Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > Tech / General Engine
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?

Tech / General Engine Is your car making a strange sound or won't start? Thinking of adding power with a new combination? Need other technical information or engine specific advice? Don't see another board for your problem? Post it here!

Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-30-2003, 03:07 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: California
Posts: 1,186
Car: 1988 Camaro Convertible
Engine: 355
Transmission: 700r4

Classifieds Rating: (1)
Send a message via AIM to Jstcrzyengh Send a message via Yahoo to Jstcrzyengh
What will my compression ratio be?

Building the following 350:

350 .030 over
AL L98's ported to 64cc
.051 head gasket
TRW forged pistons (l2256)
Lt4 hot cam or ZZ4 cam haven't decided yet
1.6rr's.

TRW says with these pistons on a 64cc head you are looking at 9.72 compression ratio, however that is why I went with a .051 gasket to lower the compression even more. I want to be as close to 9.5 as I can. I am thinking of a small amount of pontential boost later in it's life. Also what rings does everyone suggests for a daily driver, and what kind of RWHP am I looking at?

thanks

James
__________________
1988 Camaro Sport Coupe Convertible
Jstcrzyengh is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2003, 03:14 PM   #2
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Loveland, OH, US
Posts: 18,462
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5

Classifieds Rating: (0)
You don't "port" heads to a combustion chamber volume. You have to work on the chambers. You "port" the ports.

9½:1 is too little CR with aluminum heads. You need to be a little over 10, maybe up to 10½:1.

Leave the chambers alone; port the ports; and use the Fel-Pro 1044 head gasket (.051" thickness installed). That should put you about where you need to be.

If you're running a long-tube runner TPI, it won't matter what rings or pistons or bottom end you use, the TPI will protect them from ever seeing any significant stress. I'd suggest the regular Speed-Pro moly rings, and their hypereutectic pistons. Get new rod bolts put in the rods, ARPs or something, that's about the only thing below the head gaskets you should really do anything to. Anything else would mostly be a waste of money.
__________________
"So many Mustangs, so little time..."
RB83L69 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2003, 05:50 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 4,942
Car: Girls
Engine: Indian
Transmission: Change

Classifieds Rating: (0)
9.5:1 is good for up to 8 psi (depending on cam), but I wouldn't go anymore than that with compression or boost.

Moly rings are good for superchargers.

I wouldn't recommend hypers if you're planning on boosting it. Forged are great insurance. If you were going with 4psi and 8.5:1 then the hypers would hold up pretty well, but I doubt you want to stay that low.

Granted there are tons of people running 12 psi on LT1s and IIRC, those have hypereutectic slugs, but that's because those people spent so much money on the car and the SC they don't have any money left to tear out the motor and drop forged pistons in it. If you're gonna build it for boost, BUILD IT FOR BOOST.

Maybe you already have the pistons, but if you don't get dished pistons and don't hog out the chambers of those heads. The smaller chamber with dished pistons provides more quench area which is better for boost.

Last edited by AJ_92RS; 03-30-2003 at 05:55 PM.
AJ_92RS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2003, 09:38 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: California
Posts: 1,186
Car: 1988 Camaro Convertible
Engine: 355
Transmission: 700r4

Classifieds Rating: (1)
Send a message via AIM to Jstcrzyengh Send a message via Yahoo to Jstcrzyengh
__________________
1988 Camaro Sport Coupe Convertible

Last edited by Jstcrzyengh; 03-30-2003 at 09:40 PM.
Jstcrzyengh is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2003, 10:09 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Decatur, Illinois
Posts: 2,906

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally posted by AJ_92RS
9.5:1 is good for up to 8 psi (depending on cam), but I wouldn't go anymore than that with compression or boost.
Are you suggesting this with aluminum heads in mind?

Ben
Momar is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2003, 11:09 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 4,942
Car: Girls
Engine: Indian
Transmission: Change

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally posted by Momar
Are you suggesting this with aluminum heads in mind?

Ben
With stock aluminum castings (read 'thin deck surface'), for an everyday driver, for REALIBLE power...... Yes.

Plus (as I also said) it depends on the cam. A cam that allows high cylinder pressure will be more prone to detonate than one that doesn't.

It's kind of like how you can get away with more compression (or more like 'need' it) if you go with a lumpier cam (i.e. more overlap.)

Static compression is AKA "theory" compression. The lower your cylinder pressure, the higher static compression you can get away with. Actually that's why a lot of the cams with more overlap recommend higher compression ratios to make up for the loss of cylinder pressure.

This is kind of a catch 22 though since a cam with a lot of overlap is the LAST thing you want when using forced induction. Too much overlap shoots the intake charge right out your exhaust pipe, so the goal is to use a cam with more duration, but less overlap. If the cylinder fill is high then detonation is more likely to result.

A lot of it would depend on the efficiency of the intercooler as well. But not knowing that info, I'd rather give him a safe haven instead of a "should be OK" answer.
AJ_92RS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2003, 11:09 PM
ThirdGen
1992 Camaro




Paid Advertisement


Reply

Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > Tech / General Engine

Tags
1044, boost, build, compression, fel, felpro, forged, l2256, overlap, piston, pistons, pro, speed, trw
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

 


1982 Camaro '82 || 1983 Camaro '83 || 1984 Camaro '84 || 1985 Camaro '85 || 1986 Camaro '86 || 1987 Camaro '87 || 1988 Camaro '88 || 1989 Camaro '89 || 1990 Camaro '90 || 1991 Camaro '91 || 1992 Camaro '92


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright © 1997 - 2012 ThirdGen.org. All rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced without the expressed, documented, and written consent of ThirdGen.org's Administrators.

Emails & Contact Details