PULSTAR Pulse Plug

[Taurus]

Anyone who have tried this?

http://www.pulstarplug.com/

Pulse plugs are a radical departure from spark plugs. Their physical dimensions are the same as spark plugs because they have to interface with the engine and ignition system just like spark plugs. But this is where the similarity ends.


Pulse plugs incorporate a pulse circuit, which stores incoming electrical energy from the ignition system and releases the stored energy in a powerful pulse of power. Instead of 50 watts of peak power typical of all spark plugs, pulse plugs deliver up to 1 million watts of peak power. So where does the pulse plug get its incredible power?


When the ignition signal is sent to a traditional spark plug, it begins to ionize the spark gap. This means that the voltage builds in the gap until a spark can be formed. During this ionization phase, which lasts about 5 millionths of a second, the incoming voltage (which has nowhere to go) heats up ignition components including the spark plug. This is wasted energy. When the ignition voltage overcomes the resistance in the spark gap, the spark is created with an initial discharge of approximately 50 watts. Once created, the spark resides between the electrodes at very low power for over a period of 30 millionths of a second.
What is different about a pulse plug is that instead of heating ignition parts during the ionization phase, this energy is stored in the integral circuit inside the pulse plug. When the ignition power overcomes the resistance in the spark gap, the pulse circuit discharges all of its accumulated power - 1 million watts - in 2 billionths of a second!
A simple way to think about pulse plugs is that they are similar to a camera flash, whereas spark plugs are more like a flashlight. A camera flash is exponentially brighter than a flashlight even though they both may use the same battery.




The powerful spark of Pulstar™ ignites fuel more precisely, which can reduce cycle-to-cycle variation by up to 50%. This is an important contribution to improving fuel economy.

Its a bit expensive but may compensate for the savings on fuel.

[niky]

Forgot the link, but I looked it up.

Basically, there probably isn't much of an effect.

A flashlight lasts longer than a camera flash... that 2 billionths of a second versus 30 millionths is:

0.000000002
0.000000300

At those infintesimal time frames, the spark propagated is only propagated at the tip. Considering it doesn't go anywhere else but the tip of the spark plug, the combustion wave-front emanating from the spark remains exactly the same. The spark plug can't change the speed or intensity of the flame-front propagation...

To put it in another perspective... your gas is a stick of dynamite. Whether you light it with a lighter or a small blowtorch, the amount of boom is still the same.

Multiple point plugs (like Bosch Super Fours and Splitfires) were conceptualized as a way of making this wave-front bigger at the start (double or quadruple points of initial combustion = better coverage), in other words, you're lighting your dynamite at multiple points for a faster boom. But that idea didn't really pan out as planned. Ideally, the Bosch Super Four is supposed to be a superior plug, but real-life results from its use provide mixed reactions... from "it feels a little stronger", to "it runs like crap."

Apparently, the thing that really matters is that the tip of the plug is as close to the center of the combustion chamber as possible, so that the flame-front propagates evenly throughout the cylinder.

Now, this product claims to produce better combustion from using a shorter but stronger pulse? Probably not. It could arguably make for more consistent combustion, but that's it.

I'll believe it if I actually see dyno-testing by a respectable source. Dyno results so far haven't shown much... one is from a first-time poster in his forum, another is from a guy who switched from Bosch Super Fours (which, like I've said, run like crap on some cars).

-----

I'm not saying, categorically, that they won't work. Some plugs actually show a 2-3 hp difference on four-bangers found in your common commuter car as compared to other plugs... but these "more powerful" plugs are often already OEM for the car (in the case of NGK BKR5E or 6Es). And if you want a shorter but stronger pulse, there's a simple way to do it... re-gap your plugs.

Their claims are, quite frankly... fantastic... and it would be interesting to see how their plugs test against brand-new OEM and common plugs on a number of cars.

