Raising compression
#31
Rennlist Member
Very interesting write-up on CR vs Boost. It gives a very convincing argument for "lower" CR in forced induction motors as Rogue has been discussing:
http://www.modularfords.com/f17/incr...ressure-51059/
http://www.modularfords.com/f17/incr...ressure-51059/
#32
Rennlist Member
I don't think too many people running modified motors in here are victims of huge lag. Most guys are now running decent aftermarket Mafs, Maps, Standalones etc where lag is reasonably insignificant. Sure, they're not like a modern factory small capacity, high c/r turbo motor like my g/f's Peugeot but nor do they fall off after quite low rpms. Our cars are performance cars which are driven in a spirited fashion be it on road or track. A little lag is fine by me. Feels great and is easily controllable with a modicum of anticipation.
Not to say that a high-ish c/r 16v 3L+ motor while running E85 or similar isn't appealing. But then so is a billet block / head with superior design blah blah...(Did someone say Norwood!)
Not to say that a high-ish c/r 16v 3L+ motor while running E85 or similar isn't appealing. But then so is a billet block / head with superior design blah blah...(Did someone say Norwood!)
#33
Rennlist Member
The higher the compression ratio, the higher the efficiency.
You want power to come on smooth with the turbo and not ramp up. A smooth power delivery is easier to drive and is easier on the drivetrain. Turbo lag is never good and will be introduced when lowering the CR, which also makes the engine less efficient in the areas with little to no boost. Torque plateaus is where it's at, not a peak horsepower number.
I would love to see what a 3.0L could do with 10ish CR and a proper sized turbo.
You want power to come on smooth with the turbo and not ramp up. A smooth power delivery is easier to drive and is easier on the drivetrain. Turbo lag is never good and will be introduced when lowering the CR, which also makes the engine less efficient in the areas with little to no boost. Torque plateaus is where it's at, not a peak horsepower number.
I would love to see what a 3.0L could do with 10ish CR and a proper sized turbo.
#34
Rennlist Member
But, it's very difficult to increase the average cylinder pressure without increasing the peak cylinder pressure some. It's just inherent to how reciprocating engines work.
Even if one argues that an increase in BMEP can be achieved from higher cylinder pressures purely from later in the power stroke, it would be so late that some of the energy would inevitably be wasted out the opening exhaust valve.
I'm in the camp of higher CR. Let's try to get every last bit of energy out of the fuel we can; SI engines are wasteful enough as they are.
One could argue that we could help reduce detonation potential of the higher CR, with lesser exhaust back pressure on the head (bigger hotsides); but the higher CR would make up for possible increase in lag.
#35
Rennlist Member
Interesting that Corleone had some apparent issues with coolant "hot spots" resulting in HG issues. He went as far as to install 4 steam vent kits. Other high HP motors have reported similar coolant "hot spots". Corleone was running almost 10:1 CR. Is it possible these HG issues were not "hot spots" but rather head lift due to high peak cylinder pressures? My block is over half-filled but I saw no such coolant "hot spots". My 2.85L was running 8.1:1 CR. Any thoughts?
#36
Professional Hoon
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,090
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Interesting that Corleone had some apparent issues with coolant "hot spots" resulting in HG issues. He went as far as to install 4 steam vent kits. Other high HP motors have reported similar coolant "hot spots". Corleone was running almost 10:1 CR. Is it possible these HG issues were not "hot spots" but rather head lift due to high peak cylinder pressures? My block is over half-filled but I saw no such coolant "hot spots". My 2.85L was running 8.1:1 CR. Any thoughts?
#37
Racer
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Encinitas, ca PCA National DE instructor PCA San Diego chief driving instructor
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
2 Posts
And he was revving to 7-8k because the power band moved to the right as of the high comp and cam.
"Back in the day" when I raced AMA Superbike we would run different compression ratios for different tracks. Willow, Daytona, Elkart Lake, less compression (13:1 or so) to boost top end power. Laguna, Sears, Laconia, more squeeze (some guys were running 16:1 or more) to get it off the corners quicker. Of course, cams and cam timing were changed too.
Other tracks were a compromise setup. Note that we had unrestricted fuel quantity. Restricting fuel load like some classes do encourages high mechanical compression ratios, as the compression ratio is the efficiency ratio.
#38
Burning Brakes
I can see a 16:1 engine having soft power up top. With compression that high it's like the entire combustion chamber becomes a quench zone.
One of the things I look for when choosing a comp ratio is the lowest ignition timing I see during a WOT pull. Typically timing is lowest at peak torque, and if peak torque occurs at lower rpm (think small turbo) then you either need to keep boost down or use a low comp ratio so that timing stays on the right side of BTDC. If you use the same comp ratio with a big turbo, then peak torque happens at higher rpm where timing is typically higher, so you can either run more boost or raise the comp ratio. So it's a juggling act between boost level, turbo size, ign timing, and comp ratio. At least that's how I see it.
Also, don't be afraid of low timing. It seems like there's a tradition in the 951 arena for having high timing. I know the APE chips that came in my car run rediculous timing during cruise. A bone stock EVO only has 4 to 6 degrees of timing at peak torque (21psi @ 4k rpm.)
One of the things I look for when choosing a comp ratio is the lowest ignition timing I see during a WOT pull. Typically timing is lowest at peak torque, and if peak torque occurs at lower rpm (think small turbo) then you either need to keep boost down or use a low comp ratio so that timing stays on the right side of BTDC. If you use the same comp ratio with a big turbo, then peak torque happens at higher rpm where timing is typically higher, so you can either run more boost or raise the comp ratio. So it's a juggling act between boost level, turbo size, ign timing, and comp ratio. At least that's how I see it.
Also, don't be afraid of low timing. It seems like there's a tradition in the 951 arena for having high timing. I know the APE chips that came in my car run rediculous timing during cruise. A bone stock EVO only has 4 to 6 degrees of timing at peak torque (21psi @ 4k rpm.)
#39
Racer
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Encinitas, ca PCA National DE instructor PCA San Diego chief driving instructor
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
2 Posts
I can see a 16:1 engine having soft power up top. With compression that high it's like the entire combustion chamber becomes a quench zone.
And those same tuners were scratching their heads wondering why it wouldn't pull on top even with rock'em sock'em cams and way-too-big carbs ???? ()
The number of clueless tuners in semi pro racing rivals the number of restaurant owners who can't cook a tasty meal to save their lives...
#40
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Yep - nearly always, as peak torque usually corresponds to peak volumetric efficiency.
I agree that Evos/DSMs/Hondas and other high-flowing, 16-valve, centered spark-plug, small-bore engines will be ok, and even require low timing advance. My friends ~500awhp DSM I tuned, was single-digit timing at peak torque.
However, that approach simply won't make power with the 951. They need timing, and lots of it compared to a 4G63, B16, ect. Sid's car picked up 10mph in the 1/4 just by adding timing. The large bores, off-center spark-plugs, wedge-style combustion chamber, and lower port-flow (compared to a 4-valve) all contribute to needing more spark-lead.
Also, don't be afraid of low timing. It seems like there's a tradition in the 951 arena for having high timing. I know the APE chips that came in my car run rediculous timing during cruise. A bone stock EVO only has 4 to 6 degrees of timing at peak torque (21psi @ 4k rpm.)
However, that approach simply won't make power with the 951. They need timing, and lots of it compared to a 4G63, B16, ect. Sid's car picked up 10mph in the 1/4 just by adding timing. The large bores, off-center spark-plugs, wedge-style combustion chamber, and lower port-flow (compared to a 4-valve) all contribute to needing more spark-lead.
#41
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep - nearly always, as peak torque usually corresponds to peak volumetric efficiency.
I agree that Evos/DSMs/Hondas and other high-flowing, 16-valve, centered spark-plug, small-bore engines will be ok, and even require low timing advance. My friends ~500awhp DSM I tuned, was single-digit timing at peak torque.
However, that approach simply won't make power with the 951. They need timing, and lots of it compared to a 4G63, B16, ect. Sid's car picked up 10mph in the 1/4 just by adding timing. The large bores, off-center spark-plugs, wedge-style combustion chamber, and lower port-flow (compared to a 4-valve) all contribute to needing more spark-lead.
I agree that Evos/DSMs/Hondas and other high-flowing, 16-valve, centered spark-plug, small-bore engines will be ok, and even require low timing advance. My friends ~500awhp DSM I tuned, was single-digit timing at peak torque.
However, that approach simply won't make power with the 951. They need timing, and lots of it compared to a 4G63, B16, ect. Sid's car picked up 10mph in the 1/4 just by adding timing. The large bores, off-center spark-plugs, wedge-style combustion chamber, and lower port-flow (compared to a 4-valve) all contribute to needing more spark-lead.
#42
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
#44
Intermediate
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Daytona Beach
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh yeah, coz the antique audivwporsche inline 4 is so much better than a Honda inline 4.
Obviously a modern 2.0-2.4L inline 4 with a 16 valve variable intake and exhaust head makes more power more efficiently than my low compression 2.5L 8 valve (and is somewhere around 100lb lighter from what I hear)
Obviously a modern 2.0-2.4L inline 4 with a 16 valve variable intake and exhaust head makes more power more efficiently than my low compression 2.5L 8 valve (and is somewhere around 100lb lighter from what I hear)