Decking Heads / compression ratio
04-08-2009, 05:02 PM
#1
Newb
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7
Total Cats: 0
Decking Heads / compression ratio
A Couple related questions:
What is the stock compression ratio on 1.6? (9:1 ish?)
On stock components...
How much clearance do I have on the heads before the valves and pistons become kissing cousins, (even if a timing belt snaps)?
And, how far do you have to machine the head to achieve a 9.5:1 and a 10:1 compression ratio respectively?
If anyone knows, or could point me in the right direction I'd appreciate it.
What is the stock compression ratio on 1.6? (9:1 ish?)
On stock components...
How much clearance do I have on the heads before the valves and pistons become kissing cousins, (even if a timing belt snaps)?
And, how far do you have to machine the head to achieve a 9.5:1 and a 10:1 compression ratio respectively?
If anyone knows, or could point me in the right direction I'd appreciate it.
Reply
0
0
04-08-2009, 06:58 PM
#5
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
let me point you in the right direction:
low compression: lots of spark advance
high comp: lots of slow gayness and detonation
I'm making a substantially more torque on my 8.6:1 motor with a gt2860rs than about anyone on a 9.0:1 static motor. So much that I was surprised. Take a look through my build and dyno threads...the #'s speak for themselves. My car isn't sluggish off boost either, I wouldn't change a thing if I had to do it again.
Now, flame away and tell me about how my turbine-housing is too big, my compression is too low, and how I constantly pull the wool and how you've never seen a naked chick in your life, bro. Bubble hard in the BRG, flex the roll, with the top dropped, holler back...
low compression: lots of spark advance
high comp: lots of slow gayness and detonation
I'm making a substantially more torque on my 8.6:1 motor with a gt2860rs than about anyone on a 9.0:1 static motor. So much that I was surprised. Take a look through my build and dyno threads...the #'s speak for themselves. My car isn't sluggish off boost either, I wouldn't change a thing if I had to do it again.
Now, flame away and tell me about how my turbine-housing is too big, my compression is too low, and how I constantly pull the wool and how you've never seen a naked chick in your life, bro. Bubble hard in the BRG, flex the roll, with the top dropped, holler back...
Reply
0
0
04-08-2009, 08:05 PM
#6
Newb
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7
Total Cats: 0
So i can ask it a different way.
I would like to run 8 lbs of boost. I'm running a Greddy system (not the greatest) with a piggy-back (not the greatest^2) and don't feel like tuning a high boost car with just fuel pressure or getting a piggy-back fuel management system. High power is not my goal with this build. Nor am i trying to make more than 180 horse on this car.
Usually the recommendation would be to drop the compression, add thicker head gasket for instance, then add boost to make power. I personally don't want to tune above 10 lbs w/o a stand alone, nor am I going to buy one because of my financial situation.
I have my motor apart right now and am just going to use stock components putting it back together b/c I don't have any $$ for forged components or lots of machine work. In fact, I'm taking out a loan just to fix the car because I have to have it running. What I can do is deck my heads for free. My plan is to push up the compression a tad and run mid-to-low boost.
What is the optimal compression ratio on stock components without running into heat and detonation problems?
I would imagine like 9.5:1 or maybe 10:1; even though that's pushing it.
Next question is how to achieve that ratio with just decking the heads.
... closer to a 'turbo forum' question now or does 'head work with boost application' fall under a separate category? It sounded like an "engine building question" to me, but I could be mistaken.
It is interesting to correlate 'high compression' with 'slow gayness and detonation.' If i wanted to run 11:1... I'd say that's just an N/A build or a bit ridiculous if you wanted to add boost.
My question is; given 8 lbs of boost, what is the highest compression ratio you can safely run; and how to achieve it. I assumed I had a good idea what that ratio would be and wanted to ask a simple question.
It is also interesting to correlate intent with a technical question. I'm not here to compare my nuts to anyone. I just want to try and upgrade my car within the means of time and resources I have available to me and hoped someone would know.
I would like to run 8 lbs of boost. I'm running a Greddy system (not the greatest) with a piggy-back (not the greatest^2) and don't feel like tuning a high boost car with just fuel pressure or getting a piggy-back fuel management system. High power is not my goal with this build. Nor am i trying to make more than 180 horse on this car.
