Tennessee Car Forums at TennSpeed banner

High Compression VS Low Compression

  • High compression engine boosted and tuned

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Low compression engine boosted and tuned

    Votes: 0 0.0%
1 - 20 of 63 Posts

·
Vintage BMW Aficionado
Joined
·
4,550 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So we have had some controversy on which is a better combination to turbo a car... I just want the general consensus.

Answer the poll and put your .02 in if you wish.

Reliability plays a big role in most of our turbo'ed cars, considering they are mostly DDs.

All factors should be considered.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
id go for low compression means you can boost more but you could probably get away with running like 10.1 and some modest boost as well. high compression turbos just too iffy in my opinon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,504 Posts
Id go low comp, But high comp is always better. If you know how to tune it safely high comp will always make alot more power than low comp.
 

·
Vintage BMW Aficionado
Joined
·
4,550 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
rs-tdsm95 said:
id go for low compression means you can boost more but you could probably get away with running like 10.1 and some modest boost as well. high compression turbos just too iffy in my opinon
Agreed. I give all props to someone who has the money to do a high compression turbo car, and tune it safely. But its just not to practical. So I guess reliability and power both come into play.
 
G

·
rs-tdsm95 said:
id go for low compression means you can boost more but you could probably get away with running like 10.1 and some modest boost as well. high compression turbos just too iffy in my opinon
boost more? lol


ok with lower comp you cna run a higher psi number, which isnt always better.
highcomp yes u will run lower bopst BUT a high power number can be achieved as well.
do some REAL research instead of asking a forum. then make your choice
 

·
Super Moderhater
Joined
·
12,369 Posts
boost already has a turbo ... so i dont think he's worried ^ ... therefore he doesnt need to do research, he's just asking us what we think, like he said

LOW COMP. FTW!!! its just too risky to boost something thats higher than 10:1 ... and requires too many mods

i dont think it deserves any props, its just not wise - you can get the same #s out of the same car either way with enough money, so you might as well do it the safe way
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
im all about high comp low boost but when you get into the reliability aspect of it low comp is more then likely always gunna be more reliable but only boosted car i haved owned was dsm so reliability was always my problem and my friends low comp boosted crx is a bitch
 

·
Hater-Supreme
Joined
·
4,615 Posts
Low compression=the standard of turbo engines in the 80's/90's... Yields slower response, as well as slugishness out of boost on some cars. Can "run more boost", but depends on compression ratio, fueling, tune, and willingness to push for knock or not.

Higher compression=the newer standard for manufacturers - BMW is a good example. Yields better response off boost, as well as more torque, sooner for some cars. In an aftermarket application, it can be a good thing (I'd likr to run 9.1:1 instead of 8.5:1 on my car).

It's a tossup, but ultimately your choce.
 

·
International Administrator
Joined
·
9,621 Posts
wow....tons of mis-information being passed off here......feels like hondatech.
you can boost any compression...its all about the tune.
my cat engine runs 20:1 compression, my red teg runs 11.5:1....
you guys need to RUN and purchase these books quickly....

as soon as you read the one on the left...get back with me on your answers........the supra guy above me should be able to back my answer....
 

·
Super Moderhater
Joined
·
12,369 Posts
it all depends on what you define as "too high" as well

for example. if my 5SFE became a 5S-FTE like i want ... it would be at like 9.5:1 ... but i think anything above 10.5 is too high
 

·
International Administrator
Joined
·
9,621 Posts
what facts do you have to back your "thought"? thats why i say get the book and learn....corkey bell is a genius.
 

·
International Administrator
Joined
·
9,621 Posts
people boost itr's and ctr's all day long.....no problems. sure if you slap a turbo on any engine untuned....boom. please stop passing off mis information as facts...young dumb kids read the internet, then thats how stuff gets started.
 

·
Super Moderhater
Joined
·
12,369 Posts
actually i have been speaking to multiple engineers [im going to school for ME, so yeah ... i have access to them], including one guy who has turbo'd several camrys [lol, i know]

they all agree that low-comp is the preferred method ... i never said it was impossible to do high-comp, its just more complicated

and like i said ... requires more mods [ie: better tuning equipment, such as a standalone rather than a piggyback]

with all that book reading maybe u should read everyone's complete posts too
 

·
International Administrator
Joined
·
9,621 Posts
with the mentality of a ecu being more mods.....you need to stick with a stock engine.
sorry to jerk your chain......
the only reason people tell you to lower compression..... reduced chance to detonate, cutting corners on equipment, ect....
i will be quiet now.
 

·
Super Moderhater
Joined
·
12,369 Posts
most people are satisfied with an eManage or SAFC ... therefore, yes ... a standalone WOULD be more of a modification ... and allows for a much more complex tune

but thank you for your elitist p.o.v.
 

·
International Administrator
Joined
·
9,621 Posts
elitest....hahahahahaha, only if you knew. ive spent 17yrs trying different things. i just try to teach from my VERY expensive mistakes...
emanage=i dont mess with
safc/vafc=only tricks map/mass sensor....NO ignition tuning at all, thats the major drawback

as cheap as chipping ecu's are now a days...theres is no excuse. thanks for the discussion sir.
 

·
Vintage BMW Aficionado
Joined
·
4,550 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
You know you'd think some people could get off their high horses and step back and take a look at things. Don't you think the way you are acting is a little "childish" spoolie. This is a simple poll. Answer, leave your response, and go on with your day, thats all I ask. We all pull our pants up the same way, so stop acting like you don't. Let's keep this thread to a dull roar instead of blowing it out of proportion. Thank you.
 

·
DTG > All
Joined
·
2,196 Posts
I guess I'll make a comment on this thread since it was made because I hurt some poor mr2 guys feelings in another thread.

First of all I never said turboing a low or high compression is better than the other, I was just saying it is possible to turbo a high compression motor and it is not as hard as some of you idiots make it out to be. 2nd whoever is satisfied with a piggyback ecu on a performance car isn't really looking to get the most out of their car. safc? (the ricers dream engine management system) that pos can't even control timing and is a F'n joke. E-manage? a little better than the beloved safc as it can control timing but it is still garbage (I know I've owned both the blue and ultimate) Anything that has to modify the stock ecu's signals to tell the engine what to do is pretty much crap in my eyes. So tell me what does a high compression turbo car need that a low compression turbo car doesn't need too? More tuning? I wouldn't want to drive a car that has a half assed tune on it anyways but to most of you on here, half assed stuff is good enough for you. Just because people haven't turbo'd a high compression motor themselves they think its impossible or too hard to do. It just shows the lack of experience and knowledge that they have. The only people who actually know what they are talking about in this thread are Moody, Spoolie and myself.
 
1 - 20 of 63 Posts
Top