Close

Page 18 of 25 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 426 to 450 of 608
  1. #426
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cleveland TN
    Posts
    542
    Rep Points
    555.0
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Ok correction on the bore if I plug in 84.1 bore, 89.7, .3 dome spits out 47.5 CC size for 10.2 which in the end with the thicker gasket is showing about 9.93:1 CR. Still a decent CR lowering given just a gasket.

  2. #427
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Did u subtract the ccs from valve relief cuts in the pistons for valve clearance
    Click here to enlarge

  3. #428
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    277
    Rep Points
    622.8
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Yes Reputation No
    I got ~9.97 CR with a .02CM change (.03 from the HG - .01 for machining). I assumed the Vc was unchanged beyond the .02CM change. This was using the origional values @brusk pulled.

    I get ~10.0 with the new values in post 426. Same assumptions.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    Did u subtract the ccs from valve relief cuts in the pistons for valve clearance
    I assumed no changes to the pistons as well. This is probably too complicated of a calculation for most of us to do. I was just doing mine in Excel, you will need much more information to spit out an accurate value that takes those changes into account.

  4. #429
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cleveland TN
    Posts
    542
    Rep Points
    555.0
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    unfortunately without a piston in front of me to try to actually measure I guessed close to 0 hoping that the crappy pictures I could find shows about the same dome as valve releif. Even if I up the dome size and the CC chamber I still show about the same amount of change dropping from 10.2x:1 to 9.93.

  5. #430
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cleveland TN
    Posts
    542
    Rep Points
    555.0
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ATP Click here to enlarge
    I got ~9.97 CR with a .02CM change (.03 from the HG - .01 for machining). I assumed the Vc was unchanged beyond the .02CM change. This was using the origional values @brusk pulled.

    I get ~10.0 with the new values in post 426. Same assumptions.
    Doh my bad got caught up in trying to find actual sizes I forgot about the machining.

  6. #431
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    277
    Rep Points
    622.8
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by brusk Click here to enlarge
    unfortunately without a piston in front of me to try to actually measure I guessed close to 0 hoping that the crappy pictures I could find shows about the same dome as valve releif. Even if I up the dome size and the CC chamber I still show about the same amount of change dropping from 10.2x:1 to 9.93.
    I think you did some more advanced calculations than I did, probably more accurate as well.

  7. #432
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cleveland TN
    Posts
    542
    Rep Points
    555.0
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Just using any of the various online calcs. Just plugging in numbers and doing research while screwing off at work.

  8. #433
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Head was just lapped not machined and only about 2 thou was taken off..how does that affect the calcs?
    Click here to enlarge

  9. #434
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cleveland TN
    Posts
    542
    Rep Points
    555.0
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    If it was truly 0.002 inches that's .05mm that comes in around 9.97 according the calc I'm looking at.

    FYI if you wanna play the one I'm using is http://www.race-cars.net/calculators...alculator.html.

  10. #435
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    277
    Rep Points
    622.8
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by brusk Click here to enlarge
    If it was truly 0.002 inches that's .05mm that comes in around 9.97 according the calc I'm looking at.

    FYI if you wanna play the one I'm using is http://www.race-cars.net/calculators...alculator.html.

    Exactly what I got using Excel.

  11. #436
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Cool, not bad for just a head gasket change
    Click here to enlarge

  12. #437
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cleveland TN
    Posts
    542
    Rep Points
    555.0
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Little closer to a high boost friendly CR. If it were more I could see that leading to some of your timing advance requirements but only dealing with CR changes on NA engines that wouldn't have been noticeable on most NA engines but with boost maybe.

