In a message dated 7/25/2001 6:33:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
> Still, the 1.8 G60 originally has CR something like 8.5. But having a 2.0 > with the same CR would require more fuel at the given intake pressure > since 2.0 pumps more air through, and keeping the same chip will cause > lean mixture. Ok, it will try to compensate by Lambda signal, but will it? > With driveability I was thinking the low rpm, easy city driving. This is > importand since driving the G60 I find myself going to police department > more often. Why? If you go easy on G60 car, it feels too soft and weak, > i think of 8.5 CR with negative intake pressure (if we are going slow), > and to make it little quicker and responsive, you have to keep more RPM > what eventually leads to running faster, then G60 feels alot alot better > than > going slow. This all is subjective, but it is so. I want a car, which has > response even when I drive easy. I was thinking that tranny with 3.9 final > could cure this. I forget what a 2.0 16v's stock C/R is but if its 9.5:1 or less id stick with it, much more drivability for sure, thats what turbo miata 1.6s make more power boost for boost and have better street response than mildly built 323 GTXs with the same basic block in them...a few of the GTX guys are planning on going to 9:1 with miata pistons...if your engine can withstand the horsepower level it yields you can run almost any boost level on any compression ratio, its just a matter of having enough fuel and changing the timing enough...hell they have a supercharger and turbo for the honda S2000, i think its stock CR is like 10:1, personally id say for maximum performance with great drivability and simplicity ditch the stock ecu idea and use whatever big injectors you can make fit <something from the Porsche family id imagine would make a good donor> and use a programable aftermarket setup, once its dyno tuned professionally you'll have a very fast excellent running car -Mike
