5.9, max safe compression?

-

gregsdart

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2004
Messages
788
Reaction score
463
Location
mn
EQ heads, sealed power 11cc dished pistons, .020 overbore, stock stroke, can set deck hieght at .050 in the hole with a .028 gasket as is, or deck it some for better quench, if it will tolerate higher compression. With out decking the block, it works out to 9.6/1 compression. 93 octane BP gas is what I can run, average DA is 2000 feet or more, local elevation is 1,000 ft, humidity is usually over 50 percent. Cam is 224 @ .050, 276 @ .006 hydraulic roller, will be in at 106. How much would I dare increase compression? At .050 quench, compression would be. 10.5/1?
 
Last edited:
Does this mean you have .022" deck clearance and a .028" gasket for a total of .050"?
 
Currently the block is stock, stock pistons were .050 in the hole. The .050 quench distance would require I deck the block about .028.
 
BTW, running your original numbers (.050" in the hole) and 62 cc chambers, I get 9.35/7.5 SCR/DCR at 0 ft elevation. Decking down another .028" for .050" piston to head clearance, I get 9.9/7.9 SCR/DCR at 0 ft elevation.

Since my SCR numbers are different, that is why I asked about the piston models. Have you cc'd the dish in the pistons? I would not expect quite as much dish volume at the 11 cc's you list for 405P's. I also don't get .050" deck clearance with a stock deck and those pistons.... so things are not quite adding up yet.

Edit to add: So are these H655CP's? The 11 cc dish makes sense now. The .050" stock deck may be a bit off but is close....
 
Last edited:
I haven't bought pistons yet, but figure the Sealed Power hyperuetechtic replacement. Dish pistons would be my best option. My goal is to get as tight a quench as I can and as much compression as 93 octane will allow.
I thought EQs were 58cc, but if they are 62 cc, that would work better yet.
 
I would not want to run on the razors edge of detonation by maxing your compression without some type of knock sensor. One tank of bad fuel or an overly lean condition is all it takes to cause damage.
 
Greg, is run the lower ratio with your cam and forget the quench because getting a good quench in there will raise the ratio a bit high with the iron head and the small cam isn't going to help much at all.

You know my cam right? I'm running 9.73-1 with the aluminum heads and I call that enough. Quit enough.
 
Or run a piston with a deeper dish and make the quench tight. He hasn't bought pistons yet.
 
EQ heads, sealed power 11cc dished pistons, .020 overbore, stock stroke, can set deck hieght at .050 in the hole with a .028 gasket as is, or deck it some for better quench, if it will tolerate higher compression. With out decking the block, it works out to 9.6/1 compression. 93 octane BP gas is what I can run, average DA is 2000 feet or more, local elevation is 1,000 ft, humidity is usually over 50 percent. Cam is 224 @ .050, 276 @ .006 hydraulic roller, will be in at 106. How much would I dare increase compression? At .050 quench, compression would be. 10.5/1?
Are those EQs iron?
I am a streeter,
Back in in the early 2000s,I ran a Hughes cam similar to that (270/280/110 hi-lift; the 050s were 223/230) under aluminum heads at 10.9Scr. I think the Dcr was around 8.8 @180 psi. I ran it on 87E10 with full-timing,lol. I ran 32 to 36 and on the street, couldn't feel any difference, so mostly I run 32 to 34. I cruized it at 60/62and it idled at 14. I ran the Quench at .044 for the first year, and .034 after that.
I don't think you can run that high a Dcr with iron heads, and for sure not at the current .079 Q.I'm not a builder, but I have heard that running Q between .050 and .080 is bad news
But I can't say for sure as I was still on 87E10. I've never since 1999 run anything but 87E10, in that engine.

Imo, I would get the Q down to between .035 and .045 and do whatever it takes to increase the chamber size to avoid detonation.If that means custom machining on the crowns, that is what I would do. I ran the Q down into the hi 020.s with the 292/509 cam and the Scr at 11.3, and it still burned 87E10 at 34*.I spun the dice at as little as .025,with stock rods and hypers, and won.
Perhaps I have too high an opinion of Q,so be it.
Burning 87 for 17 years/125,000 plus miles, I saved a boat-load of cash.And that car burned up a lot of tires.And it broke a lot of parts.But the engine just kept on rolling,rolling....
But I will tell you my secret, since I'm old and we will likely never meet at the track. It's all in the advance curve.And I am at 960 ft. I ran 14 initial and 34 total. But I ran a kinked curve, that delivered 28* at 2800, and then it slowed down, and the 34 wasn't all in until 3400.
I run a manual trans so I am not married to a particular stall. And I can downshift like lightning; faster than lightning on the upshifts, cuz,my tranny has been custom slick-shifted. So I never lug that engine. Besides, I have a dial-back timing device, that I can adjust up to 7.5 degrees either way, right from the driver's seat.
In my next engine, I'm gonna pump the Dcr up yet more.Maybe I'll get to run 89,lol
 