Usually the recommendation would be to drop the compression, add thicker head gasket for instance, then add boost to make power. I personally don't want to tune above 10 lbs w/o a stand alone, nor am I going to buy one because of my financial situation.
I have my motor apart right now and am just going to use stock components putting it back together b/c I don't have any $$ for forged components or lots of machine work. In fact, I'm taking out a loan just to fix the car because I have to have it running. What I can do is deck my heads for free. My plan is to push up the compression a tad and run mid-to-low boost.
What is the optimal compression ratio on stock components without running into heat and detonation problems?
I would imagine like 9.5:1 or maybe 10:1; even though that's pushing it.
Next question is how to achieve that ratio with just decking the heads.
... closer to a 'turbo forum' question now or does 'head work with boost application' fall under a separate category? It sounded like an "engine building question" to me, but I could be mistaken.
It is interesting to correlate 'high compression' with 'slow gayness and detonation.' If i wanted to run 11:1... I'd say that's just an N/A build or a bit ridiculous if you wanted to add boost.
My question is; given 8 lbs of boost, what is the highest compression ratio you can safely run; and how to achieve it. I assumed I had a good idea what that ratio would be and wanted to ask a simple question.
It is also interesting to correlate intent with a technical question. I'm not here to compare my nuts to anyone. I just want to try and upgrade my car within the means of time and resources I have available to me and hoped someone would know.
Reply
0
0
04-08-2009, 08:37 PM
#7
I think y8s has been running boost on his 10:1 stock pistons for a while now so its clearly possible (I'm not sure if the 10:1 pistons still clear the valves in the event of a cambelt snap, anyone care to comment?)
You have the engine apart so the easiest way will be to measure your engine. I wouldn't feel safe machining bits based on information from someone else's motor.
Also there is no way in hell you are going to raise your compression from 8.8:1 to 10:1 by having your head skimmed. Only way is to use domed pistons with recesses cut for the valves if you are worried about cambelt snapage. Unfortunately you are out of luck for drop in replacements because all of the higher comp pistons are for 1.8's so its going to be an expensive experiment.
If you have a really good buddy who does **** hot welding you could try adding material to the combustion chambers between the valves, thought this will require you to do a lot of grinding and polishing so that all of the cylinders are "cc'd". But it's a good excuse to port the **** out of the head while you are there.
Some people I know have tried adding material to their pistons, they also then had some interesting crankcase ventilation so I wouldn't advise it.
Let us know how you get on.
You have the engine apart so the easiest way will be to measure your engine. I wouldn't feel safe machining bits based on information from someone else's motor.
Also there is no way in hell you are going to raise your compression from 8.8:1 to 10:1 by having your head skimmed. Only way is to use domed pistons with recesses cut for the valves if you are worried about cambelt snapage. Unfortunately you are out of luck for drop in replacements because all of the higher comp pistons are for 1.8's so its going to be an expensive experiment.
If you have a really good buddy who does **** hot welding you could try adding material to the combustion chambers between the valves, thought this will require you to do a lot of grinding and polishing so that all of the cylinders are "cc'd". But it's a good excuse to port the **** out of the head while you are there.
Some people I know have tried adding material to their pistons, they also then had some interesting crankcase ventilation so I wouldn't advise it.
Let us know how you get on.
Reply
0
0
04-08-2009, 08:37 PM
#8
Newb
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 12
Total Cats: 0
let me point you in the right direction:
low compression: lots of spark advance
high comp: lots of slow gayness and detonation
I'm making a substantially more torque on my 8.6:1 motor with a gt2860rs than about anyone on a 9.0:1 static motor. So much that I was surprised. Take a look through my build and dyno threads...the #'s speak for themselves. My car isn't sluggish off boost either, I wouldn't change a thing if I had to do it again.
Now, flame away and tell me about how my turbine-housing is too big, my compression is too low, and how I constantly pull the wool and how you've never seen a naked chick in your life, bro. Bubble hard in the BRG, flex the roll, with the top dropped, holler back...
low compression: lots of spark advance
high comp: lots of slow gayness and detonation
I'm making a substantially more torque on my 8.6:1 motor with a gt2860rs than about anyone on a 9.0:1 static motor. So much that I was surprised. Take a look through my build and dyno threads...the #'s speak for themselves. My car isn't sluggish off boost either, I wouldn't change a thing if I had to do it again.
