Go Back   MustangForums.com > Ford Mustang Tech > Classic Mustangs (Tech)
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Search


Classic Mustangs (Tech) Technical discussions about the Mustangs of yester-year.

Welcome to Mustang Forums!
Welcome to Mustang Forums.

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, so please join our community today!


Highest Compression for pump gas

Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-06-2009, 06:37 PM   #1
mustang1968gtcs
 
Join Date: May 2009
Vehicle: 1968, Ford, Mustang GTCS
Location: California
Posts: 1
Default Highest Compression for pump gas

I Bought a 408W stroker motor and the compression is too high on it. It has 12.2.1 comp and I need to lower it but before I do, I was wondering what is a safe number for 91 Octane? The motor has 225cc aluminum AFR heads on it
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!

Last edited by mustang1968gtcs; 05-06-2009 at 06:48 PM.
mustang1968gtcs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2009, 06:41 PM   #2
67mustang302
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 67 Mustang Coupe
Location: California
Posts: 10,415
Default

Depends on a whole mess of things. Cam profile, vehicle weight, gearing, head material, cooling system effectiveness etc.

Generally 9.0-9.5:1 is a good range, and with the right cam can still make tons of power safely on pump gas, provided everything else is up to par. Even as high as 10 or 11:1 can be run, but it often requires extraneous measures to be taken that sometimes cost power.
__________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!

Untested 331, lots of suspension, chewing up corners.
67mustang302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2009, 07:12 PM   #3
tyler72
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Apison, TN
Posts: 971
Default

I run a 10.5:1 ratio on premium fuel, only had a problem once... I guess I got bad gas, whe I cut it off it dieseled on me for a few seconds. Pissed me off lol. But I didn't change anything, no timing adjustments, etc, and it hasn't done it again. So I blame it on the gas. But generally, with the Aluminum heads you will be fine at 10 or slightly above. Anything above 10.5 pretty much requires race fuel.
__________________
72 Coupe: 347, C4 (planetaries blown TFU), 8.8 w/ Auburn Pro Posi & 31 spline Mosers, 4 wheel discs, Auto Meters, TT2's
96 Cobra Convertible: Lowered, Pro 5.0 Shifter, Subframe connectors, C/C plates, Roll Bar, Cobra R's, Mac Prochamber, SLP LM1 Catback
tyler72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2009, 08:38 PM   #4
Starfury
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Vehicle: 1967 Ford Mustang Fastback
Location: Davis, CA
Posts: 5,647
Default

Aluminum heads dissipate heat faster and generally allow you to run another point of compression than cast iron heads would. Like Tyler said, 10:1-10.5:1 is about the limit for 91 octane with aluminum heads.
__________________
Tad H.
'67 Fastback
331 stroker
Starfury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2009, 08:50 PM   #5
.boB
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location:
Posts: 939
Default

Pay attention to what 67mustang302 just said: static compression is only part of the equation.

What you're really interested in is dynamic compression, AKA cold cranking pressure. That's a function of static compression, rod length, altitude, intake valves closing point, and a couple other things. And that just gets you close. Some cams may have a fairly low cranking pressure, but will really build cylinder pressure as the rpm's rise. Cylinder pressure is what makes power.

There are a few calculaters on the web that you can find with a google search. RB Racing has a good one. It's a Harley site, but it works the same on all engines.

Generally speaking, for pump gas you want cylinders pressures below 190 or so. If you have a radical cam with a late valve closing point, CCP should be low so you don't over pressure at 5,000 rpm's.
__________________
.boB
'08 V6 Pony
'65 Monster FFR Roadster
.boB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2009, 10:28 PM   #6
andrewmp6
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location:
Posts: 8,162
Default

Run e85 its got the octane you would need but you need a special carb to use it and you get less mileage then gas.
andrewmp6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2009, 11:21 PM   #7
67mustang302
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 67 Mustang Coupe
Location: California
Posts: 10,415
Default

Yeah, what bob said.

Even doing something as simple as changing cam position to a few degrees advanced can be enough to cause an engine to start detonating. Actual cylinder compression or TRUE compression is a function of static compression, combined with cam profile and valve event timing, head and intake flow, as well as exhaust flow etc. Basically your true compression will be your volumetric efficiency X static compression. It's not totally exact, but pretty dang close.

So if you had a 10:1 engine with 80% VE then you have around 8:1 actual compression, which is decent. A 10:1 engine with 90% VE would be 9:1 actual, which would really be pushing the limits of premium pump fuel, and would likely require a bit more fuel or a bit less timing than the engine needs for best power(or both). Let's say you have a 9:1 engine with 95% VE, then you'd have around 8.5:1 actual, which is doable on pump fuel.

Keep in mind that an engine will always make better power with more timing rather than more compression. The purpose of the compression cycle in the engine is to compress the air/fuel charge, which does 2 major things. First, it brings all the air and fuel molecules into close proximity to one another, so when combustion starts it has less distance to travel and with neighboring molecules closer together it can transfer energy to adjacent molecules more rapidly(ie a denser mixture will burn more quickly and completely). The second thing it does is add heat to the air/fuel charge....which is important for 2 reasons itself. 1 it brings the fuel up close to it's ignition temperature so the spark plug can ignite it, and secondly it adds the heat energy necessary to vaporize the fuel(since liquid fuel can't burn). Compression also helps with air/fuel mixing, but that's another matter entirely.

Now, the whole purpose of advancing ignition timing is because fuel takes time to burn, and you ideally want the burn to start at such a time in relation to the piston that you achieve the highest pressure in the cylinder when the piston is at a point where it can transmit best power to the crankshaft. But, as fuel is burning in the early phase of the combustion cycle the piston is still coming up and compressing the mixture(albeit very little, as it's on the last legs of the upward stroke), and also the combustion wave that is traveling outward away from the spark plug is compressing the air/fuel charge ahead of it. If the air/fuel charge that is yet to be burned is too hot as it's being compressed(and heated even more) by the combustion process, it will reach it's flash point and auto-ignite, sending it's own combustion wave out(detonation), when these 2(or sometimes more) waves collide you get the characteristic knocking sound of detonation. It can kill engines quickly.

Detonation can be limited by several things, higher octane rated fuel(higher resistance to detonation, but it burns more slowly), lower compression(less compression heat, which if too low will not provide enough heat energy for efficient combustion, and power is lost), more fuel(richer, causing the mixture to absorb more heat energy on compression as the fuel tries to reach it's vaporization point, and it burns more slowly making less cylinder pressure, and power is lost), or less timing(you start combustion later, resulting in the piston already traveling away from the chamber before the combustion process has had a chance to complete effectively, and the expanding volume reduces temperature in the chamber, but less cylinder pressure is created and power is lost). Things like more efficient cooling systems and aluminum heads can help, but they're not a cure for an overly compressed cylinder with not enough fuel octane.

If you build a high compression engine, and the cam and induction match properly, you end up with higher cylinder pressures during compression and more heat in the charge before ignition(relative to a lower compression engine). If you have to reduce timing in order to control detonation because the charge is simply too hot(not enough fuel octane to handle the heat), then you're reducing overall cylinder pressure and power output as a band-aide to control detonation.....the engine makes less power. In an engine with lower compression that doesn't have as much heat in the charge(the octane can handle the heat) then you can run as much lead as is needed to make the highest cylinder pressures....the engine makes the most power.

You have to remember though, that more compression does not always mean more power. The purpose of the compression cycle is not to generate power by having more compression, it's to get the air/fuel charge as hot as is NECESSARY to achieve the most rapid and most complete combustion. Any more compression and heat beyond that is not only unnecessary, but adds unwanted heat that can result in detonation(or in severe cases, pre-ignition). Ideally, compression heats the air/fuel charge so that the fuel is totally vaporized, and close enough to it's ignition temperature that the spark plug can easily ignite it, but still cool enough that the extra compression heat from the combustion process itself won't overheat the fuel ahead of the combustion wave and cause detonation. Again, any more compression beyond what is necessary for ideal combustion is most likely going to cause problems, and it's un-needed.

Most high compression engines on the street that run premium pump fuel(91/93) get away with it by either running less timing, more fuel, or have a cam profile that helps to reduce overall cylinder compression, but that typically results in a cam that makes the engine want to run effectively at higher rpm than you normally see on the street. Cam's aren't supposed to be used as a cure for too much compression. Also, many larger cams NEED more static compression, which is why manufacturers will give a recommended compression range for their cams. Camshafts that cause the engine to operate better at higher rpm generally have a tendency to lower overall cylinder compression at lower rpm, but it's offset at higher rpm by increased VE(to a degree). They need the extra compression to be able to start the engine and get it to simply run right at lower rpm.
__________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!

Untested 331, lots of suspension, chewing up corners.
67mustang302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2009, 08:23 AM   #8
urban_cowboy
5th Gear Member
 
urban_cowboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: '69 Mustang Mach1
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 2,100
Default

I have understood the relationship of static compression to dynamic compression for a while, but have never seen a calculator that gives you pressure and a dynamic CR. Great post!

So in your experience, at what pressures or dynamic CR do you need 89octane, 93octane, 100octane, etc. assuming performance timing?
__________________

"Yeah, were runnin a little bit hot tonight. I can barely see the road from the heat comin' off of it." Van Halen
12.20sec 1/4mi @ 115.50mph
http://www.hardtohandleracing.com
urban_cowboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2009, 09:54 AM   #9
THUMPIN455
5th Gear Member
 
THUMPIN455's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Vehicle: Too many to list, 30+
Location: Marquette Mi
Posts: 3,566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewmp6 View Post
Run e85 its got the octane you would need but you need a special carb to use it and you get less mileage then gas.
This I can help with, and if you compare E85 to 105-110 octane race gas, the price is more than enough to justify a bit less mileage. Although you can get some or all of the mileage back if you decide to go dedicated E100/E85. Also on ethanol you will make more power, run much cleaner for emissions, longer intervals between oil changes, no carbon build up thus no appreciable wear in the engine, and it will run cooler to the point of possibly having frost on the intake on a hot day.

If you have an engine with more than 11:1 its worth looking into and modifying a carb is much cheaper than swapping heads or pistons. Some tunes aren't as good as others, but even the poor tunes pick up power. Most vehicles tuned for it see about a 50hp increase by running ethanol over gas, and that is over race gas or pump gas. If you race you will be more consistent because heat doesnt affect performance as much, and up to a certain point more heat in the engine makes substantially more power.

Currently I have a 98 Formula with its LS1 on ethanol, and a 70 GTO burning it in a 455. The only change I made to the GTO was modifying the carb and it broke the transmission. The Cougar in my sig is going ethanol as well, I like the power and ability to keep the engine cool even on the hottest days.

If you can get E85 near you, its a better idea than swapping heads or pistons to lower compression.
__________________
POD and Cougar progress pics:
71 Pit of Despair Mustang
67 Cougar

THUMPIN455 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2009, 11:41 AM   #10
dodgestang
5th Gear Member
 
dodgestang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Vehicle: 1965, Mustang, Fastback
Location: Insanity
Posts: 2,149
Default

I Have 10.8:1 static compression and the car runs just fine. I use 93 all the time but on the occasions when I have used 91 I have not had any issues. I do have a lot of overlap in my cam that bleeds off a bit though
dodgestang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2009, 12:30 PM   #11
67mustang302
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 67 Mustang Coupe
Location: California
Posts: 10,415
Default

All fuels aren't the same necessarily. 91 at one pump in one state might not be the same quality as 91 at another pump in another state. And sometimes the fuel delivery guys get lazy when they have extra fuel left, and pump 87 into a 91 tank etc. And again, compression you can run is dependent on the engine build, if you build for highest possible cylinder pressure/compression within the rpm range, then you won't need as much static compression. That's the primary reason that blower engines have much lower static compression, the boost really fills the cylinder and offsets it, often INCREASING the actual compression above that of static. It's going to depend on where you want power as well, since that will to some extent dictate camshaft profile.

