Run 25:1 compression, take the spark plugs out
and run diesel.There...problem solved. <img src="graemlins/gr_chug.gif" border="0" alt="[chug]" /> <img src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" border="0" alt="[jester]" />

 

ChrisB, hit it on the head about Colonel's ability to run that high a compression. I want to bring up a misconception about using a large cam to bleed off cylinder pressure, this only lowers cylinder pressure at low rpms and this increased cam timing will actually increase cylinder pressure at peak torque. What this means is pinging can be as bad or worse at the top of each gear even with a large cam. Another point is about ignition timing, the later timing occurs as with most LS1's, the harder it is to fire plug because cylinder pressure has increased with every degree that spark occurs closer to TDC.
This problem would be extreme with a 12 to 1 compression Ls1 with very little ignition timing. Just a thought. <img src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" border="0">

 

Tony listen to what ChrisB is saying..

 

Also what are the long term goals of this setup? Will nitrous come into play in the future? If so, which was would be safer for a motor with say a 200 shot or so?

 

YEAH - WHAT CHRISB SAID

12.5 is way too much for a car that will be driven much at all.
There is nothing better than the throttle response of a 12 or 12.5 C/R engine on proper fuel, however we dont have 100+ octane fuel like we did 25 years ago! I used to build up "real" LS6 and LS7 engine for vettes.
I have built up numerous engine types and find that aluminum heads on an engine generally can use 11 and cast heads only 10 as a max for regular street use.
If you are willing to at least blend racing fuel with premium, go to 11.5 or 12 as a maximum, but dont plan any long trips where you might not find racing fuel along the way.

If you try running even 12 to 1 ratio on just 93 octane pump fuel, the retarded timing will make it barely idle, run hot, and feel VERY sluggish, and make it undrivable in hot weather.

PS - A larger cam (longer duration) makes lower cylinder pressure at low RPM's but fills the cylinders better (creating higher pressure) at high RPM. So a big cam will allow a high compression engine to run OK at lower speed, but detonate just as bad or worse at high RPM.

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: GTO69JUDGE ]</p>

 

From another similar thread...

"Originally posted by Hydra:
Really... Very Impressive Colonel! What exactly have you done to make your motor so detonation resistant?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Glad you asked!

Several factors are helping me...

Maybe the biggest is the fact that we have aluminum cylinder heads and block. Aluminum dissipates heat more rapidly than iron.

Flat top pistons. My extra compression is gotten from my shaved LS6 heads and my thin metal head gaskets.

Quench area. My quench area is very small for the same reasons that my C/R is high. This creates some major turbulence in the combustion chamber which is condusive to having a more even fuel/air mixture throughout the combustion chamber (less chance for a lean spot.)

A camshaft with lots of overlap makes for less dynamic compression at rpms when you are "off the cam." 244/244 112 makes for some pretty good overlap.

160 degree thermostat.

The ability to lower the timing advance and enrichen the fuel mixture by cranking up the MAFT. Running the mixture rich helps to prevent detonation. I can also lower my timing advance through use of a resistor plugged into the IAT sensor. A 5.2K ohm resistor gives the ECM a reading of 92 degrees, for example. The ECM uses a less aggressive timing scale for hot weather.

Practically no backpressure in the exhaust system. This one has been debated but testing at MTI has shown that having cats installed on a car makes for more detonation.

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: Colonel ]</p>

 

Good replies so far!

1. This isn't my only vehicle now. I might drive it 100 miles per week maximum, less when bad weather is around.

2. I am planning on buying a trailer, makes it much more convenient for track visits (can prep the car the night before instead of in the pits). I've also spent more on tow trucks than a trailer would have costed me haha.

3. I am looking primarily for performance first, drivability second. It used to be the opposite.

4. No, I do not want to require race gas.

Another idea: What if I build the motor to 12.0:1 CR and try it out, and if I am having detonation issues I can always pull the heads and install a thicker pair of headgaskets. We will be testing the Holley intake vs LS6 intake when they arrive, and I'm going with whichever one flows better, hopefully the Holley since it can be port-matched to my new LS6 heads.

This should be fun <img src="gr_grin.gif" border="0">

Tony

 

Another idea: What if I build the motor to 12.0:1 CR and try it out, and if I am having detonation issues I can always pull the heads and install a thicker pair of headgaskets.

Tony, read my above comments on quench area. If you install thicker head gaskets you'll have less compression, yes...but you'll have MORE chance for detonation.

 

You might consider building your engine with 12:1 using 5.3 truck heads which have smaller chambers. That way when you realize 12:1 is too much for pump gas, you can bolt on your 5.7 heads which will give you about 11:1 which you will probably be happier with. EXPERIMENT!!

 

[quote]This is how nascars work - the run ungodly amounts of compression, but because they are pulling it in through that little tiny restrictor plate their dynamic compression is nothing like the calculated static. <hr></blockquote>


Right, they were running 20:1 + a few years ago on the restrictor plate motors. since then, they have a CR limit. one thing, with that high CR, WOT they were fine, but then coming in and out of the pits, they would blow head gaskets.

-Louis

 

Louis - yep, good point on the low rpm/load situation also!

I would say 12:1 is pushing it still for a streetable ride. Maybe with reverse cooling (would be curious to see what kind of extra compression the EWP allows). Honestly though there is not going to be a huge hp difference between 11.5:1 and 12:1 but there is a big impact on the wallet if you have to fill up on 104 vs. 93.

Either that or I am just trying to slow you down <img src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" border="0"> <img src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" border="0">


Chris

 

[quote]Originally posted by Nine Ball:
<strong>Lets say you are designing a new LS1 motor combo (I am!). What route would you choose between these two, keep in mind that I will be running 93 octane pump gas 90% of the time:

A. 11.0:1 Compression ratio, and higher timing values

B. 12.5:1 Compression ratio, and less timing

Both should run fine on pump gas when tuned correctly, but which is the better method of making the power, and WHY?

Tony</strong><hr></blockquote>


Tony, here is case B on my own 85 Vette.

National Dragster Article on my 85 Vette



Julio