Now, flame away and tell me about how my turbine-housing is too big, my compression is too low, and how I constantly pull the wool and how you've never seen a naked chick in your life, bro. Bubble hard in the BRG, flex the roll, with the top dropped, holler back...
Reply
0
0
04-08-2009, 08:40 PM
#9
Newb
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 12
Total Cats: 0
I think y8s has been running boost on his 10:1 stock pistons for a while now so its clearly possible.
You have the engine apart so the easiest way will be to measure your engine. I wouldn't feel safe machining bits based on information from someone else's motor.
Also there is no way in hell you are going to raise your compression from 8.8:1 to 10:1 by having your head skimmed. Only way is to use domed pistons with recesses cut for the valves if you are worried about cambelt snapage. Unfortunately you are out of luck for drop in replacements because all of the higher comp pistons are for 1.8's so its going to be an expensive experiment.
If you have a really good buddy who does **** hot welding you could try adding material to the combustion chambers between the valves, thought this will require you to do a lot of grinding and polishing so that all of the cylinders are "cc'd". But it's a good excuse to port the **** out of the head while you are there.
Some people I know have tried adding material to their pistons, they also then had some interesting crankcase ventilation so I wouldn't advise it.
Let us know how you get on.
You have the engine apart so the easiest way will be to measure your engine. I wouldn't feel safe machining bits based on information from someone else's motor.
Also there is no way in hell you are going to raise your compression from 8.8:1 to 10:1 by having your head skimmed. Only way is to use domed pistons with recesses cut for the valves if you are worried about cambelt snapage. Unfortunately you are out of luck for drop in replacements because all of the higher comp pistons are for 1.8's so its going to be an expensive experiment.
If you have a really good buddy who does **** hot welding you could try adding material to the combustion chambers between the valves, thought this will require you to do a lot of grinding and polishing so that all of the cylinders are "cc'd". But it's a good excuse to port the **** out of the head while you are there.
Some people I know have tried adding material to their pistons, they also then had some interesting crankcase ventilation so I wouldn't advise it.
Let us know how you get on.
Reply
0
0
04-08-2009, 09:48 PM
#13
Moderator
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 20,652
Total Cats: 3,011
The thing you might not fully appreciate is that 0.5psi will give you more return on investment than going from 9:1 to 10:1 in your compression ratio. And your increased ratio will preclude further gains that can be achieved when you are in a better financial situation. It is a foolish move by any measure for an automobile that will be used on pump gas.
You and the raven fellow are obviously in need of a book or two in your private libraries regarding turbocharging gasoline engines. I would recommend "Maximum Boost" by Corky Bell as a point of embarkation.
Raven: Don't be so foolish as to mock The Hustler when he is offering wise advice. There is nothing unsound in his statement except the holler back part.
You and the raven fellow are obviously in need of a book or two in your private libraries regarding turbocharging gasoline engines. I would recommend "Maximum Boost" by Corky Bell as a point of embarkation.
Raven: Don't be so foolish as to mock The Hustler when he is offering wise advice. There is nothing unsound in his statement except the holler back part.
Reply
0
0
04-08-2009, 09:54 PM
#14
Newb
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 12
Total Cats: 0
The thing you might not fully appreciate is that 0.5psi will give you more return on investment than going from 9:1 to 10:1 in your compression ratio. And your increased ratio will preclude further gains that can be achieved when you are in a better financial situation. It is a foolish move by any measure for an automobile that will be used on pump gas.
You and the raven fellow are obviously in need of a book or two in your private libraries regarding turbocharging gasoline engines. I would recommend "Maximum Boost" by Corky Bell as a point of embarkation.
Raven: Don't be so foolish as to mock The Hustler when he is offering wise advice. There is nothing unsound in his statement except the holler back part.
You and the raven fellow are obviously in need of a book or two in your private libraries regarding turbocharging gasoline engines. I would recommend "Maximum Boost" by Corky Bell as a point of embarkation.
