Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[6pack\]\s+Compression\s+Ratio\s+Calculation\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[6pack\]\s+Compression\s+Ratio\s+Calculation\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [6pack] Compression Ratio Calculation (score: 1): Author: "Derek" <saffrontr@tiscali.co.uk>; Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 07:02:16 -0000; Have sent you a seperate email attaching a spreadsheet which details the various heads fitted to the six cylinder range. According to the spreadsheet the standard head fitted to the 74.5 is the "219; /html/6pack/2008-01/msg00066.html (7,428 bytes)
2. Re: [6pack] Compression Ratio Calculation (score: 1): Author: "Foster, Stan" <stan.foster@hp.com>; Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 15:36:18 +0000; Thanks Derek, that is quite a formidable spreadsheet !. And that thickness is consistent with Roger Williams who says in both TR6 books that the US head will need about .080 removed to bring the comp; /html/6pack/2008-01/msg00071.html (8,042 bytes)
3. Re: [6pack] Compression Ratio Calculation (score: 1): Author: "Shawn J. Loseke" <sloseke@holly.colostate.edu>; Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 09:21:33 -0700; The best/most mechanically efficient method for increasing compression is to begine with a zero deck height. That way more of the combustion chamber shape can be saved. When you keep shrinking that; /html/6pack/2008-01/msg00077.html (9,527 bytes)
4. Re: [6pack] Compression Ratio Calculation (score: 1): Author: "Navarrette, Vance" <vance.navarrette@intel.com>; Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 09:06:15 -0800; Actually, if you look at Richard's table carefully, you will see that a 1974 head starting at 3.550 thickness, and ending at 9.6:1 CR with a 0.020 overbore (which is what I did) should be milled to; /html/6pack/2008-01/msg00098.html (9,340 bytes)
5. Re: [6pack] Compression Ratio Calculation (score: 1): Author: Robert Lang <lang@isis.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 12:18:47 -0500 (EST); That is correct. If you look in the Kastner TR6 Competition Prep Book (aka the Bible), it tells you this very number - later heads must take off and additional .080 to get the the numbers. He uses 10; /html/6pack/2008-01/msg00099.html (8,659 bytes)
6. Re: [6pack] Compression Ratio Calculation (score: 1): Author: "Navarrette, Vance" <vance.navarrette@intel.com>; Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 10:02:37 -0800; Raising the compression ratio by decking the block will get you more power than raising the compression the same amount by milling the head. The reason is that with a decked block the piston comes c; /html/6pack/2008-01/msg00102.html (9,881 bytes)
7. Re: [6pack] Compression Ratio Calculation (score: 1): Author: "Foster, Stan" <stan.foster@hp.com>; Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 18:17:23 +0000; The gentleman who is doing the machining for my motor also asserts that zero decked engines develop more torque. He is going to CC my cylinder head to my desired CR btw. Stan --Original Message-- Fro; /html/6pack/2008-01/msg00103.html (9,272 bytes)
8. Re: [6pack] Compression Ratio Calculation (score: 1): Author: "Shawn J. Loseke" <sloseke@holly.colostate.edu>; Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 21:41:37 -0700; I'll admit you said it better than I did Vance. Thats what I get for writing stuff while I have a nasty headcold. Thats what I was getting at by saying that the burn was more efficient when you retai; /html/6pack/2008-01/msg00111.html (11,204 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]