low compression

This is the place to ask questions about your engine components like cams, valves, pistons… just anything that is generally "engine" specific. This also includes questions about exhaust systems such as exhaust manifolds, piping size, mufflers, ect...
Post Reply
Ntyvirus1
2009 Silver Contributor
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:30 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

low compression

Post by Ntyvirus1 » Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:50 pm

would it be "safe" to run 8:8.1 pistons in a n/a car before boost?
Official "I'm Going to Drive My Neon till it Dies" Club #000038

Image
hul kogan wrote: And from thy shadows he comes to rippeth thine buttholes. :lol
MoxHair wrote:You should never throw parts at a car.. You'll dent the exterior.

User avatar
excon
2GN Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:15 am
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by excon » Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:42 pm

I assume you mean 8.8:1 compression.

Yes, you could run that, but if you are running that low n/a you'll be producing less power. I'm not even sure what would happen.

You would also use more gas (in theory) because it would take more gas/power (than it would with 9.3:1) to get you to where you were going. not much though...

User avatar
jonnymopar
Junior Admin
Posts: 3039
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 7:49 pm
Location: Southeastern MA

Post by jonnymopar » Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:20 am

LimeStrat is doing just that right now. He's got a 2.4 with turbo pistons installed, but no boost yet. It's weak, but it runs ok. He drove quite a long way to the 2GN meet in July on that setup with no problems. You should be fine if you wanted to do that.
Image
Jon J.

2003 Neon SXT - new home, new owner. Thanks for everything, old friend.
1989 Daytona ES - 2.4L/A555 swapped

Official "I'm Going To Drive My Neon Until Jerry Buys It" Club Member #11

Ntyvirus1
2009 Silver Contributor
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:30 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Post by Ntyvirus1 » Fri Oct 17, 2008 11:29 am

thnx and srry bout that excon, i got a little switched around with the symbols.
Official "I'm Going to Drive My Neon till it Dies" Club #000038

Image
hul kogan wrote: And from thy shadows he comes to rippeth thine buttholes. :lol
MoxHair wrote:You should never throw parts at a car.. You'll dent the exterior.

slow2.0ts13
2GN Member
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 3:17 pm

Post by slow2.0ts13 » Fri Oct 17, 2008 11:36 am

j/w out of curiousity ntyvirus1 why do u want to lower compression?
Image

occasional demons
Junior Admin
Posts: 20064
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 12:14 pm
Location: Ashland Ohio

Post by occasional demons » Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:22 pm

slow2.0ts13 wrote:j/w out of curiousity ntyvirus1 why do u want to lower compression?
Ntyvirus1 wrote:would it be "safe" to run 8:8.1 pistons in a n/a car before boost?
I'm assuming he is building the engine for a turbo/SC set up, but will be driving it for a bit before the turbo/SC is installed.
Bill
Probably shouldn't listen to anything your penis says, that guy's a dick.
Patience, of course, is a very powerful weapon, but sometimes I start to regret that it is not a firearm.
Too much time spent here is a sign of a bad case of Ownaneonvirus.

2000 Neon MTX swap with '02 R/T PCM
1999 neon coupe 2.4 swap

slow2.0ts13
2GN Member
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 3:17 pm

Post by slow2.0ts13 » Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:38 pm

oh, so lower compression is better for turbos and i guess higher compression for n/a's?
idk im a noob.
Image

User avatar
Danteneon
Former Moderator
Posts: 9591
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:13 pm
Location: Manassas, VA

Post by Danteneon » Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:40 pm

You are correct. High compression with forced induction makes things want to go boom :lol:
If I could just figure out how to meld the Outback and the Neon into one car...

Image

Ntyvirus1
2009 Silver Contributor
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:30 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Post by Ntyvirus1 » Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:19 pm

yea evntually i plan on getting a turbo setup goin but money wise ill prolly end up rebujilding the bottom end with the MPX rebuild kit before i can afford/install teh turbo.
Official "I'm Going to Drive My Neon till it Dies" Club #000038

Image
hul kogan wrote: And from thy shadows he comes to rippeth thine buttholes. :lol
MoxHair wrote:You should never throw parts at a car.. You'll dent the exterior.

slow2.0ts13
2GN Member
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 3:17 pm

Post by slow2.0ts13 » Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:52 pm

fyi: when i was pricing some things out (idk if ur looking at the kit from modernperformance.com) you can build your own kit for about 200 less.
Image

Ntyvirus1
2009 Silver Contributor
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:30 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Post by Ntyvirus1 » Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:04 pm

not the bottom end kit
Official "I'm Going to Drive My Neon till it Dies" Club #000038

Image
hul kogan wrote: And from thy shadows he comes to rippeth thine buttholes. :lol
MoxHair wrote:You should never throw parts at a car.. You'll dent the exterior.

OB
Former Moderator
Posts: 9686
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA

Post by OB » Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:32 pm

Compression has nothing to do with turbocharging. Boost is the issue. The higher the boost, the higher the overall cylinder pressure. Pressure = heat. Heat = detonation. With the right amount of fuel and a healthy amount of spark retard, higher compression engines can make reliable turbo power. The reason people use low compression is to keep a theoretical 'safety net'. However, with the right equipment and tune, pretty much any engine can be turbocharged successfully, regardless of compression. Low compression is the easy way out and allows for mistakes in the tune and a lot more abuse. A good idea for the average driver. Many people think that compression is something that has to be addressed for a 'properly built' forced induction engine, but this is not the case. That's not to say that the low compression idea is a bad one, but I just wanted to clear that up.

Oh and lower compression should actually reduce fuel consumption due to the lower cylinder temps. Detonation is less of an issue, so a leaner burn can be achieved without worrying about heat. On the flip side, power is lost from the smaller amount of air and fuel in the cylinder that is ignited. This is why the 9.3:1 engines were used on the newer Neons. Better fuel economy. They were able to make up the small amount of lost power with tuning, since the compression difference was only half a point.
-Derek

|Donate to 2gn|Feedback || OB's | GozziFab | All Business |


User avatar
LionheartedSXT
2GN Member
Posts: 905
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:34 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Post by LionheartedSXT » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:39 pm

^^^
that was very useful info OB, good stuff...
-Chad
MoxHair wrote:pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Its all smoke and mirrors.
- Project Log
- Feedback

Donkeypuncher
2GN Member
Posts: 2183
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:14 am
Location: Dallas, Tx

Post by Donkeypuncher » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:45 pm

That is all very correct. It's just a good rule to stay under 9.0:1, especially since most people up the boost down the road. Most people I know stick with 8.6:1, but a lot of the stock 420a guys run a turbo just fine with 9.6:1. Of course that is with the correct fuel setup and proper tuning. There were plenty of guys that toasted their engine due to detonation though. Mainly because they went cheap and tried to tune with injectors and a safc controller.

Post Reply

Return to “Engine”