Highest CompRatio On Stock Tuning
Highest CompRatio On Stock Tuning What is the highest compression ratio that is safe on stock tuning?
I have a MAFT and ran 11.6 @ 119 n/a on stock tuning (heads, cam) and then 10.8 @ 129 with nitrous (still stock tuning).
I'm thinking about bumping the compression up a bit (nothing too risky, 11:1 or 11.3:1).
At what point will ls1edit or some form of custom tuning become neccessary?
tia! <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" />
I have a MAFT and ran 11.6 @ 119 n/a on stock tuning (heads, cam) and then 10.8 @ 129 with nitrous (still stock tuning).
I'm thinking about bumping the compression up a bit (nothing too risky, 11:1 or 11.3:1).
At what point will ls1edit or some form of custom tuning become neccessary?
tia! <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" />
Re: Highest CompRatio On Stock Tuning I'm running around the 11:1 static compression with a set of 5.3L heads, and it seems to be just fine. Would probably run better with tuning, but everything esle is pretty much stock, so I don't see a reason for tuning yet.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 1
Re: Highest CompRatio On Stock Tuning I think you will be fine on stock programming but better with LS1edit <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
I Would shoot for 11.3-11.5:1 compression and see how that works on 93-94 octane.
You "should" be able to get away with 27-28 degrees advance without problems with 160 stat and fan tuning
Cheers,
Chris
<small>[ August 30, 2002, 10:18 AM: Message edited by: Chris ARE 360 ]</small>
I Would shoot for 11.3-11.5:1 compression and see how that works on 93-94 octane.
You "should" be able to get away with 27-28 degrees advance without problems with 160 stat and fan tuning
Cheers,
Chris
<small>[ August 30, 2002, 10:18 AM: Message edited by: Chris ARE 360 ]</small>
Re: Highest CompRatio On Stock Tuning </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Chris ARE 360:
<strong>I think you will be fine on stock programming but better with LS1edit</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's kind of what I was thinking. Maybe I can get LS1edit sooner rather than later.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>I Would shoot for 11.3-11.5:1 compression and see how that works on 93-94 octane.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Cool, we can only get 93 (93.5 at one place down the road) octane here normally, so hopefully a pinch above 11:1 will be fine.
Thanks!
<strong>I think you will be fine on stock programming but better with LS1edit</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's kind of what I was thinking. Maybe I can get LS1edit sooner rather than later.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>I Would shoot for 11.3-11.5:1 compression and see how that works on 93-94 octane.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Cool, we can only get 93 (93.5 at one place down the road) octane here normally, so hopefully a pinch above 11:1 will be fine.
Thanks!
