When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Every AL head I've worked on that wasn't a maintenance queen (IE race cars and such) the pugs get swapped every 35K to god knows what.. They all have had some issues with corrosion in the threads, not like crazy bad but they do have some. I use a plastic gun brush with a dab of carb cleaner to clean the threads. Takes a few seconds per hole, then I use either the metal anti size or a high temp dielectric grease (VERY VERY sparingly.. )
Its no different than a head stud in a AL block, you'll always get some galling on dissimilar metals ,, usually its not a big deal.
At the end of the day its the equivalent of a oil argument.. Ya makes your choice and live with the results..
Doesn't something terrible happen when you push an aluminum material against a steel material? For some reason I have this nagging thought that in almost any environment something bad is almost guaranteed if you wait long enough with those two together, even if they are clean.
I believe that the technical name might be galvanic corrosion.
Will it happen if you change out your plugs every year or every other year? Probably not.
How about a daily driver where plugs are changed out at 100,000 miles? How long does it take to get there?
Other vehicles in my "fleet" include an '85 Vette with 71K miles and a 93 Dodge Cummins dually with 89K. Are either of those vehicles likely to hit 100K anytime soon...not likely. Yep, I know the Dodge doesn't have plugs, just presented as an example.
Here's the way I look at it. Manufacturers with multi million dollar R&D programs, 100 years of experience, and millions of examples to pull information from do not use anti seize and the plugs have always come out fine in my 19 years doing plugs for a living multiple times a week over those years.
I always like to use a tiny dab of Anti-Seize on the threads, about the size of a grain of rice and smear it around the threads. Then torque the plugs to 11 ft lbs. I also like to use Dielectric Grease in both ends of the Spark Plug Wire boots and help prevent moisture from getting inside and to aid in removal of the wire from the plug.
When I worked at the Chevy Dealership, I ran into a handful of trucks that came from an area, such as the rust belt, where you see rust or corrosion on the trucks/engines and ran into minor problems with the plugs. There have been a few where the spark plugs were a pain to remove and 2 times where the threaded portion of the plug broke off in the head due to being seized.
The picture is an example of what I have rarely ran into. This is not a common thing, and out of the thousands of trucks I have worked on, maybe 20 or so I had difficulties removing the plugs and on one truck 2 plugs broke off in the head. Mostly happened on the early LS powered trucks. I am not saying this is because Anti-Seize has not been used.
Gm does not recommend the use of Anti-Seize on some LS based engines due to added friction when torquing. The dealer I worked at did have some kind of lube that was intended for spark plug threads, we very seldom used it tho. It pretty much looked like Petroleum Jelly
Last edited by 07NBSChevy; 07-14-2017 at 11:21 AM.
As a mechanic i cannot disagree with anti-seize on plugs as well as other things like O2 sensors, having dealt with many neglected cars. But on my own cars it might be overkill just because I'm always in there doing something as it is.
Looks like we are all correct to some degree. I only used anti seize on my plugs in my boat that do not have coated/plated threads. I specify NGK for all cars I work on in the shop, that may be why I have less issues with plugs than others. Even so, I'll keep repeating it, I've personally seen more problems from using it than not using it. So I personally don't use it except for special cases.
Supposedly mercedes and some other manufacturers advise against using it but I didn't have time to scour the net for it. But this came up right away.
Here's the way I look at it. Manufacturers with multi million dollar R&D programs, 100 years of experience, and millions of examples to pull information from do not use anti seize and the plugs have always come out fine in my 19 years doing plugs for a living multiple times a week over those years.
Too much anti-seize is definitely bad news on plugs I agree 100% with that. Cheap anti-seize is also bad news, I agree with that too. However...
Here's the way I look at it. Mass production and the just good enough to get by approach that goes with it, isn't what I want for my performance cars. I happily spend extra money to avoid that sort of mechanic or shop. I have zero tolerance with that approach when it comes to my performance cars. A couple of friends with careers in professional motorsports convinced me to avoid that approach to car projects a long time ago.
Each to their own, that's part of what makes the hobby fun.
When my 99TA was new with ~4,000 miles a friend & I did plugs. The 8 NGK platinum plugs (that's right not AC Delco and I'm the cars only owner) - no two had the same gap the gap ranged from .052 to .065, I understand the GM didn't want to invest time and money in having an employee check plug gap before installation.