  13. #438
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Stockholm
    Posts
    1,528
    Rep Points
    1,177.6
    Mentioned
    61 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Yes Reputation No
    Dzenno from what you have seen is it possible to change valve seals without removing the head from the block?
    07 335i AT - MOTIV 750 - MHD BMS E85 - BMS PI - JB4G5 - Okada Coils - NGK 5992 Plugs - Helix IC - Stett CP - Custom midpipes with 100 HJS Cats - Bastuck Quad - PSS10 - QUAIFE LSD - BMS OCC - Forge DVs - AR OC - ALCON BBK - M3 Chassi - Dinan CP - Velocity M rear Toe arms - Advan RZ-DF - LUX H8 - Level 10 AT upgrade
    Click here to enlarge

  14. #439
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by enrita Click here to enlarge
    Dzenno from what you have seen is it possible to change valve seals without removing the head from the block?
    Its not impossible but it'll take a while and it'll be pretty tricky having the valve not drop in the cylinder when you're pulling the retainers/springs. Valve cover and cams have to come off and the shop needs to have an N54 cam timing toolset on their disposal to do this right when you're putting the cams back on.
    Click here to enlarge

  15. #440
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    168
    Rep Points
    219.9
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    For calculating static compression ratio change, you'd also need to know the original and new combustion chamber volume. If any valve deshrouding was done during the headwork that will increase chamber volume, and therefore lower static compression.

  16. #441
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    3,293
    Rep Points
    1,435.7
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by brusk Click here to enlarge
    Looking up as much info as I could using a compression ratio and these figures 84mm Bore, 75mm stroke, piston dome (guessing close to a 0 given the recesses and actual dome) .2 which works out to about a 38.5 CC size to get a 10.2:1 with a standard 1.22 gasket size. If I change it to a 1.52 gasket size it spits out about 9.88:1 CR. Anybody else get the same numbers?
    is 9.88:1 CR is really what is being run now, that would DEFINITELY explain the power loss given identical tunes, that's a sizeable drop..

    however as you seem to have found (dzenno), it allows MUCH more aggressive tuning, which can only be a good thing? Click here to enlarge

    it doesn't entirely help with finding out exactly the gains from JUST headwork though Click here to enlarge


    still... awesome that you have gains of any sort at all no matter what you did Click here to enlarge

    ED: 9.97:1 was the latest working-outage? well that's still sizeable drop from 10.2, and would still account for all the changes lol

    wonder what you could get with the 9.5:1 pistons and an oversized head gasket, i take it it'd drop to ~9.3:1 in that case?

    make it pretty doughy in the bottom end >_<.. hm

  17. #442
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    1,641
    Rep Points
    2,149.9
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    22


    Yes Reputation No
    This is the type of discussion that makes this site far and apart from the other one. You guys are way more knowledgeable than I am.

    I want to see numbers D!
    2010 e92 M3 Jet Black | DCT | ESS Tuned | Akrapovic Slip-on | Challenge X-pipe | AFE Intake | 18" Volk TE37SL | KW V3 Coilovers | RPI Scoops | Under Drive Pulley

    2007 e92 Mont. Blue 335i | 6MT | COBB Tuned | Quaife 3.46 LSD | Helix FMIC | AA DPs | HKS Exhaust | DCI | Stett CP w/ Forged DVs | KWv2 Coilovers | UUC Sway Bars & SSK | HPF Stg 2 Clutch | HFS-4 | M3 Suspension Bits | DEFIVfab Diff Lockdown Kit | Stoptech Trophy BBK

  18. #443
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    3,857
    Rep Points
    3,642.6
    Mentioned
    74 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    37


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by nafoo Click here to enlarge
    This is the type of discussion that makes this site far and apart from the other one. You guys are way more knowledgeable than I am.

    I want to see numbers D!
    I agree, I like to read and learn, if anyone honestly still gets good info from reading the other forum's n54 section they are either a noob or like reading the same basic crap over and over again.