As far as E85 goes, you can't even get it in a lot of places. I doubt it will ever take off as a viable alternative fuel on a national level, there's too many problems associated with transporting it long distances. It's a great fuel to run in an engine though, but I know out here in California I've yet to see it at a pump anywhere, though I've heard in a few places it can be found. If we could find a way to get E85 from something that can be commonly and easily grown in many places, that'd be great. Alcohol is a different beast than a petroleum based fuel, but when setup right will always perform better.
__________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!

Untested 331, lots of suspension, chewing up corners.
67mustang302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2009, 01:54 PM   #12
THUMPIN455
5th Gear Member
 
THUMPIN455's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Vehicle: Too many to list, 30+
Location: Marquette Mi
Posts: 3,566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67mustang302 View Post

As far as E85 goes, you can't even get it in a lot of places. I doubt it will ever take off as a viable alternative fuel on a national level, there's too many problems associated with transporting it long distances. It's a great fuel to run in an engine though, but I know out here in California I've yet to see it at a pump anywhere, though I've heard in a few places it can be found. If we could find a way to get E85 from something that can be commonly and easily grown in many places, that'd be great. Alcohol is a different beast than a petroleum based fuel, but when setup right will always perform better.

Well the EPA envisions an additional 24,000 E85 Stations in the next ten years, they are pursuing it to get cleaner air. There arent really many problems with long distance transportation, that is one of the myths perpetuated by oil companies. Oil companies are doing what any business will do when there is competition, they will try to kill it or minimize its effect on them. Nevertheless ethanol fuel is coming, and its on the way big even if right now it doesnt look like it.

California is installing more pumps, you can find them at
http://e85vehicles.com/e85/index.php/board,18.0.html

and info on converting your carb at
http://e85forum.com/viewforum.php?f=...73fb620c24dd37

Without getting into an argument over it, because I really dont care if you use it or not, or where it comes from, I merely provide correct information about ethanol fuel and running it in old cars. To me its rather stupid to pay $6-$10 a gallon for race gas when you can make more power with something you can get at a gas station for less than $2/gallon right now. Im not trying to convert anyone, or dissuade anyone from using gasoline, gas will be here for a long time yet, it just kinda sucks as a fuel in performance engines.

The fact that even people in urban areas can make it themselves form multiple sources means you dont need a station near you if you are willing to do some work and learn a bit. You can make it for less than $1 a gallon pretty easy, and legally.

FWIW you can go over 13:1 with E85 easily, 15:1 is doable with a decent tune. On neat ethanol, or E100/E98 with no gas in it, you can go over 19:1, although most of our engines are not capable of that much without a strengthened bottom end and head gaskets. Boosted engines make a bunch more power on ethanol due to the improved cooling of the intake charge and the ability to use proper ignition curves for best power. Its a pump fuel, and it will be closer soon. Availability is currently the main drawback to those of us with old high compression engines. I have to drive 32 miles one way to get it from a station, but I have to go 14 miles to get premium too.
__________________
POD and Cougar progress pics:
71 Pit of Despair Mustang
67 Cougar

THUMPIN455 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2009, 02:12 PM   #13
67mustang302
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 67 Mustang Coupe
Location: California
Posts: 10,415
Default

I wouldn't mind running ethanol in my engine at all, but at 9.4:1 compression it's probably rather pointless. If it were available around here for cheap then I'd definitely build an engine with like 13:1 and run it. Like you said, better performance and a lot cleaner.
__________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!

Untested 331, lots of suspension, chewing up corners.
67mustang302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2009, 02:12 PM
MustangForums
Ford Mustang




Paid Advertisement

 
 
 
Reply

Tags
111, 87, 91, cars, compression, e85, fuel, gas, highest, pump, race, racing, run, running, whats

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

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
high compression yes or no? pitman86gt 5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang 33 07-17-2006 04:48 PM
compression ratio hardcore91LX 5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang 14 12-27-2005 01:18 AM
Gas and Cam Question 94Cbra 5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang 15 09-16-2004 09:15 PM

Advertising

Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory
New Sponsors
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:07 PM.

© Internet Brands, Inc.


This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
Emails Backup