Compression Ratios
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
Re: Compression Ratios
Originally posted by rayjle
I am not real clear on the beniefits/differences in compression ratios. What do they measure? How would, say, a truck be different than a sports car? What can one do to modify these ratios?
I am not real clear on the beniefits/differences in compression ratios. What do they measure? How would, say, a truck be different than a sports car? What can one do to modify these ratios?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 137
From: Elkton, Virginia
Car Info: 1998 Subaru Impreza L 2.2
Nitrous, Turbocharged, and Supercharged applications are usually lower than 9:0 CR. I think my subaru L has a CR of 8:5:1 maybe? I have never understood how diesel, especially turbo diesels, can run astrnomically high CRs. I'm guessing it has something to do with 40 octane
.
-Charles-
.-Charles-
Guest
Posts: n/a
diesels don't have spark plugs. they basically rely on the extremely high compression, and volitility of the fuel to ignite. its also a direct injection into the cylinder, rather than into the intake. don't quote me, but i think thats all correct.
the C/R of a jetta tdi is like 19-20. damn.
-PJ
the C/R of a jetta tdi is like 19-20. damn.
-PJ
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 137
From: Elkton, Virginia
Car Info: 1998 Subaru Impreza L 2.2
No Spark Plugs
That's right, I forgot they didn't have spark plugs. A CR of 20 is volitale to say the least, doesn't the Ford 7.3L Powerstrokes up that to around 22? I also think its cool how they redline at like 3,000 rpms, that's why they have so much torque and so little giddy-up-and-go. Anyway, back to gasoline....
-Charles-
-Charles-
Guest
Posts: n/a
Actually, diesels have glow plugs. They don't have conventional "spark plugs", but they have a heated tip at the top of every cylinder, and when the charge is heavily compressed towards the top, it self ignites. That's why, sometimes, when turn off your motor via the ignition, if the car continues to run on it's own before it finally shuts down, it's called dieseling. Just some useless facts.
As for compression ratios, as previously stated, they are one of the key determiners of power production. As a general rule, the higher the compression, the more power a motor will generate. There are actually two types of compression. There's static compression, which is the actual difference in chamber volume from bottom dead center to top dead center. For instance, a 9:1 compression ratio would mean that, at top dead center, the chamber volume is reduced to one ninth the total volume that the chamber has at bottom dead center. Then, we have dynamic compression. That's a combination of your static compression combined with volumetric efficiency. Volumetric efficiency (VE) is the motor's ability to breathe. The reason why people install cams, intakes, headers, exhaust systems, is to increase the flow of the motor. If your intake/exhaust sytem is efficient enough to fill a 2 litre motor with only 1.5 litres of air, that would give your motor a 75% VE. Without forced induction, most motors will never see 100% VE. That means that, even if you have a 2.0 litre motor, you will seldom, if ever, move 2.0 litres of air for a full cycle of the motor. Of course, resonance tuning and boost are two ways to get around this, but on the most part, without forced induction or some serious tuning, you won't see 100% VE. So how do you figure out your dynamic compression ratio?
Static compression ratio x VE = dynamic compression ratio
If your motor has a 9:1 static compression ratio and an 85% VE...
9.0 x .85 = 7.65 dynamic compression ratio.
So, either an increase in static compression ratio or VE would result in a higher dynamic compression ratio, or power output.
As for compression ratios, as previously stated, they are one of the key determiners of power production. As a general rule, the higher the compression, the more power a motor will generate. There are actually two types of compression. There's static compression, which is the actual difference in chamber volume from bottom dead center to top dead center. For instance, a 9:1 compression ratio would mean that, at top dead center, the chamber volume is reduced to one ninth the total volume that the chamber has at bottom dead center. Then, we have dynamic compression. That's a combination of your static compression combined with volumetric efficiency. Volumetric efficiency (VE) is the motor's ability to breathe. The reason why people install cams, intakes, headers, exhaust systems, is to increase the flow of the motor. If your intake/exhaust sytem is efficient enough to fill a 2 litre motor with only 1.5 litres of air, that would give your motor a 75% VE. Without forced induction, most motors will never see 100% VE. That means that, even if you have a 2.0 litre motor, you will seldom, if ever, move 2.0 litres of air for a full cycle of the motor. Of course, resonance tuning and boost are two ways to get around this, but on the most part, without forced induction or some serious tuning, you won't see 100% VE. So how do you figure out your dynamic compression ratio?
Static compression ratio x VE = dynamic compression ratio
If your motor has a 9:1 static compression ratio and an 85% VE...
9.0 x .85 = 7.65 dynamic compression ratio.
So, either an increase in static compression ratio or VE would result in a higher dynamic compression ratio, or power output.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Excellent explanation!
To further the thought: Say you have a 10:1 static compression car (close to a 2.5 RS) and add a turbo. You now increase the VE and thus the dynamic compression ratio. This is where trouble can begin, because the dynamic compression ratio gets so high that problems occur, like detonation. Solutions to this include running higher octane fuel, retarding timing through engine management, limiting boost, lowering compression ratio, replacing rods, crank etc w/stronger parts etc.
jack
To further the thought: Say you have a 10:1 static compression car (close to a 2.5 RS) and add a turbo. You now increase the VE and thus the dynamic compression ratio. This is where trouble can begin, because the dynamic compression ratio gets so high that problems occur, like detonation. Solutions to this include running higher octane fuel, retarding timing through engine management, limiting boost, lowering compression ratio, replacing rods, crank etc w/stronger parts etc.
jack
hats off to Neouser for establishing the difference between dynamic and static compression ratios. Generally speaking, I personally believe that the terminology "compression ratio" has become a bit of an iconic hinge upon which the opinions and reasonings of the obligatorily ignorant opinion swings...now I may sound hostile, and I may very well be an idiot (who can ever tell for sure?), but I assure you I am not simply being contrarian...we have 450 horsepower turbocharged Porshes with 9.4:1 compression and 450 horsepower Subarus wth 8:1 compression (granted of course greater displacement has a part to play, but that is besides the point). Remember that the only reason for low compression ratios is to lower the detonation threshold as one turns up the boost ...INHERENTLY it has nothing to do with power. So, that being said, and I will cut myself off here before composing a veritable discertation of sorts, simply remember that compression ratio in regards to turbocharging is much more about accomodating high boost pressures than it is about actual power generation (it is a huge compromise and results in generally peaky HP and torque)...and as the body of American tuners become more educated over time, I gurantee we will see a greater trend towards moderate boost levels coupled with slightly HIGHER compression ratios...and not wonder so much anymore why it is that turbo Porsches seem to be so multitalented and almost completely and utterly own Japanese *** on a consistent basis...remember my fellow Americans that we are the modern evolution of the "muscle-car" phenomenon...peace and love to y'all
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
[Ed McMahon on]
YES! You are corRECT, SIR!
[/Ed McMahon off]
Porsche definitely ownz. If it weren't for the 911and 944, Subaru probably wouldn't be using boxer engines, because they didn't have the resources to engineer the leap to water-cooled flat engines on their own. They borroed heavily from Porsche... now why don't more makers do that (hint hint GM!).
I am willing to bet that the EJ25T in the STi is no less than 9.0:1 compression for this very fact.
YES! You are corRECT, SIR!
[/Ed McMahon off]
Porsche definitely ownz. If it weren't for the 911and 944, Subaru probably wouldn't be using boxer engines, because they didn't have the resources to engineer the leap to water-cooled flat engines on their own. They borroed heavily from Porsche... now why don't more makers do that (hint hint GM!).
I am willing to bet that the EJ25T in the STi is no less than 9.0:1 compression for this very fact.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post




