So what do you huy's think is better, more boost less compression or a little more compression and less boost. All things being equal to get the same power output out of both setups.
Printable View
So what do you huy's think is better, more boost less compression or a little more compression and less boost. All things being equal to get the same power output out of both setups.
If its primarily a street vehicle, I would run the most compression I could that would still allow me to hit my power goals on the chosen octane under boost in the given app. That would give you a more responsive engine out of boost, also more efficient. But, by going on the lesser compression side you have way more room for error with the tune under boost, less chance of timing being pulled and you have the capability to make more overall power with the fuel being the limiting factor. Its all about the particular combo in ? and what your after.... :twocents:
werd. imo low 9's in the compression ratio is prob best. A lot of high power guys go in the 8's but like he said. Leave some room for error. You can always turn up the boost. But you cant turn down the compression.Quote:
Originally Posted by ATX ENGINE MAN
Here comes the great debate...
boost
compression should match intended boost level ........... done.
that was the pointQuote:
Originally Posted by SCIV
Get this months GM High-Tech Performance mag. There is a great article dedicated to this exact topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by sleeper1500
PS - I tried to get it off the web, but couldn't.
There is no answer to this question
Too many variables.
static compression
dynamic compression
aluminum or iron heads
intercooler or no intercooler
type of intercooler
fuel
tune
boost level.
compressor efficiency
ect
ect
ect.
+ 1Quote:
Originally Posted by r.barn