[Taurus]

According to their site's test results:

http://www.pulstarplug.com/testresults.html

E-PEP® TEST RESULTS
PULSTAR™ IMPROVEMENT (%)
OVER SPARK PLUGS Vehicle
Spark
Plug
Pulse
Plug
Fuel
Economy 0-60 MPH Times Relative
Torque 2006 Mercury
Marquis, 4.6L MC AGSF
22FM1 Pulstar
Ad1 10.5 5.0 11.0 2006 Toyota
Corolla, 1.8L NGK
IFR5A11 Pulstar
Be1 2.2 10.0 5.0 2004 Chevrolet
Avalanche, 5.3L AC Delco
41-985 Pulstar
Ad1 8.4 7.8 11.2 2004 Chevrolet
Malibu, 2.2L AC Delco
12563387 Pulstar
Ad1
4.1 5.4 3.8 1997 BMW
740i, 4.4L Bosch Super
F7LDCR Pulstar
Be1 8.4 8.0 6.9
This is supposed to be in a table but it won't display that way. Sorry.

Enerpulse Performance Evaluation Procedure (E-PEP)
The Enerpulse Performance Evaluation Procedure (E-PEP) is a test method for comparing the performance of pulse plugs against that of spark plugs and documenting the comparison in three performance categories: fuel economy (city and highway), 0-60 MPH times and relative torque. Subject vehicles are prepared utilizing factory recommended new spark plugs, spark gap settings, tire pressures and fuel. Fuel flow meters are installed into the vehicle’s fuel lines (incoming and return) and linked to a computer to register real-time fuel flow throughout the test to an accuracy of 1/42,000th of a gallon. An accelerometer is also installed to measure 0-60 times and relative torque.
Once prepared the vehicle is driven for 10 miles on a closed-loop course 3 times to simulate city driving and driven for 20 miles on a closed-loop course 3 times to simulate highway driving. The average miles per gallon for each condition is then added together and divided by 2 yielding a single average fuel economy number.
If an accelerometer is used the vehicle will then be accelerated 6 times from 0 to 60 MPH on a flat driving surface upwind and downwind. The high and low times, relative horsepower and relative torque readings are discarded and the average of the remaining 4 runs is recorded.
If a dynamometer is used, a series of tests reflecting 0-60, relative horsepower, and relative torque will be performed. The vehicle will perform 3 runs for each test and the average of the 3 will then be recorded.
When E-PEP is completed for the stock factory spark plug, Pulstar™ pulse plugs are installed and the vehicle is reconditioned with tire pressure and fuel. E-PEP is then run again with pulse plugs and the averages of all 4 conditions (city fuel economy, highway fuel economy, 0-60 times relative horsepower and relative torque) are calculated. The improvement percentage for Pulstar™ vs. the stock spark plug is then calculated.
A data disc is burned to archive the comparative data, which is also logged in the E-PEP Test Results register.
The performance of your vehicle may vary with the age and condition of your car, weather, and your driving habits. Remember that pulse plugs are an investment.

but then again this may have only been performed on their own lab. A separate party may give a different result somehow, I'll still search for some on :google:

[Taurus]

Got this from one of the forums:

The 1MW claim certainly comes from the fact that they're using pulse compression techniques common in pulsed power PFN designs to compress the same amount of energy in a smaller time frame. In gas discharge lasers, a fast electrical discharge results in a stable plasma, and desirable laser performance. What really got my attention in the article were the picutures of the comustion wave front propagation from a traditional plug verses the pulse plug. The wave front propagation was shown nearly 2x faster w/ the pulse plug. Chemical reactions occur on the nanosecond scale, so if the pulse discharge is able to deliver ALL the spark energy to initiate combustion, rather than taking longer to spark, and burning the pulse energy in the plug resistor, this would establish a higher energy shock wave and potentially enhance the rate at which combustion occurs... I say it's plausible to attain a more efficient (and more consistent) combustion cycle.

[niky]

Plausibility is one thing, proof is another.

I'd wait and see, but I doubt any solid proof will come of this.