Last edited:
Before you go getting edgy on the compression ratio, why don't you use this calculator to see what you would gain by going from 9.6 to 10.5 compression?

Wallace Racing - Calculate New HP From Change In Compression Ratios Calculator
This calculator is TERRIBLY misleading as to how overall engine performance is effected with CR, and I wish people would stop pointing to this, as they are doing a great disservice to new engine builders. This ONLY reflects the PEAK HP under certain LIMITED circumstances. It tells you NOTHING about how much added CR effects low RPM torque, widens the torque band at the low end, and improves engine efficiency.

If we did not care about this, we would also never change cam timing to make changes in peak combustion compression numbers.... etc. And we all KNOW that running too big a cam in a low SCR engine kills the low RPM torque. So why then turn around and say that CR is not important? Pure nonsense.

If CR was not important, we would all run 6:1 SCR and never worry about detonation. Let see some dyno curves from that....
 
This calculator is TERRIBLY misleading as to how overall engine performance is effected with CR, and I wish people would stop pointing to this, as they are doing a great disservice to new engine builders. This ONLY reflects the PEAK HP under certain LIMITED circumstances. It tells you NOTHING about how much added CR effects low RPM torque, widens the torque band at the low end, and improves engine efficiency.

If we did not care about this, we would also never change cam timing to make changes in peak combustion compression numbers.... etc. And we all KNOW that running too big a cam in a low SCR engine kills the low RPM torque. So why then turn around and say that CR is not important? Pure nonsense.

If CR was not important, we would all run 6:1 SCR and never worry about detonation. Let see some dyno curves from that....

I second that. My Hughes 2330 was a tractor, yet reved to over 7000. I think the power peak was around 5200, but it was sorta long and flat up there. And 7200 got me over 60 mph, in first-over so I went there cuz The engine could.And that cam also made super fantastic gas mileage, that nobody believes so mostly I keep it to myself.
The current HE3037 is a tractor too, and peaks perhaps 200rpm higher.But It can't make the the same mpgs. Although I have never paid attention to what the rpms are exactly, I think it will take secondaries at just off idle. Try that with your stock teener, 268*, 3.55s, 295s,and clutch . Just dump it and floor it,Hah! I can see the embarassment on your face from here.
But that's not fair you say, you have a 360. Yes I do.
And if you wanna try that on your 7.5Dcr 360, go ahead. Dump it and floor it,Hah.
Ok wait, I'll give you a headstart. I'll wait until I see your car moving. Got your earplugs in? I will be coming by at Seventy-two hundred revolutions per minute. There is no dyno for measuring that.
On the next engine, I will try a Dcr of 9 to 9.2,still with the aluminum heads, but back to a 270ish cam, and Somebody is gonna have the task of porting my Eddies, and I won't tell you who it won't be. And it's not gonna be a race port.
And I'm gonna run 3.23s. And I will fly by you again, at 7200, cuz that is what the rev-limiter is set to. When I floor it, it is foot-in-the-carburetor-WOT.And the tires don't quit spinning until I tell them to, or until 65mph, whichever comes first.
Ok wait, it's a 367 How tractor-like could it be? Well it's not the tractor like a 440/727 in your 68 Chrysler. You know, the one you can watch the speed-O winding up to 100 mph at a ferocious pace. No tire spin. No exhaust screaming. No drama of any kind, outside of that speed-O and a bit of wind noise starting up. No my 367 isn't like that at all.
But, it will idle down to 550 or less with a little clutch,and pull itself around on flat pavement. And from the stop-lite it's a blip, dump and go deal. Now I admit it, I have a 10.97 starter gear; that's a 3.09x3.55=10.97. Your 2.66low gear car would need 4.12s to match it.You might say I have excessive starter gear, and I think you might be right. I am very sure I could run 3.23s and give up nothing. But I am too lazy to go and swap them in. I think I could even get away with 2.94s, but then my GVOD would be kindof useless........
In a streeter, if you can tune it,High-compression RULES!!