Likewise, GM didn't use a little bit of dielectric grease on the plug wires to help ensure the best conduction of current. I do because it's worth my time to sweat the details just like using a tiny about of quality anti-seize on the plugs is worthwhile insurance in my opinion and thirty years of experience being a tech at a manufacturing company.
Just because GM "gets by" not doing something simple doesn't mean its the right or best way - it may mean the GM way for installing plugs is the most efficient way. It's certainly more efficient than my procedure.
Most folks wouldn't want to pay a mechanic or tech for the extra 10 minutes of labor using anti-seize, checking the plug gap and using a tiny bit of dielectric grease takes. As hobbyist and car enthusiasts most of us can spare the few extra minutes it takes with no ill effect.
I have a friend who's been a mechanic for about 35 years, he doesn't use anti-seize but he does always a tiny amount of Motor oil on the plug threads. He says it's cheaper than quality anti-seize and more cost effective.
In any case Pantera EFI aka Lance has much experience, practical and theoretical knowledge on engine topics so I tend to agree 100% with his advice on this topic over others.
Too much anti-seize is definitely bad news on plugs I agree 100% with that. Cheap anti-seize is also bad news, I agree with that too. However...
Here's the way I look at it. Mass production and the just good enough to get by approach that goes with it, isn't what I want for my performance cars. I happily spend extra money to avoid that sort of mechanic or shop. I have zero tolerance with that approach when it comes to my performance cars. A couple of friends with careers in professional motorsports convinced me to avoid that approach to car projects a long time ago.
Each to their own, that's part of what makes the hobby fun.
When my 99TA was new with ~4,000 miles a friend & I did plugs. The 8 NGK platinum plugs (that's right not AC Delco and I'm the cars only owner) - no two had the same gap the gap ranged from .052 to .065, I understand the GM didn't want to invest time and money in having an employee check plug gap before installation.
Likewise, GM didn't use a little bit of dielectric grease on the plug wires to help ensure the best conduction of current. I do because it's worth my time to sweat the details just like using a tiny about of quality anti-seize on the plugs is worthwhile insurance in my opinion and thirty years of experience being a tech at a manufacturing company.
Just because GM "gets by" not doing something simple doesn't mean its the right or best way - it may mean the GM way for installing plugs is the most efficient way. It's certainly more efficient than my procedure.
Most folks wouldn't want to pay a mechanic or tech for the extra 10 minutes of labor using anti-seize, checking the plug gap and using a tiny bit of dielectric grease takes. As hobbyist and car enthusiasts most of us can spare the few extra minutes it takes with no ill effect.
I have a friend who's been a mechanic for about 35 years, he doesn't use anti-seize but he does always a tiny amount of Motor oil on the plug threads. He says it's cheaper than quality anti-seize and more cost effective.
In any case Pantera EFI aka Lance has much experience, practical and theoretical knowledge on engine topics so I tend to agree 100% with his advice on this topic over others.
The only thing I don't agree with is "they do enough to get by". I have cars come in sometimes with around 200k miles that haven't seen any maintenance outside of oil changes tires and brakes, in other words no other fluids have been changed and no plug changes. There's no way in hell they build them doing the least possible and enough to just get by and cars go near 200k without service. That's obvious proof they do far more than just the minimum. The minimum was evident when you were lucky to make it to 30k without an ignition overhaul. Also keep in mind, manufacturers watch what happens to their vehicles in the long run to study how to improve their vehicles, if plugs were ripping out threads at the dealer all the time there from lack of use of anti seize there would be tons of backlash and customer complaints, potential high costs to the manufacturer for customer assistance, warranty, or recalls, and potential loss of sales. So they are watching for these kinds of problems.
And I pull those plugs out that have well beyond 100k and up to 200k on them no problem all the time. And they don't have anti seize on them. So i'm having a hard time seeing the need for it. Albeit, there are special circumstances that should be considered. I'm not against using it, there's just times there's no real point in something.
One thing that i'm not sure has been mentioned, I read at some point that anti seize was not recommended because it is between the plug and the head and that can reduce heat transfer from the plug to the head and raise plug temps potentially leading to pre detonation. And when I read things like that I start feeling like I'm watching a commercial for medication that has a list at the end of side effects and then I realize I'm better off with the current condition than the potential side effects.
