Scott,
You've opened up a can of worms.
Only reason I mention it is the guys on ROP say high compression doesn't
play well with the computer. I'm not at all sure why.
You can see my post and the responses here.
http://realoldspower.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=170732#170732
I am very surprised someone running 8.7:1 (probably less) is having
trouble even on '93 octane.
Did you notice the emphasis on "quench" and the mention of "cylinder
pressure?" Quench is the distance between the flat edge of the piston and
the flat surface of the head beside the combustion chamber. Quench is
supposed to provide extreme turbulence in the flame front to prevent power
robbing preignition and destructive detonation. Smokey Yunick had some very
interesting things to say about quench and how it doesn't work, sometimes.
Small block Chevys have a lot of quench area all around the combustion
chamber (which is what Smokey ran). An Olds only has quench available on the
thin area opposite the combustion chamber. The rest is a heel shaped rounded
combustion chamber, almost like a semi-Hemi. It is stated that quench
distance should be around 0.035-0.040". On Thunder's 468 with 11 to 1 BRC
totally flat top pistons with no valve reliefs, I run a quench of 0.140",
with the piston 0.100" down in the hole! That's not supposed to work, but it
does, and I have a completely unobstructed flow path across the combustion
chamber. She can run on 93 octane with no problem, even with 11 to 1.
However, I do prefer to use 114, but she can use 93 and not preignite.
That works very well for me. So, as the old saying goes, there's more than
one way to skin a cat, and there's more than one way to engineer, or
re-engineer, a problem.
Yes, I now remember your newly designed cam. I wouldn't be concerned at all
with the new CR with your computer. You would have more of an issue with the
new cam interfacing with the computer, if there is any problem.
Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
