<VV> Spark Plug Gaps

[Chris & Bill Strickland]

>does anybody have any EVIDENCE either agreeing  or DISagreeing with my suspicion that our engines would work better with a  greater gap?
>

Rule of Thumb from Back When, as stated by "Old John", was that a 
smaller gap would start and idle better, even with the then new HEI 
systems -- he always put them at .035 and no one ever complained, but 
that doesn't mean it passed emissions testing as this pre-dated testing, 
and I'm sure John fiddled with those lean carbs to richen them up.  So 
part of the problem will be defining what making "our engines ... work 
better" means.

It takes a higher voltage spark to jump the wider gaps, which sorta 
means fewer misfires and less unburnt hydrocarbons out the tail pipe, 
eveything else being equal.  Not really much difference between .028, 
.030, .032, and .035 in a stock type engine, but we don't even have the 
same gas now days compared to when GM established the spec, so is the 
spec really valid even if it is mostly a sorta stock engine?  Probably 
nobody really *knows*, nor has any combustion chamber data to back up 
their *know*ing -- maybe faster/slower lap times on the track, or 
better/worse dyno numbers -- probably the best data would be real time 
exhaust gas analysis on your individual car, and most of the guys doing 
that are playing with their fuel injection, not their spark plug gap.

Hopefully, maybe I've stepped on somebody's toes and they'll speak up?

Bill S