If you read my links above from NGK you'll see why they aren't gapped at the factory. NGK gaps them to tight tolerances and only recommends gapping them withing a very small range of spec, and a person on an assembly line introduces too much likely hood for human error, especially with today's fine wire plugs. You have to remember the human element and what problems that brings and that big companies know this. Combine that with the fact that quality people that give a **** about the quality of their work seems to be getting fewer and further between. So it's not likely they will ever have people performing a step that a machine is already doing with far more consistent accuracy.
I love theory, I also love how often I see what sounds good on paper gets shattered by what happens in the shop.
Last edited by 00pooterSS; 07-20-2017 at 11:37 AM.
What? A thread where everybody agrees with everyone else?
you guys broke the internet
Today I was looking at some grey stuff on the side of my glasses for a good 30 seconds before realizing... yeah it was anti seize.
LOL people agreeing??? Crazy talk.
Originally Posted by BuschPerformance
Any threaded steel object being put into aluminum gets anti-seize in my book.
I completely understand that approach. I would do the same if I haven't had so many examples show me that it was unnecessary. I.E. all these years doing plugs in the shop and no issues from the factory not using anti seize. But if you use it properly, you should also have no issues. To each his own.
TSB's usually come after a problem has been addressed and a resolution has been found. I hear that there are several manufacturer's with these TSBs
Here's Porsche. I'm sure some will say "oh they do that so you'll have to pay them to fix the damaged threads". Don't you think they would like to not **** off their customers so that they can keep your business? They try so hard to please customers that doing something to purposely cause damages completely conflicts with their model. If you haven't worked at a dealership then you wouldn't know the extremes they go to to please customers, yes I know they suck at it, but it's the personnel at the dealer that sucks, the manufacturer puts a lot procedures in the dealers to ensure customer satisfaction (on the service side mostly).
I've spent a lot of time at dealers across the nation at the director level of management and seen my theory of dealers destroyed.
And there is THE WORD, from Porsche's decree to our eyes. Sounds legit! And I agree, no car mfr. in their right mind(most, anyway...)would do something to get customers pissed. Anything to smooth the way to customer satisfaction usually does it.
And there is THE WORD, from Porsche's decree to our eyes. Sounds legit! And I agree, no car mfr. in their right mind(most, anyway...)would do something to get customers pissed. Anything to smooth the way to customer satisfaction usually does it.
Exactly, manufacturers know that brand loyalty is a large large segment of their sales.
never know with big companies, sometimes statistics, and bottom line cost on a mass scale takes precedence in a case where technician error percentage (number of vehicles with problems because the tech did something wrong) outweighs the resulting number of issues caused by the "unfixed problem".
In other words, lets say 8/1000 engines had trouble after 8 random techs applied too much antiseize to the plugs, cost the company X dollars
So they ran statistical data and found that only 2/1000 engines would have trouble with no anti seize applied at all, given the interval of service etc.. and costs Y dollars.
SO even though the anti seize is desirable, the cost of not using it was lower and caused less problems. They may have even considered the cost of "employee training" (a video of how to apply anti seize for this example) and weighed against it (think of other scenarios where it might work). Statistics is funny sometimes.
Hi All, some Spark Plug "tech" history.
My son went to HS in Irvine with the NTK's (Japan) USA Manager's son, they were friends.
I bought the NTK UEGOs, AFTER signing the agreement, for use with my ECU in the 1980's.
I 'bench" tested both the UEGO AND the EGO (three wire) with a different read found.
My son ERIC added a Signal Ground wire to the EGO body, the reads became equal.
This report was then witnessed by his NTK friend creating the "birth" of the FOUR wire EGO sensor.
I was allowed to buy these from Wixom, the only one for many years.
I was under direction of Rob DeBlander who later became a good friend seen often at SEMA & PRI.
He had a NEW project and asked for my help.
The newer 8mm & 10mm Spark Plugs were being broken when installed, NEW, into the AL Head !
The cause was the use of thread lube (anti-sieze) AND a normal Hand tighten method. (not a torque wrench method)
The fix was a Plating method that did not require Anti-Sieze.
TO THIS DAY NGK STATES "USE Anti-Sieze with un-plated (black) Spark Plugs."
Thus King, you are correct, the statistics were based on an IMPROPER installation method.
The manufactures have little concern for a engine/sparkplug at 200,000 miles.
