results. Wire swap 5 min apart with no cool down time. Granatelli's being tested after stock and they made MORE power over the old stock (first time) and new stock (2nd time 2 years later). If anything the Granatelli's were at a disadvantage with the alum intake there might have even been some heat soak.

My track testing, be it different days, comes with weather info and notes regarding the rear end change when going to Comp A's wires. Again, that data isn't good enough for some.

But those tests are being ignored by some.. Just saying..




If I have time, I will set up the bench test for those making claims that resistance is not having an effect on potential spark output.

A spark is a spark is a spark right? That's what some are arguing? As long as the spark jumps the plug, equal power will be made? I am not sure I agree with this either.

Just food for thought here.

Does the stronger spark equate to a larger area of spark ?
If there is a larger area of spark, does it ignite a larger initial area of fuel?
Does that initial area of fuel translate to more flame front earlier in the combustion cycle as the piston is near TDC?
Does that larger earlier flame front burn more fuel before the exhaust valve opens exerting more force on the piston?
Once the exhaust valve opens, the residual energy has a path to escape and does so.

Fuel is still burning even as it leaves the cyl. Heck, I put a nasty hole in my N20 line and melted the sheath off my 2ga wire recently due to the flame I had coming out of my exhaust on the 300rwhp hit of N20.

I would not put this much energy in to figuring this out if I did not see real life results. Perhaps the naysayers are missing that point. I saw power on the dyno and personally would like to understand why.

spawne32

iTrader: (2)

What your implying then is that by applying more voltage that the timing of the ignition is somehow more accurate then with higher resistance wires, by some means of a "delay" in burning from the size of the initial flame front, which I think is unlikely. But again, you could test this theory if you had a way of measuring cylinder pressure during combustion. Since we all know that horsepower is a direct result of increased cylinder pressures, you could measure that change. If the results were consistently higher then you could say that the granatelli's by whatever means of them changing the way the spark plug fires, be it a larger initial flame front, more residual spark energy, etc, that it results in a better burn. But through dyno testing or track testing alone, the variables that come into play are too large to be considered an accurate result in favor of the wires. I also think that, even if for some reason you did record higher cylinder pressures on their wires, it wouldn't be that significant of a change to result in 20rwhp, maybe 1 or 2 at best, not to mention the fact that you'd be arguing that 0ohm wires resulted in drastically different results compared to say 25ohm wires or 50ohm wires that most vendors sell on here for a 1/3rd of the price of granatelli's.

LIL SS

iTrader: (9)

This is NOT what I am saying. Timing of the spark plug should be consistent through all the different wires. Resistance of the wire is not slowing down the current traveling through the wire.

I am saying there would be more available energy through the spark plug creating a stronger spark. By being a stronger spark, it might be taking up more area therefor lighting a larger area of fuel.

Have you ever compared spark generated from the same coil/wire/plug combo but with varying plug gaps? What physical changes did you see with the spark as it jumped the gap?

Have you ever compared the spark generated from two different coils with the same wire/plug/plug gap combo? Again, what changes did you see with the spark?

Hank Peabody

iTrader: (2)

Granatelli wires kicked my dog.

cali_bear2003

iTrader: (7)

Well, I bought my set yesterday. I will be running them with a new set of Delco Iridium's. 😜

spawne32

iTrader: (2)

Post up how much horsepower you gain for us.

cali_bear2003

iTrader: (7)

I am hoping for 65 plus, but I am also installing a spec's Martin Smallwood cam, Mamo AFR 215 heads and a Mamo FAST 102/102 combo along with all the extra's needed to support the above. Tony did tell me, going fast is very expensive. If you ask, will they increase hp, I don't know!!!! But I have already spent thousands so what's a few more to max the do-it-once do-it-right build!!! If I gain zero HP from the wires, I really do not care as I am doing my best to leave very little on the table. In the end, I get more out of research, buying, installing and wrenching then actually driving my car. I have a garage queen and between working and twin toddlers in the house. I have no time. Plug wires.....they look awesome in the picture lol!!!!!!!!!

BattleSausage

iTrader: (3)

I had a long drawn out response several days ago but I'll just say this since it directly answers your question. When we initially did this test some years ago, we wanted to ascertain changes in flame propagation which determines the combustion pressures. We assembled the engine with optimum quench in mind, as that would promote turbulence and give us our best values for measurement purposes. We also measured output of the coils vs their rated output and then proceeded to test with multiple sets of plug wires. Those included OEM, MSD, GMS, Accel, etc.

In short, with all wires being new we saw less than a peak of 2% difference in all wires. Averaging the numbers cut that in half. There were no appreciable differences between them so to speak. You also have to understand that the coil output we measured was just above 40kv and even with the wider gap we had chosen, it only required 19-22kv to bridge the plug gap and initiate the SI cycle (spark/ignition) iirc...the rest being manifest as waste spark.

I want you to think long and hard on this, as this will be my last post on the subject. With the ever growing stringent regulations imposed on the manufacturers to meet CAFE standards, don't you think they would all be using these "special" wires if there was that much left on the table with their current wires? The wires are one of the cheapest products of the entire car to produce, and as GMS claims 5,10,15+ rwhp for some of the vehicles, that translates into 5% power gains in some cases if it were true, as well as theoretically improving all around power delivery/response and therefore SHOULD increase gas mileage as a side effect. Yet they choose to leave that on the table over a few mere dollars while spending millions in testing. Does that remotely make sense to you?