OK hang on. I have an old Vizard book that says going from 9.5 to 11.5 SCr will be about 3% power increase, in a street engine with a "relatively short cam duration". He has a real nice chart and everything. So if you have a 360 hp street stormer, According to the chart, you might gain 11hp. Big deal you say. Well it is a big deal! It is almost 1 full cam size in the "relatively short duration cam" that the book talks about. But unlike the cam which makes that power by trading away low-rpm torque, the extra compression makes the extra torque throughout the rpm range! That IS a big deal. Only a similar increase in gear ratio can touch it off the line. But again, gears can only take you so far, and then horsepower has to take over.
But I like what nm9 says.
The extra compression at lower rpm and at part-throttle, means you don't have to drive as deep into the carburetor to get the job done.
It's all related to effective compression ratio.
If at WOT and a certain rpm,your VE was 100 % and your 9.5 SCr360 could pull in 360/8=45 cubic inches of air per cylinder, and compress it to say 1/9.5 of that,and during that, the pressure might rise to 9.5 times atmospheric, or say 143 psi for simplicity sake.
Now lets say at 2000 rpm throttled and cruizing, your VE might be I'm guessing 30%, so that same cylinder pulls in just 13.5 cubic inches, and compresses that to .3x143 =43psi.
But if the Scr was 11.5, and the cylinder pressure was 170 psi@ WOT, then the same cruize pressure might be 51psi. If your car only needed 43psi to cruise at, then you could back out of the throttle, and be burning less fuel to maintain the cruize.
But, and this is the important part, More pressure is available at all times with the higher Scr!
And even more importantly this is why a low-Scr/low-Dcr, small displacement engine with too-big a camshaft, gets soft on the bottom ; namely, a major loss of cylinder pressure.

If you have been following along, it might have crossed your mind that with just 43 psi at PT, the cylinder pressure is just 43/143= 30% of what the gas will support. In other words the current cylinder pressure is less than 1/3 of what the gas will support.!! So why are you still buying 93gas? You won't be needing it until nearing 100% VE.
So you can see that the true Scr could be tripled under these theoretical conditions, to 3x43=129 and the actual cylinder pressure would still not exceed the ability of the gas . What is 3 times 9.5? You guessed it 28.5/1.
Now some of you will try and muddy things up, saying the cylinder is always gonna be 100% full of air. You will get no argument from me on that. 100% full of air that is 30% as dense as 1 atmosphere. Go suck an egg, my math saves a lot of figuring. Besides it's all theoretical. The exercise is just to show a little about what often goes on when guys put 268* cams in sub 8/1 stock teeners, and wonder why they have to spend another wheelbarrow full of money to actually be able to drive the thing in traffic. I woulda left the engine stock,except pumped it up to something like 12/1, maybe more. Then watch that 230cfm 2bbl roar....BTW, that's only 6.5% more power,lol, according to the book,like 14hp,lol,about the same as going up one gear size. But I guarantee you, around town, it will feel like a lot more than that, cuz the extra power is everywhere, not just at max VE.The entire power curve moves up; the average power increases across the board.

Some of you might remember my big-bore teener experiment of about 1974. Where I put the entire top end and cam from a teener onto a junkyard 340.I was only 21 at the time so don't ask me what parts I used, that was forever ago. But that engine was phenomenal. I dropped it into a 65 Valiant wagon with the 904 from a 273,and fenderwell headers,that is all. I drove it for 2 years until the tranny gave up. That was one of the funnest streeters I ever had. And easy on gas,lol.
 
Last edited:
Running the OP's numbers on 62 cc heads, .022" pistons below deck, 11 cc dish, and .028" head gasket, SCR/DCR is 9.9/7.9. 64 degree intake closure angle for the OP's cam at 106.

Point of reference, my son's recent 340 is set up to 10.0/8.2 (a step smaller cam; intake closure angle = 61*) and has AL heads and quench. So pretty safe. Spins street tires at just over 1/2 throttle with 3.55 gears, 15 degrees initial, 2200 stall.

And I have run 10.3 SCR and DCR up into the low 8's on iron heads WITH quench (60 degree intake closure angle). I had to always run premium AND I could not get too carried away with ignition mechanical advance. Good and torquey but not quite the same tire spinner as above with a 3.08 rear and stock TC. (Ford)

Edit to add: All the DCR numbers above are at sea level so actual will be a bit lower at 1000' altitude.
 
