On Fri, 25 Feb 2000 TommFern@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 2/25/00 8:38:33 AM Central Standard Time,
> saint1958@home.com writes:
>
> <<
> I would go with 10.0:1 ratio versus 9.0:1. More horsepower yet run 92 or
> less on the Octane gas.
> >>
> I agree, I've got 10.5 to 1, no detonation and verified by a knock sensor on
> 92 oct. My buddy has the same comp.,no problems. The throttle response is
> much better than the stock comp. Hughes has a broad selection of chrysler
> cams for the magnum. If I were you, I'd strongly consider going with the
> M1,10to1 comp. and a bigger cam. You will love it. The m1 just loves that
> comp and cubes. My buddy just ran a 12.85 @103 with this combo.(Hughes stage
> 2 @ heads). If you must stay with the stocker than go with one of the smaller
> cams that matches up with the intake well. The M1 is a smashing good buy at
> $250. Why mess with the 13s when you can play in the 12s.
> Tom
>
What about engines which will be using forced induction of some type
such as blowers or turbos? I know that for those types of motors, a
low compression ratio is better than a high one, but I'm not quite
sure where the cut-off is. I suppose it varies from engine to engine?
I've heard of some Mustangs who want to run monster compression
ratios actually dropping their CR down to 8:1 or lower. I don't know
much about the pros/cons myself though. (i.e. why wouldn't a high
compression ratio plus low boost make the same power as a low compression
ratio and high boost?)
-Jon-
.--- jon@dakota-truck.net -- or -- stei0302@cs.fredonia.edu ------------.
| Jon Steiger * AOPA, DoD, EAA, MP Race Team, NMA, SPA, USUA * RP-SEL |
| '92 Ram 150 4x4 V8, '96 Dakota V8, '96 Intruder 1400, '96 FireFly 447 |
`---------------------------- http://www.cs.fredonia.edu/~stei0302/ ---'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:48:48 EDT