i12drivemyMP5 said:
all scientificness aside, don't we here in the good ole US of A regularly get watered down detuned versions of all kinda cars that many automakers in their infinite "wisdom" send out & sell that are less than the pinnacle of scientific achievement in order to comply with whatever bulls*** legislation is in place or to "protect" the American consumer from themselves & last but not least, TO MAKE MONEY? What did the comparative analysis study reveal about the amount of spark degredation over time between 4 wire, 2 wire setups using both wire types & also no wire setups? Was the choice based upon production costs or the need to replace parts to keep revenue flowing? Somehow I just don't think that lifelong infinite use from a single purchase is the engineering goal so yeah, I think that all kind of small improvements can be made to squeeze more life & zest outta of what is sold is possible. I just don't think we are getting all the performance, economy, reliability, efficiency & longevity that is possible. Most things can be improved upon. The results I spoke of were after the plugs had been installed for a couple of months so seperate improvements were noticed.
Actually, I think you and me are in basic agreement here. I also think that many small, and sometimes not so small, improvements can be made to the basic product resulting in better performance, economy, reliability, efficiency and longevity, as you state. An inspection of the list of mods I've done to my car certainly would indicate my own feelings here. Obviously, production costs, the typical customer base to which the car is marketed and government regulations specifying emission and safety standards play a major role in determining the way in which our cars come equipped from the factory. A case in point is the OEM spark plug wires for the FS-DE; low first cost but adequate to do the job even though they will ultimately have to be replaced to maintain rated performance.
Along the same lines, TheMAN was the first to inform us that the FS-DE engine could benefit from extended reach plugs (they are OEM in the 1.6L 3rd gen engines) and that certain equivalent JDM models were using them. If you look at TheMAN's article, he provides a number of references suggesting that the benefits obtained are due to the fact that the extended nose EFFECTIVELY advances the ignition timing by ~ 2 degrees since the electrodes are placed closer to the center of the fuel charge. A further suggestion was then made that, consequently, 89 octane (plus) fuel should be used with these plugs to prevent detonation under certain circumstances and to take full advantage of their benefits. This in fact is what I'm doing, but the US-influenced requirement that our cars use 87 octane fuel may, at the same time, have mandated the use of non-extended nose spark plugs in our USDM cars.
As to studies dealing with the comparative analysis of performance and its degradation in 4-wire versus 2-wire versus 0-wire ignition systems, I obviously have no knowledge of the results obtained. I can only draw inferences here and assume that elimination of a wear item and potential RF interference source like a spark plug wire is a good thing in today's electronically controlled engine environment, and leads to greater reliability through the elimination of a part. At the same time, it seems to me that mounting the coil output terminal directly on the spark plug terminal yields the best and cleanest possible transmission path for the electric current used to ignite the mixture. Of course, elimination of a part also may save money, without harming performance, which is not necessarily a bad thing. I would also expect that companies who manufacture spark plug wires would also have piles of data 'proving' that their wires are superior to any OEM design and therefore promote the idea that performance demands the use of their wires, and the more the merrier.
These ideas reflect my current thinking, and of course, I could be wrong.(enguard)