X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 00:13:24 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail14.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.195] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.2) with ESMTPS id 2890356 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 02 May 2008 10:47:45 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=211.29.132.195; envelope-from=fredmoreno@optusnet.com.au Received: from fred ([202.139.5.198]) (authenticated sender fredmoreno) by mail14.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m42Ekllg026140 for ; Sat, 3 May 2008 00:46:56 +1000 From: "Fred Moreno" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mail" Subject: FW: [LML] Re: Lightspeed Plasma III in Performance Engine X-Original-Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 22:46:44 +0800 X-Original-Message-ID: <000501c8ac63$5dd3a3b0$c6058bca@fred> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8ACA6.6BF6E3B0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6822 Importance: Normal Thread-Index: AcisWi6eRDV/Tg44REKlEem2RvisfAACPXuw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8ACA6.6BF6E3B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 Conclusion: Lightspeed fires through ugly fouled plugs better than a magneto, just as advertised. So this might be a benefit in starting if = your plugs are somewhat fouled. =20 Doesn't Lightspeed use an automotive type plug instead of the massive electrode plugs typically used with mags? I was just wondering if the automotive plug is less prone to fouling. The Lightspeed probably does = fire through better, but unless the plug configuration is the same on the Lightspeed and the mag it seems like the results could be a little misleading. =20 Tom Gourley =20 Right you are Tom, and as Grayhawk noted, plug position counts also. My Lightspeed fires the top plugs which probably stay cleaner, and the mag fires the lower plugs which are probably dirtier, so my comment was unwarranted. A comprehensive test would reverse the plug positions and = try it again to see what happens. =20 =20 Fred =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8ACA6.6BF6E3B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

Conclusion: = Lightspeed fires through ugly fouled plugs better than a magneto, just as advertised.  So this might be a benefit in starting if your plugs = are somewhat fouled.

 

Doesn't Lightspeed use an = automotive type plug instead of the massive electrode plugs typically used with = mags?  I was just wondering if the automotive plug is less prone to = fouling.  The Lightspeed probably does fire through better, but unless the plug = configuration is the same on the Lightspeed and the mag it seems like the = results could be a little misleading.

 

Tom Gourley

 

Right you are Tom, and as Grayhawk = noted, plug position counts also.  My Lightspeed fires the top plugs which = probably stay cleaner, and the mag fires the lower plugs which are probably = dirtier, so my comment was unwarranted.  A comprehensive test would reverse the = plug positions and try it again to see what happens. 

 

Fred

 

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8ACA6.6BF6E3B0--