Zetterbeard
Well-Known Member
Just to confirm, the M-12405-35T plugs do fit the 2.3L in the Ranger gaped at .026? Just want to double check before purchasing.
Sponsored
Yep! They fit and the truck is running super well. Had them in for about 200 miles so far.Just to confirm, the M-12405-35T plugs do fit the 2.3L in the Ranger gaped at .026? Just want to double check before purchasing.
The only issue I see is the .043 gap, The most allowable gap change that NGK supports is .008, so the smallest gap you'll get to is .035. That very likely to cause spark blowout and a slight loss in performance. Stock gap is .030 and recommended tuned gap is .026-.028.I went in another direction and picked up NGK 95605 LTR7BHX Ruthenium HX Plug , which should be one step colder Ruthenium style NGK's.
I"ll let you guys know how it goes when I get them installed.
You aren't wrong, i'll likely gap them down to .27 some of the Fiesta and Focus guys have been doing that with no issue.The only issue I see is the .043 gap, The most allowable gap change that NGK supports is .008, so the smallest gap you'll get to is .035. That very likely to cause spark blowout and a slight loss in performance. Stock gap is .030 and recommended tuned gap is .026-.028.
That part number (M-12405-35T) is slotted for the 3.5 Ecoboost V6 motors- only sold in sets of 6. The Ford Performance plugs that are specked for the 2018 2.3 Focus RS and Mustang 2.3 Ecoboost are M-12405-20T, said to be 2 steps colder than stock. Any reason you chose the plugs for the V6 ecoboost from Ford Performance? Or is it the same plug as the M-12405-20T? All Ecoboost plugs seem to be the same configuration. The M-12405-20T are also a lot more expensive for some reason.Nah, extensive research indicates that not only do these not have iridium in the straps (aka not double iridium like the motocraft), but they also don't perform as well according to testing by multiple EB tuners. Additionally, gapping the 6510's to .026 is going beyond the recommended allowable gapping from NGK. Ending up finding out that the 542s, being one step colder, were likely superseded due to emissions and replaced with a normal temp plug. As such, they moved these plugs to their ford performance line and changed the model number to Ford Performance M-12405-35T. I ordered three sets so I can keep some on hand and bought a nice gapper tool so I can gap them down to .026 as recommended for nearly any tuned EB. I'll report back how the truck runs after I get them put in tomorrow.
Did you ever find out the one step colder plugs and where did you get them?Anyone running the NGK ruthenium one step colder?
5 star recommends swapping plugs at 30-35k miles and I'm at 41k!
Is it 95605?
When I type in the specs of the truck rockauto gives me PN 90495 which is heat range 6
Yea I put the 95605 and bought em from rockauto.Did you ever find out the one step colder plugs and where did you get them?
So the colder plugs are part # Ford Performance M-12405-35T? Itās not me itās the Jack Daniels.Okay, so I was assuming my truck had the sp542(one step colder plugs) based on other EB platforms and what @tjanok found above. However, my truck indeed had sp578 (CYFS12YPT) in it. Picture below, they donāt look great after 24.9k miles but 19k of those have been while running the 93 performance tune. I installed the sp542 one step colder plugs (ford performance part number above) and I can say with certainty that the truck runs and idles more smoothly. Iām glad I changed them out for sure.
That is what I switched to after a tune and performance parts.So the colder plugs are part # Ford Performance M-12405-35T? Itās not me itās the Jack Daniels.
Think these are equal or is the one you got better?That is what I switched to after a tune and performance parts.
https://www.levittownfordparts.com/sku/m-12405-35t.html
Honestly not too sure, went FP so I wouldn't be wondering if it was the right temp.Think these are equal or is the one you got better?
NGK 95822 Laser Iridium Spark Plugs