    I too am anxious for numbers!
    Click here to enlarge
    ESS 6XX kit

  19. #444
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    277
    Rep Points
    622.8
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by andrew20195 Click here to enlarge
    For calculating static compression ratio change, you'd also need to know the original and new combustion chamber volume. If any valve deshrouding was done during the headwork that will increase chamber volume, and therefore lower static compression.
    FWIW, I assumed the Combustion Chamber was unchaged in my calcs. To get a 100% correct answer, you need 100% of the information. In the absence of all information, I made assumptions.

  20. #445
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Its safe to assume that compression has dropped roughly by 0.2-0.3 points from these assumptions. When I posed the question it was just to get a rough idea on the drop due to the head gasket change. Exact numbers are obviously impossible without exact measurements. If the head was actually machined the thicker gasket would likely not change compression at all. I'm happy about the little drop in compression though as the plan is to go with something possibly larger in the coming year depending on what comes to the market and that little drop can't hurt.

    What do you guys think about the VANOS changes when it comes to this head? Any suggestions what direction you'd go there? I'm leaving tinkering with it for the dyno. On the stock head, changing the VANOS with stock and RB turbos provides very minimal top end gains if any over what the COBB OTS map already provides. There is a bit to be gained depending on boost levels but not much. It'll be interesting if those same changes help with this head in place.

    One thing I haven't mentioned is the 2.56 Quaife LSD in the back that's been put in place instead of the 3.08 I used to have. The car hits about 82km/hr in 1st (51mph), 139km/hr (87mph) in 2nd and about 212km/hr (132mph) in 3rd. On the current pump only tune 1st gear still loses traction on the street but its cold out and DRs on the back need a bit of warm up. 2nd gear is currently usable on dry pavement and given its hooking the car is pulling amazing. Runs from about 3k rpm to redline in 2nd are pretty wild and considerably longer than with a 3.08, all of which should come in handy at the strip and eliminate the need for the 3-4 shift entirely with this current setup on RBs given where traps could land. Anyone racing this car on the "street" will have a very hard time keeping up due to this 2nd gear gearing. 6th gear on the highway RPMs at about 1750 going 120km/hr and its totally usable. I don't personally use it as the sound from the exhaust is pretty loud in the car at that speed but with a stock catback on it'd be perfect for cruising and "fuel economy" Click here to enlarge

    I'll try my best for dyno this week some time, possibly Saturday morning again if they can squeeze me in
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 11-06-2012 at 01:31 PM.
    Click here to enlarge

  21. #446
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Miami Beach
    Posts
    1,094
    Rep Points
    513.1
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    ^interesting.....pretty anxious to see the gains
    Click here to enlarge

  22. #447
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    354
    Rep Points
    465.4
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Good info in here, sir! Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge
    sales@ardesign.info | tel. 303.351.3515| www.ardesign.info
    Powering some of the world's fastest BMWs

  23. #448
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    3,293
    Rep Points
    1,435.7
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Yes Reputation No
    that's crazy! (in gear speeds)

    I didn't even know quaife offered a longer FD ratio, how would it compare to a 3.46 setup?

  24. #449
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Flinchy Click here to enlarge
    that's crazy! (in gear speeds)

    I didn't even know quaife offered a longer FD ratio, how would it compare to a 3.46 setup?
    3.46 would provide considerably shorter gears. Haven't tried it on my car yet but I get on the street in a 6MT it works well as well but when you have tons of low end torque such as with stock or RB turbos I think taller is preferred to be able to use the lower gears a bit better. My preference would've been a 2.73 for instance but unfortunately it didn't exist.
    Click here to enlarge

  25. #450
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    3,293
    Rep Points
    1,435.7
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    3.46 would provide considerably shorter gears. Haven't tried it on my car yet but I get on the street in a 6MT it works well as well but when you have tons of low end torque such as with stock or RB turbos I think taller is preferred to be able to use the lower gears a bit better. My preference would've been a 2.73 for instance but unfortunately it didn't exist.
    i wonder what real world acceleration difference there'd be... not changing gears vs having far shorter gears.

Page 18 of 25 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •