5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang Technical discussions on 5.0 Liter Mustangs within. This does not include the 5.0 from the 2011 Mustang GT. That information is in the 2005-1011 section.

8.8 compared to 9:1 compression

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-12-2006, 12:36 AM
  #11  
5speed GT
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
5speed GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location:
Posts: 664
Default RE: 8.8 compared to 9:1 compression

as usual you are a great sorce of information. so there is no real need to pull the heads off to have them cut to 64cc if they are 65ish now.
5speed GT is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 12:37 AM
  #12  
AdderMk2
Banned
 
AdderMk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lil' Rhody
Posts: 22,376
Default RE: 8.8 compared to 9:1 compression

think of it this way. you have a lower than stock compression.... why not boost?
AdderMk2 is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 01:26 AM
  #13  
threeg502
1st Gear Member
 
threeg502's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location:
Posts: 126
Default 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.
threeg502 is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 04:30 AM
  #14  
88blackgt
4th Gear Member
 
88blackgt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,826
Default RE: 8.8 compared to 9:1 compression

boost it, 8.8 is almost ideal
88blackgt is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 11:23 AM
  #15  
2 kwik
I ♥ Acer
 
2 kwik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location:
Posts: 5,116
Default 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.

2 kwik is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 12:33 PM
  #16  
JD1969
Pro. B.S. caller outer
 
JD1969's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: IL
Posts: 9,644
Default 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.
JD1969 is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 12:58 PM
  #17  
5speed GT
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
5speed GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location:
Posts: 664
Default RE: 8.8 compared to 9:1 compression

yea, I had a full valve job done with new FMS high lift prings
5speed GT is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 02:39 PM
  #18  
88blackgt
4th Gear Member
 
88blackgt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,826
Default 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
88blackgt is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
baddog671
Archive - Parts For Sale
20
07-26-2016 01:20 PM
Dokilar
4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang
15
10-16-2015 08:13 PM
Matt's 95 Stang
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
2
10-05-2015 07:16 AM
uedlose
The Racers Bench
4
10-01-2015 08:31 PM



Quick Reply: 8.8 compared to 9:1 compression



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:23 AM.