8.8 compared to 9:1 compression
#13
RE: 8.8 compared to 9:1 compression
The .2 point of comp is a tiny amount. Have you played around with your ignition timing? Differant
(newer) cylinder heads offer faster burn rates than past designs. You may have to run LESS spark advace to optimize the combo. Given to choice I'd take better airflow over that small amount of comp. My point is I wouldn't take the heads off my car for .2 compression.
(newer) cylinder heads offer faster burn rates than past designs. You may have to run LESS spark advace to optimize the combo. Given to choice I'd take better airflow over that small amount of comp. My point is I wouldn't take the heads off my car for .2 compression.
#15
RE: 8.8 compared to 9:1 compression
it's not 30% use the total hp total it will be like 5%
ORIGINAL: 5speed GT
.038 or .039, I dont remember
I guess 15hp is alot when the head and intake swap(w/ 9:1 compression gt40s) would only yeild about 50hp anyway, so thats like a 30% hp loss.
.038 or .039, I dont remember
I guess 15hp is alot when the head and intake swap(w/ 9:1 compression gt40s) would only yeild about 50hp anyway, so thats like a 30% hp loss.
#16
RE: 8.8 compared to 9:1 compression
Did you have the heads rebuilt before you put them on? New valve job etc.? Also remember that judging if there was a performance gain "by the seat of your pants" is not going to tell you anything.
#18
RE: 8.8 compared to 9:1 compression
if you're going n/a, you're going to want it higher than 9:1. if you're going boosted you're going to want to stay way you are or go sliiiiiiightly lower. either way, i dont really think 9:1 is worth changing things for
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Matt's 95 Stang
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
2
10-05-2015 07:16 AM
mungodrums
Suspension
0
09-24-2015 10:12 PM