Thread: 200 hp
View Single Post
Old 07-12-2015, 05:06 PM   #21
enkeivetteenkeivette is offline
Super Moderator
 
enkeivette's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,850
Default

Ring gap changed to boost specs when I replaced all the moly rings with stainless. (Compression was the same with both rings sets).

Valves are adjusted pinky tight to zero lash, quarter turn of preload. Pushrod height and valve tip wear pattern checked when I installed the 1.65 harland sharp rockers. I did NOT over-tighten them, I am very aware of that mistake. (Compression was the same before and after different rockers).

Static compression, no, absolutely not sure. The history of this motor is that I relied on the machine shops calculation to yield 10.5+:1 compression, NA cam, dynoed it, down on power. Did the math myself after measuring piston depth with a feeler guage (pistons are relieved, heads are 74cc), calculated 9.4:1. Installed a blower, kept breaking pistons. Went with a thicker HG to drop it to a then calculated 9:1, saying bye bye to proper quench, and hello to functionality. (The closest I've been since the machine shop math blunder).

The end.
__________________
I <3 forced induction.
  Reply With Quote