No one has duplicated these gains and there is a reason for it. It defies physics, no more and no less. If we were talking about an alky/meth setup with extreme cylinder pressures where the turbulence can blow out the spark, it would be a different story. In which case, everyone turns to a mag setup as it's pretty much the only game in town that can handle it reliably. The butt dyno is not an accurate measurement, nor is going from an aged wire to a new set which is where pretty much all the results most post come from. It's simply a placebo effect, in which case your money would be well spent going which a cheaper wire to meet your needs unless you need certain things such as heat shielding, etc. In which case, you still have better options.

Don't take my word for this, spend some time on YB or the like and listen to the minds that race for a living and have the funds to test these things. Just be forewarned, you go in there peddling this crap and they're likely to eat you just like they did JR and his bogus claims.

spawne32

iTrader: (2)

you could not have said that any better battlesausage, thank you for that post, that one post basically sums up the entire thread of what everyone has been saying.

Hank Peabody

iTrader: (2)

What if you were getting what everyone calls "spark blowout". Its easy to reproduce, just gap plugs a little too wide in a boosted application. Is it not possible that the lower ohm wires might deliver just a hair more amperage and result in less "spark blowout" in this borderline setup?

I can run BR7EF plugs at .028 out of the box up to about 11psi. Past that I get more and more "blowout". Maybe these low resistance wires would allow a little more leeway before "spark blowout"??

LIL SS

iTrader: (9)

I know you said this was your last post, but I am hoping you will at least answer a few additional questions. I do appreciate the bench testing you have done.


I am curious if you tested the coils recovery time.
At what frequency was your charge/discharge cycle running at?
Was there any loss in output as frequency was turned up?
Or was it a single event cycle repeated >1 second later?

This is the reason I would like to put it on a PWM and also see how the coil recovers.
40kv single event >1 second apart might not be the same if the coil is driven at 42hz.
I am curious to see if there is any voltage roll off with the increase of frequency.


Just an FYI
Both dyno and track, at .036 my plugs fired just fine making +/- 500rwhp through a glide / 9” / locker / 315/60/15 radials.
On the Dyno, same .036 my plugs fired just fine with +/- 700rwhp through a glide / 9” / locker / 315/60/15 radials.
On the track however, .036 did not work well at +/- 700rwhp. I had to shrink the gap to .028 to keep it from popping and surging.
I am now at .024 with the +/- 800rwhp tune up.

Seems like the 40kv wasn’t bridging the gap any more as the cyl pressure went up.
Or is it even 40kv under real load, much higher ambient temps, much larger draw on the electrical system and a higher frequency.



Do you remember solid core wires being used >30 years ago? There has ALWAYS been noise issues with them. Turn the radio on in a 60’s car running solid wires and you will likely hear the EMI I am talking about. Now, think about today’s vehicles and all the electronics in it. I deal with companies that require AEC-Q and PPAP components on a regular basis. Do you really think an auto manufacture is going to risk any EMI interference with all the agency approval’s and testing they need to go through. Short answer is NO. The liability standards put on them are even worse than the CAFÉ standards.

Also the added cost to filter the noise gets expensive.

This EMI issue is the only reason I bought a different wire, it was causing havoc with my N20 controller.

Plus, it is hard to beat the advantages of coil on plug from an efficiency stand point.




Are you saying all of these guys are running stock wires?
Wait.. Why not? By your standards they are all just wasting money buying any form of aftermarket wire.. Just sayin…

granatelli sales

iTrader: (1)

All due respect GM offers performance wires in the GM Perf catalog and claims power gains as well. Our wires are used by several racing teams in NHRA, NMRA, NMCA, NASCAR, IMSA and so on. They are proven commodity.

GM DID NOT do it on purpose though they simply use the same generic wire on multiple sets of wires across a broad ban of products.

spark plug gap TODAY is all about emissions - that is why they run the cars so lean as cruise, to pass emissions laws and requirements.

Why doesn't GM just put the biggest and widest tire they can on all vettes? Cost perhaps, mileage? The OE manufactures must follow very strict rules that the aftermarket does not

spawne32

iTrader: (2)

GM doesn't run cars with lean cruise here in the states, its illegal in the US to do so due to emissions regulations on NOx standards.

BattleSausage

iTrader: (3)

I'm not an electrical engineer, I assembled the engine and watched the vitals by I'll try and answer best I can. For the bench test he used a 12v square generator and I'm assuming he used a 5v reference as the trigger just as a stock ecu would. I know he logged values from 1ms to full dwell and autofire, though increases weren't linear as with some other coils he had tested. There was some erratic behavior around ~6ms with the timing, which I'd assume was the coil becoming fully saturated. I could probably sit here and name 50+ variables that would change the voltages required to jump whatever gap as well as the saturation and output of the coils...things like MAP, temp, dcr, scr, etc. so I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.

Not to mention folks have made well over 1400rwhp and run 7's with stock GM coils, so your problem is probably somewhere in the tune or controller assuming everything else is doing it's job. Besides, with a 4 stroke engine and 1 coil per cylinder you have more than adequate time, even at 6-7k rpm for the coils to dwell and autofire to prevent oversaturation and damage. The juice is there.

You say COP, but the LS is CNP, so are you running an OHC engine or did I miss something?

That asinine comment about everyone running stock wires is off base and you know that. The point is, for the majority of people they will never see any appreciable results. By all means, buy a better set of wires if you need better thermal protection, custom boots, etc., but not because of bogus claims. But you know this already...

Now I'll let this thread go the way of the other 31 page thread which ended in some poster claiming we were full of ****, then buying a set and doing back to back testing to see a 1 rwhp change on the dyno. That was promptly closed as well.

flintwrench69

iTrader: (11)

I'm sure GMS makes a quality set of wires but its their false claims is what I have a problem with along with paying $200 for wires when theres many more reasonable options. I got a set of Taylors that were $70 & although they didn't advertise a hp gain have worked great since I bought them 5 yrs ago.