Raven: Don't be so foolish as to mock The Hustler when he is offering wise advice. There is nothing unsound in his statement except the holler back part.
Reply
0
0
04-08-2009, 11:25 PM
#17
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
So i can ask it a different way.
I would like to run 8 lbs of boost. I'm running a Greddy system (not the greatest) with a piggy-back (not the greatest^2) and don't feel like tuning a high boost car with just fuel pressure or getting a piggy-back fuel management system. High power is not my goal with this build. Nor am i trying to make more than 180 horse on this car.
Usually the recommendation would be to drop the compression, add thicker head gasket for instance, then add boost to make power. I personally don't want to tune above 10 lbs w/o a stand alone, nor am I going to buy one because of my financial situation.
I have my motor apart right now and am just going to use stock components putting it back together b/c I don't have any $$ for forged components or lots of machine work. In fact, I'm taking out a loan just to fix the car because I have to have it running. What I can do is deck my heads for free. My plan is to push up the compression a tad and run mid-to-low boost.
What is the optimal compression ratio on stock components without running into heat and detonation problems?
I would imagine like 9.5:1 or maybe 10:1; even though that's pushing it.
Next question is how to achieve that ratio with just decking the heads.
... closer to a 'turbo forum' question now or does 'head work with boost application' fall under a separate category? It sounded like an "engine building question" to me, but I could be mistaken.
It is interesting to correlate 'high compression' with 'slow gayness and detonation.' If i wanted to run 11:1... I'd say that's just an N/A build or a bit ridiculous if you wanted to add boost.
My question is; given 8 lbs of boost, what is the highest compression ratio you can safely run; and how to achieve it. I assumed I had a good idea what that ratio would be and wanted to ask a simple question.
It is also interesting to correlate intent with a technical question. I'm not here to compare my nuts to anyone. I just want to try and upgrade my car within the means of time and resources I have available to me and hoped someone would know.
I would like to run 8 lbs of boost. I'm running a Greddy system (not the greatest) with a piggy-back (not the greatest^2) and don't feel like tuning a high boost car with just fuel pressure or getting a piggy-back fuel management system. High power is not my goal with this build. Nor am i trying to make more than 180 horse on this car.
Usually the recommendation would be to drop the compression, add thicker head gasket for instance, then add boost to make power. I personally don't want to tune above 10 lbs w/o a stand alone, nor am I going to buy one because of my financial situation.
I have my motor apart right now and am just going to use stock components putting it back together b/c I don't have any $$ for forged components or lots of machine work. In fact, I'm taking out a loan just to fix the car because I have to have it running. What I can do is deck my heads for free. My plan is to push up the compression a tad and run mid-to-low boost.
What is the optimal compression ratio on stock components without running into heat and detonation problems?
I would imagine like 9.5:1 or maybe 10:1; even though that's pushing it.
Next question is how to achieve that ratio with just decking the heads.
... closer to a 'turbo forum' question now or does 'head work with boost application' fall under a separate category? It sounded like an "engine building question" to me, but I could be mistaken.
It is interesting to correlate 'high compression' with 'slow gayness and detonation.' If i wanted to run 11:1... I'd say that's just an N/A build or a bit ridiculous if you wanted to add boost.
My question is; given 8 lbs of boost, what is the highest compression ratio you can safely run; and how to achieve it. I assumed I had a good idea what that ratio would be and wanted to ask a simple question.
It is also interesting to correlate intent with a technical question. I'm not here to compare my nuts to anyone. I just want to try and upgrade my car within the means of time and resources I have available to me and hoped someone would know.
The sad truth is that you're a ******* moron and don't understand that 8psi from a 2554 is different from 8psi with a 2871...so leave the motor in stock form, buy a 2554, and check out my tail lights while your girlfriend is ******* my sphincter on the way home from the chili-cook-off. She's a *****.
Reply
0
0
04-09-2009, 04:27 AM
#19
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
This thread sucks, so does the idea. If there is nothing wrong with the stock engine, why open it to machine the head to raise the compression .5, which will only increase the chance for detonation and yield little to no gains. I machined my head when I rebuilt as well, and wish I could undo it. I'm probably at around 9.6-9.8:1
Reply
0
0
