![]() ![]() Then Shawn Proffit, Manxracer1 on the samba tells me he has run one in 1914 for like 25 years and puts them in all his street cars and see no damage. The bore thing is interesting in that I had all these people telling me to sleeve the bores and all and the 1.4.1 cams would be easier on them. Allot of the cons come from those putting them in non stroker engines whereas mine is. Parking was not easy and this was his daily! LOL! So I think I can handle the bug. Talk about crazy! You did have to rev it some to get it going then you had to hang on. I drove a friends Chevelle several times on the street years ago with a 402, ZL-1 Cam the same one they used in Can-Am Racing cars back in the day, Closed Chamber High Perf Chevy Heads with huge ports and a single 4bbl carb on top of a Tunnel Ram manifold. What I find interesting is how with me going to an W-130 cam people are telling me it will be a bear to drive on the street and it will eat up my lifter bores. Money is tight nowadays but this is a hobby and sometimes you have to gamble. I think sometimes you can over analyze and just need to pull the trigger. 050 would maybe compensate and it worked. Without much of a Squish pad in them I thought that another. I knew the shape of the chamber was the unknown in how it would turn out. I did my Homework before I decided to do this and totally understand what you are saying. This is no place for guesswork and ballpark figures. 100 on one head may yield 10cc, while on another head it could do 15cc. flycut depth depends on the shape of the combustion chamber. either it has been asked and it is really not a good idea to do this or, it has not been asked and people are possibly taught to think that if you plan to boost then you HAVE TO lower your compression to what is normal with FE DOHC or mabey any IC engine.Īnd of course, you need to plan on doing the other things like note your bearings and all the other goodies inside your engine.Bugfuel wrote:the cc reduction vs. This leaves me to some sort of conclusion already. I am asking this because I have searched around on here alot and have never seen this mentioned. If I am wrong for thinking and asking this don't flame me like a :flamer: hotdog in a campfire. #4) I am not going put a slightly thicker head gasket into this equation but it MAY make a interesting pairing amongst the two. #3) This seems like it is a very cheap way to lower the compression on our domed piston FE3's. #2) Is there a structural problem in doing this to our 10.0:1 pistons? What is immediately below our domes if they were machined off? Any ringland thickness should remain stock. #1) What will the compression ratio be if a person were to leave everything els stock and just cut the little dome off the piston? Nothing more, nothing less. O.K., some/most of you turbo people know that it is easier to tune your engine and use the lower compression ratios of like low/mid/high 8's to low 9,s, But if you want to do a higher compression like 9.5:1 or 10:1+ it is VERY important to get the proper engine tune VIA fuel management and timing and such to achieve this, especially if you are planning to run some mid to high boost levels (9-10 psi and upwards). It is much cheaper than buying new custom pistons and it will at least lower your compression ratio a little. Why can't I shave the dome off my 10.0:1 pistons and make them flat tops? I know that the compression will not be lowered by that much, but it will be better than 10.0:1 ( not that 10:1 is bad really ) but it would be all too easy to just take out my hi-comps and fly-cut the domes off. lol ) of a cheaper way to lessen the compression on my FE3 engine. I have been thinking (I know LOOK-OUT!!!scary. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |