Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Forget high compression if you want big boost... waste of time. The small amount of hp you will make lower off boost will not offset the amount you could make by winding the boost up further and not having any issues.

Lower compression and no quench for big power and high boost.

id rather higher CR with lower boost.

of course you need a good tuner & E85 to make it work

it is a street car so this thing would be so much better to drive with higher CR...

Edited by BMYHOE

I bought a set of Kelford 280 10.55mm lift cams, They do them as an off the shelf item. My turbo isn't anywhere are big as yours (B/W EFR 8374 .91a/r) and make 460kw at the hubs, full boost (20psi) at 3400rpm, it is a RB30 however.

Edited by Sub Boy32

Forget high compression if you want big boost... waste of time. The small amount of hp you will make lower off boost will not offset the amount you could make by winding the boost up further and not having any issues.

Lower compression and no quench for big power and high boost.

Well that's definately a different way to look at things.... When was the last time a high performance car manufacturer reduced compression ratio or quench in a newer model?

Higher compression will make the engine more efficient everywhere. Now couple that with a highly knock resistant fuel and you will have a good engine. You need to look at your compressor map and see where the turbo needs to run and then choose the compression ratio based on the fuel and boost you need to run.

I bought a set of Kelford 280 10.55mm lift cams, They do them as an off the shelf item. My turbo isn't anywhere are big as yours (B/W EFR 8374 .91a/r) and make 460kw at the hubs, full boost (20psi) at 3400rpm, it is a RB30 however.

Why only 20psi mate?

Is that in E85?

How have you set your cam gears up? Response/power

I only ask as I'll be having me 83/75 tuned very soon :)

Well that's definately a different way to look at things.... When was the last time a high performance car manufacturer reduced compression ratio or quench in a newer model?

Higher compression will make the engine more efficient everywhere. Now couple that with a highly knock resistant fuel and you will have a good engine. You need to look at your compressor map and see where the turbo needs to run and then choose the compression ratio based on the fuel and boost you need to run.

You answered your own question... OEM's are tight quench, high compression engines for a whole bunch of reasons not directly related to big horsepower. Efficiency across the whole rev range, emissions, etc

In terms of making big horsepower in a boosted application it is far from different. No quench and lower compression (lower is very subjective) and obviously high boost pressure is favoured.

I can see the appeal that the OEM's go for and also what others do on here with their builds; but for 500kW throw that approach in the bin.

I totally agree Michael, there comes a point where you have no choice but to lower compression, high cylinder pressure will kill your engine very quickly.

After modeling a few high comp builds with my tuner just last night, I can say that a 500kw engine must have low compression to survive, no matter what fuel or internals you run. I wish it weren't the case but cylinder pressure rises exponentially with power.

I wish it weren't the case but cylinder pressure rises exponentially with power.

What were you using to "model" different engine setups? My understanding is (no doubt could be wrong... but I'd like to be convinced on that fact) that it actually doesn't increase exponentially at all. I would have thought it would take no time to blow a motor up when increasing power if it did. There are ways of gaining torque without (or hardly) increasing peak cylinder pressure.

You answered your own question... OEM's are tight quench, high compression engines for a whole bunch of reasons not directly related to big horsepower. Efficiency across the whole rev range, emissions, etc

In terms of making big horsepower in a boosted application it is far from different. No quench and lower compression (lower is very subjective) and obviously high boost pressure is favoured.

I can see the appeal that the OEM's go for and also what others do on here with their builds; but for 500kW throw that approach in the bin.

What would car manufactures know about building engines.....

Every new model needs to make more hp, less emissions and better fuel economy. Changing to a higher compression ratio is not an easy change considering the extra thermal loading on turbo chargers and catalytic converts coupled with the potential for higher NOx levels and less resistance to knock. They usually run high quench zones to promote central flame propegation and the fact that detonation usually propagates at the outer edges of the chamber. Look at the 335ci engine or L3T mazda engine or VW golf they are all running high compression ratios couple with Direct injection.

Now when you have a higher octane fuel - in order to achieve the full affects of a highly knock resistant fuel is to increase the compression ratio. I dont see the point of running "big boost" when all your doing is running the turbocharger outside of its effciency range.

And average cylinder pressures dont increase expotentially with power... You would probly find that a well setup 400kw car would have similar cylinder pressures to a 500kw car, its just the 500kw car has higher cylinder pressure at a higher rpm.

What would car manufactures know about building engines.....

Every new model needs to make more hp, less emissions and better fuel economy. Changing to a higher compression ratio is not an easy change considering the extra thermal loading on turbo chargers and catalytic converts coupled with the potential for higher NOx levels and less resistance to knock. They usually run high quench zones to promote central flame propegation and the fact that detonation usually propagates at the outer edges of the chamber. Look at the 335ci engine or L3T mazda engine or VW golf they are all running high compression ratios couple with Direct injection.

Now when you have a higher octane fuel - in order to achieve the full affects of a highly knock resistant fuel is to increase the compression ratio. I dont see the point of running "big boost" when all your doing is running the turbocharger outside of its effciency range.

And average cylinder pressures dont increase expotentially with power... You would probly find that a well setup 400kw car would have similar cylinder pressures to a 500kw car, its just the 500kw car has higher cylinder pressure at a higher rpm.

But they are not building race engines... they are producing OEM products with strict guidelines, regulations and laws.

If you choose your turbocharger poorly then yes you might be outside its efficiency, not if you have a compressor map and can design the package effectively.

What were you using to "model" different engine setups? My understanding is (no doubt could be wrong... but I'd like to be convinced on that fact) that it actually doesn't increase exponentially at all. I would have thought it would take no time to blow a motor up when increasing power if it did. There are ways of gaining torque without (or hardly) increasing peak cylinder pressure.

It was an engine design engineering application, not sure of the name but it calculates accurately if modelled correctly. We were hoping to run 11:1 on a 2.5L VQ, at any more than 15psi the cylinder pressure would spike. Power was made more easily with the compression at 8.8:1 with lower cylinder pressures. As we are designing it for track we decided lower compression was a must and turbo response less critical. Street applications you could argue the opposite I guess.

Increasing the engine capacity was the easiest way to increase torque and power output without affecting cylinder pressure, but we are trying to keep it under 2.5L, and looking for 700hp+.

Rob 82 is all over it. Have a look at your Dyno graphs how many of these graphs maintain targeted torque values. Lets say the engine can withstand 850 nm then how many of these tuned engine generate that targeted torque then maintain it to the rev limiter. Who says these high comp engines need to run 25 psi at 4500. Map the boost if you don't have flyby wire throttle mapping to maintain the cylinder pressure the engine will cope with happily. If this requires 17 psi at 4500 increasing to 30 psi at 9000 who cares nor will the engine!! Assuming we are using the fuel of quality that rob82 suggests then 11:1 and boost is no issue.

We were hoping to run 11:1 on a 2.5L VQ, at any more than 15psi the cylinder pressure would spike. Power was made more easily with the compression at 8.8:1 with lower cylinder pressures. As we are designing it for track we decided lower compression was a must and turbo response less critical. Street applications you could argue the opposite I guess.

The cylinder pressure spike would be (if it is a good simulation) detonation - that'd be due to being octane limited. Cylinder pressure would go up exponentially if you went driving past the point of being knock limited on the mission for more power, but gaining power using controlled combustion should not be anywhere near exponential.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
×
×
  • Create New...