"Here's the way I look at it. Mass production and the just good enough to get by approach that goes with it, isn't what I want for my performance cars."
I should have elaborated more about OEM and "the just good enough to get by approach". In many cases, the general public seems to do a horrendously poor job at taking calf basic preventive maintenance exactly as you describe. I have coworkers that look baffled at the idea of ever doing a radiator & coolant flush or changing transmission fluid & filter, they laugh at the idea of changing brake fluid never mind servicing the differential or transfer case with a fluid change. Often they are shocked that their 80,000 six year old truck locked up the rear end or transmission and now has a $3500 repair bill. Given how the average customer treats a vehicle I understanding why OEM's often don't go the extra mile.
Just a few examples of "OEM just get by" mentality that inspired my perhaps somewhat unfair comment.
Ford V8 Mod motor -~98-2003 issues with lime 2 threads in the cylinder head and sometimes blow sparkplug out of head. ( I confess in don't think anti-seize would help that issue). Ford knew of issue but ignored it in many ways.
Ford V8 Mod motor -~ 2004-2008 part of spark plug tends to break off in the cylinders head in many cases. Ford again ignores issue. This ended up in a class action lawsuit against Ford.
GM 10 bolt rear end in 3rd & 4th Gen Fbody - definitely a weak rear end
Toyota - early Tundra 's ate camshafts like a starving homeless man does turkey at Thanksgiving. The hardness process wasn't correct.
Chrysler 90's era minivans with self-destructing transmissions at about 65,000 to 75,000 regardless of use or maintenance.
Don't even let me get started on the 4th gen fbody's spontaneously disintegrating interior. Or the 98-02 cars that all develop paint bubbles on the sail panel because GM elected to cut costs and not seal the panel as it had been on the 93-97 cars. Bottom of the barrel leather seats or plastic dash panels that implode randomly.
With that said overall I'm a fan of GM, my 91 RS Camaro had right at 400,000 miles on its all original drive line. Just a pair of valve cover gaskets at 360,000 miles to fix an annoying leak. The RS was driven on an 800 miles to Hawk's Motorsports who restored the car and did the LS swap
On last jab at an OEM, I found it very amusing in one sense my parents Lexus had to have an oil pan gasket and valve cover gaskets to stop the Exxon Valdese level oil slick the overrated nine year old Lexus left in the garage. The RS's old 305 is sitting on an engine stand in my garage...and has leaked a spot of oil smaller than a dime in two years.
never know with big companies, sometimes statistics, and bottom line cost on a mass scale takes precedence in a case where technician error percentage (number of vehicles with problems because the tech did something wrong) outweighs the resulting number of issues caused by the "unfixed problem".
In other words, lets say 8/1000 engines had trouble after 8 random techs applied too much antiseize to the plugs, cost the company X dollars
So they ran statistical data and found that only 2/1000 engines would have trouble with no anti seize applied at all, given the interval of service etc.. and costs Y dollars.
SO even though the anti seize is desirable, the cost of not using it was lower and caused less problems. They may have even considered the cost of "employee training" (a video of how to apply anti seize for this example) and weighed against it (think of other scenarios where it might work). Statistics is funny sometimes.
Fully agree man with your view of dealers and one of the reasons they do what they do. And that may very well be why, except there are plugs that aren't supposed to have anti seize that we've been talking about, plated plugs. And plugs that should. I should have started all of this by saying quit using anti seize, most plugs are plated now and therefore it's not necessary. But I've took the stance of "i've seen more problems from using it than not using it". Which aligns exactly with what you stated above.
I run 7 lifts at the shop alone, so sometimes I also have to take the stand of "what works best for the majority, rather than be consumed with the minority" of issues.
Originally Posted by Pantera EFI
Hi All, some Spark Plug "tech" history.
My son went to HS in Irvine with the NTK's (Japan) USA Manager's son, they were friends.
I bought the NTK UEGOs, AFTER signing the agreement, for use with my ECU in the 1980's.
I 'bench" tested both the UEGO AND the EGO (three wire) with a different read found.
My son ERIC added a Signal Ground wire to the EGO body, the reads became equal.
This report was then witnessed by his NTK friend creating the "birth" of the FOUR wire EGO sensor.
I was allowed to buy these from Wixom, the only one for many years.
I was under direction of Rob DeBlander who later became a good friend seen often at SEMA & PRI.
