Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-07-2012, 04:10 PM   #1 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 475

Oh Deer - '03 Ford Ranger XL
90 day: 33.97 mpg (US)
Thanks: 55
Thanked 91 Times in 72 Posts
Swapping coil pack order?

Found this mod on a Ranger site and wanted to hear what folks here thought.

Discuss How To: Dual ignition Plug mod (Dual plug 2.3/2.5L only) - Ford Ranger Forum

Basically what it seems to say is you switch the order the plugs are fired in. Not the firing order of the engine. This is for Rangers with the dual coil pack systems. I guess one plug in each cylinder fires on compression and one fires on exhaust(?) to burn any unburnt fuel left there for better emissions. Switching the order makes BOTH plugs fire on compression for a bigger spark I am guessing. The OP claims a gain of 2-3mpg highway.

Any thoughts?

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to hat_man For This Useful Post:
landsailor (01-07-2012)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-07-2012, 04:36 PM   #2 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Hamburg, New York
Posts: 104

Jenny - '02 Chevrolet Prizm Lsi
90 day: 31.45 mpg (US)

Crowley - '23 Ford Maverick XLT
90 day: 33.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 13 Times in 9 Posts
It was always my understanding that both plugs fire on ignition stroke and only one set fire on exhaust... Which actually makes sense now that they don't because I had a grounded plug wire (pass side of engine) and that cylinder wouldn't fire at all even though the engine had another plug on the other side. It makes sense in theory. Im going to go try this in a few i'll let you know if my engine. blows or not lol
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2012, 04:45 PM   #3 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 475

Oh Deer - '03 Ford Ranger XL
90 day: 33.97 mpg (US)
Thanks: 55
Thanked 91 Times in 72 Posts
I'm definitely no expert or mechanic but check out the link before you try it. I don't want to be the one who led someone to damage an engine. I can't say for sure but it may be Ranger specific or your "order" may be different. Be careful.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2012, 08:47 PM   #4 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Hamburg, New York
Posts: 104

Jenny - '02 Chevrolet Prizm Lsi
90 day: 31.45 mpg (US)

Crowley - '23 Ford Maverick XLT
90 day: 33.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 13 Times in 9 Posts
Well, I did it. I left the engine running, unplugged the coil pack, switched the wires, and plugged it back it. The engined idled just a little smoother and when I took her around the block, she seemed to have a little bit more grunt but I wouldn't even count that as I'm sure it's just in my head. Either way, it didn't seem to hurt anything and seeing how it's a free 30 second mod I'm just going to leave it. Any mpg or hp gains are just gravy. Plus my truck smokes less now. Probably because the plugs aren't igniting all the oil that blows past my rings lol
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2012, 05:52 PM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 475

Oh Deer - '03 Ford Ranger XL
90 day: 33.97 mpg (US)
Thanks: 55
Thanked 91 Times in 72 Posts
Guess nobody has any thoughts one way or the other.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2012, 08:13 PM   #6 (permalink)
Spacetiger
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: N. Va
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
a bit odd that this setup is better as the factory could have done this. All I can say is that there maybe more power/better MPG, but the emissions might be worse - that might explain why the factory doesn't come that way.

My 2 cents

Jerry
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2012, 08:25 PM   #7 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Hamburg, New York
Posts: 104

Jenny - '02 Chevrolet Prizm Lsi
90 day: 31.45 mpg (US)

Crowley - '23 Ford Maverick XLT
90 day: 33.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 13 Times in 9 Posts
Ya emissions are definitely worse I can smell the difference. But if it saves gas then there'll be less emissions overall due to less gas being used... So it's kind of a catch 22
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2012, 10:32 PM   #8 (permalink)
Spacetiger
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: N. Va
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I wonder if you can figure out the ignition timing vs. valve timing per RPM to see where the piston is relative to the firing.

Seems to me, the best mileage is when you are getting optimal bang to push the pistons down. Taking into account the flame travel time and engine timing (piston, valve timing, and ignition timing), it would seem that would work out to be the best for emissions. I am surprised you can smell the difference. Is it a (unburned) gas smell?

If so, that would not be good for the cat as you could burn it out early - then the mileage would drop and codes tripped...

Jerry
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2012, 07:46 PM   #9 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Hamburg, New York
Posts: 104

Jenny - '02 Chevrolet Prizm Lsi
90 day: 31.45 mpg (US)

Crowley - '23 Ford Maverick XLT
90 day: 33.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 13 Times in 9 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by spacetiger View Post
I wonder if you can figure out the ignition timing vs. valve timing per RPM to see where the piston is relative to the firing.

Seems to me, the best mileage is when you are getting optimal bang to push the pistons down. Taking into account the flame travel time and engine timing (piston, valve timing, and ignition timing), it would seem that would work out to be the best for emissions. I am surprised you can smell the difference. Is it a (unburned) gas smell?

If so, that would not be good for the cat as you could burn it out early - then the mileage would drop and codes tripped...

Jerry
No it's the smell of oil. My ranger has 180k on it and quite a bit of oil blows past the rings. And I think I'd need to have a catalytic converter in order for it to get fouled up lol. I can see your point about the timing though. If the ignition set of plugs are supposed to spark, say, at around 4 deg. BTDC, (just a random number) maybe the second set of emmisions plugs are supposed to fire directly at TDC or maybe even slightly after, then the second spark after switching the wires around would do absolutely nothing. But, us ranger owners have a unique chance with the dual spark heads. I'll look around at the junkyard and if I can find a wiring harness, I'll do an experiment to add a plug going from the wiring harness on the main coil pack to go to the secondary could pack. This way, the timing for both sets of plugs would be exactly the same. I just looked online the coil packs are the same part number, so it must be the trucks comPuter that makes the secondary Plugs low voltage. By adding on another plug to the wiring harness, the computer will make both coil packs fire the same and at the same time. It's worth a shot, anyways.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com