compression for 6.0 with 70cc heads
#1
TECH Apprentice
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kuwait
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
compression for 6.0 with 70cc heads
what will be the compression for a 6.0 L stock crank with 6.125 rods and flat forged pistons with -2 reliefs with a cometic .040 and 70cc heads?
thanks in advance
thanks in advance
#3
Here is something you can work it out with once you have those 2 details above
http://www.wallaceracing.com/cr_test2.php
http://www.wallaceracing.com/cr_test2.php
#6
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SC
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dvshk,
Bore Size for 6.0L Iron Block (all) =4.0in
Valve Reliefs are stated in the first post.
Using Stock figures for what isn't stated, I came up with ~10.63:1
My math may def be off a little.
Seeing as we don't know how far his piston it out of the hole at TDC,I just used some "stock", figures but Pred is def in the ballpark.
Bore Size for 6.0L Iron Block (all) =4.0in
Valve Reliefs are stated in the first post.
Using Stock figures for what isn't stated, I came up with ~10.63:1
My math may def be off a little.
Seeing as we don't know how far his piston it out of the hole at TDC,I just used some "stock", figures but Pred is def in the ballpark.
Last edited by GA95DCMSS; 07-11-2009 at 08:23 AM.
Trending Topics
#9
#12
TECH Senior Member
Well by adjusting deck height, I get 10.42:1
Sooo OP, you are in the ballpark of 10.35 >>>10.45:1, because while calcs are accurate in counting, it is the data entries that are not spot on. (unless you actualy measure all of them and input actual data correctly)
My 370 was .01 out of whole so that is what I had used in deck height entry for the 10.6 calc/
Sooo OP, you are in the ballpark of 10.35 >>>10.45:1, because while calcs are accurate in counting, it is the data entries that are not spot on. (unless you actualy measure all of them and input actual data correctly)
My 370 was .01 out of whole so that is what I had used in deck height entry for the 10.6 calc/
#13
TECH Addict
iTrader: (11)
Well by adjusting deck height, I get 10.42:1
Sooo OP, you are in the ballpark of 10.35 >>>10.45:1, because while calcs are accurate in counting, it is the data entries that are not spot on. (unless you actualy measure all of them and input actual data correctly)
My 370 was .01 out of whole so that is what I had used in deck height entry for the 10.6 calc/
Sooo OP, you are in the ballpark of 10.35 >>>10.45:1, because while calcs are accurate in counting, it is the data entries that are not spot on. (unless you actualy measure all of them and input actual data correctly)
My 370 was .01 out of whole so that is what I had used in deck height entry for the 10.6 calc/
If you would drop your ego glasses, you would see that......sheeesh.
#14
Using the link that i posted which is a very basic comp calculator it does not take into account gasket bore size, it does come out @ 10.42:1 on this calculator. The bloke is only after a rough estimate! You can't possibly give him a exact cr as you have not personally measured a thing
#15
TECH Addict
iTrader: (11)
Using the link that i posted which is a very basic comp calculator it does not take into account gasket bore size, it does come out @ 10.42:1 on this calculator. The bloke is only after a rough estimate! You can't possibly give him a exact cr as you have not personally measured a thing
#17
TECH Senior Member
Yeah, you are correct, I forgot that you are actualy measuring all the numbers on the engine itself, what was I thinking, your calculation must be spot on
#18
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SC
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well by adjusting deck height, I get 10.42:1
Sooo OP, you are in the ballpark of 10.35 >>>10.45:1, because while calcs are accurate in counting, it is the data entries that are not spot on. (unless you actualy measure all of them and input actual data correctly)
My 370 was .01 out of whole so that is what I had used in deck height entry for the 10.6 calc/
Sooo OP, you are in the ballpark of 10.35 >>>10.45:1, because while calcs are accurate in counting, it is the data entries that are not spot on. (unless you actualy measure all of them and input actual data correctly)
My 370 was .01 out of whole so that is what I had used in deck height entry for the 10.6 calc/
http://www.csgnetwork.com/compcalc.html