He had a NEW project and asked for my help.
The newer 8mm & 10mm Spark Plugs were being broken when installed, NEW, into the AL Head !
The cause was the use of thread lube (anti-sieze) AND a normal Hand tighten method. (not a torque wrench method)
The fix was a Plating method that did not require Anti-Sieze.
TO THIS DAY NGK STATES "USE Anti-Sieze with un-plated (black) Spark Plugs."
Thus King, you are correct, the statistics were based on an IMPROPER installation method.
The manufactures have little concern for a engine/sparkplug at 200,000 miles.
Lance
Good info and another reason to not "blanket recommend" anti seize. But to recommend it in the proper situation. I realize I came in and said quit using it, but I later said "there are cases". I should have put that all together in my first posting about it but I think we are all agreeing in a way.
Originally Posted by 99 Black Bird T/A
00pooterSS,
Regarding my comment:
"Here's the way I look at it. Mass production and the just good enough to get by approach that goes with it, isn't what I want for my performance cars."
I should have elaborated more about OEM and "the just good enough to get by approach". In many cases, the general public seems to do a horrendously poor job at taking calf basic preventive maintenance exactly as you describe. I have coworkers that look baffled at the idea of ever doing a radiator & coolant flush or changing transmission fluid & filter, they laugh at the idea of changing brake fluid never mind servicing the differential or transfer case with a fluid change. Often they are shocked that their 80,000 six year old truck locked up the rear end or transmission and now has a $3500 repair bill. Given how the average customer treats a vehicle I understanding why OEM's often don't go the extra mile.
I'm fully with you, we sell a lot of fluid maintenance and have a lot of nice machines for doing it, we spend a lot of time educating in the importance of it
Just a few examples of "OEM just get by" mentality that inspired my perhaps somewhat unfair comment.
Ford V8 Mod motor -~98-2003 issues with lime 2 threads in the cylinder head and sometimes blow sparkplug out of head. ( I confess in don't think anti-seize would help that issue). Ford knew of issue but ignored it in many ways.
I've just always thought ford was retarded and that was the best they could do lol
Ford V8 Mod motor -~ 2004-2008 part of spark plug tends to break off in the cylinders head in many cases. Ford again ignores issue. This ended up in a class action lawsuit against Ford.
They keep trying to redesign the wheel when it works just fine as it already was, and again, they're obviously retarded
GM 10 bolt rear end in 3rd & 4th Gen Fbody - definitely a weak rear end
I agree, this was a minimum to get by move
Toyota - early Tundra 's ate camshafts like a starving homeless man does turkey at Thanksgiving. The hardness process wasn't correct.
Lol I assume that was just a mistake and not a corner cut situation, toyota prides themselves on longevity, they cut their corners on the aesthetics in my opinion
Chrysler 90's era minivans with self-destructing transmissions at about 65,000 to 75,000 regardless of use or maintenance.
I hear you there, not sure if they cut a corner or if they are like ford and spark plugs, no matter how hard they try they can't get it right
Don't even let me get started on the 4th gen fbody's spontaneously disintegrating interior. Or the 98-02 cars that all develop paint bubbles on the sail panel because GM elected to cut costs and not seal the panel as it had been on the 93-97 cars. Bottom of the barrel leather seats or plastic dash panels that implode randomly.
Cant argue one bit
With that said overall I'm a fan of GM, my 91 RS Camaro had right at 400,000 miles on its all original drive line. Just a pair of valve cover gaskets at 360,000 miles to fix an annoying leak. The RS was driven on an 800 miles to Hawk's Motorsports who restored the car and did the LS swap
Badass!
On last jab at an OEM, I found it very amusing in one sense my parents Lexus had to have an oil pan gasket and valve cover gaskets to stop the Exxon Valdese level oil slick the overrated nine year old Lexus left in the garage. The RS's old 305 is sitting on an engine stand in my garage...and has leaked a spot of oil smaller than a dime in two years.
Man I love lexus quality but I have had a ton of those come in puking oil and it's always funny to me the rest of the car holds up so damn well but they massively failed on the gaskets. It seems to be just that particular engine they they put in everything in the 90s/00s the V8 cars from that time and newer cars don't seem to leak much if at all
Rant over,
Best regards
LOL you hit a lot of nails on the head with this one.
07-13-2017, 03:11 PM