Go 9 go!

Man Was I excited to get the GVOD. I could finally run a decent starter gear. You can run any reasonable rear ratio with one of those, up to say 4.56s. I found 4.88s to be a bit high but 5.38s were beyond my limit,lol
For a streeter, I think too much emphasis is often put on the cam,and engine, at the expense of a good starter gear.
A stock-teener with a 10/1 starter will be ferocious. Throw in a 2800 and look out! And the engine is still stock.Ask me how I know.
A 5.9Magnum? Well, with about a 10/1starter and 2800,and just a tiny roller cam, it will be a destroyer!
Maybe even with a little less starter.
 
Last edited:
I am running 10.81 static, with 8.71 dynamic in a 360 mag with aluminum heads in a old heavy w150, the motor is a torque monster.
It has a small roller comp 262 cam and will pull my camper and car trailer easy.
I do mix 5 gal of 110 with 93 octane when pulling a heavy load because it is cheap insurance, I can buy it at the pump here for $8 a gallon, in a lighter car I would not worry about the 110.
The old truck pulls harder than my 5.7 challenger, but not as comfy to drive.
Just a old farm truck trailer hauler, but it flat out works.
 
Sometimes things just work out, like my friends 68 Roadrunner with a 400 based 451, reverse dome KBs for tight quench running bowl ported #452 iron heads, 10.5/1 compression. The dyno operator was amazed it doesn't detonate on pump swill, which is 93 here in Minnesota. The cam is 268@ .050( NOT a typo) .580 lift hydraulic, and hauls that full weight RR to 11.40s corked up. I would love to duplicate the same end result, IE, great results running hi compression and tight quench.
I read online an article (Mopar Muscle? HotRod?) put out yesterday saying Brian at IMM is working on a similar build, with very high compression, iron heads, and pumpgas. The article said 91 california swill will be the fuel. I Hope the writer got the facts right.
 
Sometimes things just work out, like my friends 68 Roadrunner with a 400 based 451, reverse dome KBs for tight quench running bowl ported #452 iron heads, 10.5/1 compression. The dyno operator was amazed it doesn't detonate on pump swill, which is 93 here in Minnesota. The cam is 268@ .050( NOT a typo) .580 lift hydraulic, and hauls that full weight RR to 11.40s corked up. I would love to duplicate the same end result, IE, great results running hi compression and tight quench.
I read online an article (Mopar Muscle? HotRod?) put out yesterday saying Brian at IMM is working on a similar build, with very high compression, iron heads, and pumpgas. The article said 91 california swill will be the fuel. I Hope the writer got the facts right.
In a way, your friend's 451 running that SCR is not particularly daunting. If your numbers are right, with that level of cam and running a guess-timated ICL of 106, he is roughly in the 7:1 dynamic CR range. His speed is from the cubes and cam; I bet that thing has to rev a fair amount (considering the stroke).
So you are trying to duplicate THAT result? Or make something that is an all around engine with gobs low end torque? The latter is where AJ and I are coming from but that may not really what you are looking to do.
 
I haven't bought pistons yet, but figure the Sealed Power hyperuetechtic replacement. Dish pistons would be my best option. My goal is to get as tight a quench as I can and as much compression as 93 octane will allow.
I thought EQs were 58cc, but if they are 62 cc, that would work better yet.

If you haven't bought pistons, get some kb107. They will be nearly even with the deck. Shoot for .035 to .045 clearance for good quench with the EQ closed chamber heads. Magnum style closed chambers are a LOT more resistant to detonation. Depending upon cam choice, with this combo you may not need to run the 93 octane.
 
a 360 in a coronet i bought is loud and strong, idk exactly what's in it but i think it's a purple cam.
has magnum heads, i put headers on it and it has a crosswind (fake rpm airgap) with a holley. running 93 octane i haven't been able to hear it detonate (yeah, it's pretty loud though).

the PO told me it had speedpro flat tops (H116 i think?!?)
running numbers, best i could tell was the motor is about 10.3-10.7:1 compression.
pulls about 13" vacuum at idle in park at about 850rpm.
i tested a few cylinders for psi, cold motor it cranked 180-190psi.

so yeah, seems the magnum combustion chamber is pretty detonation resistant....
runs right at 180* temp on highway and cruising slower.
 
-
Back
Top