bret
Well Known Member
And why can I run 11.5-1 CR, 230 PSI static cylinder pressure in the Olds on 91 octane. OK, I know I am going to get slammed here but bring it on, this is how new ideas get started. There are a lot of folks here way smarter than me so lets share some CONSTRUCTIVE criticisms and thoughts. I bring this up because of the ever increasing price of fuel and the possibility that 100LL may change. I know some here are using 91 Oct right now, but at the cost of low compression and HP. I remember reading an article a long time ago about Quench chamber heads, I built and blueprinted a engine, forged full floating pistons, file fit rings, align hone the mains, "0" and square the deck, balance, ported intake, heads, headers, used aluminum heads with Inconel exhaust valves and had the quench area @ .030" this produces a violent and internal turbulent event to both cool hot spots and induce A/F mix across the combustion chamber to reduce detonation. In fact a test engine was built and the lower CR engine, with .060" quench heads had more detonation than the High compression engine. Along with this is a lot of custom cam profile timing and ignition curve profile, O, and carb jetting bla bla bla, yes this is all car stuff but you get the idea. So, then you will say, it is not continuous full load, well then we can look at Mercruiser race engines and Cummins turbo charged 18-1 engines and so on. All I am saying is, why are we still in the dark ages? Is everyone afraid to try something new, and no, I am not talking about car engines in planes, I am talking about aviation engines and stepping up to the plate with all this technology available. Twin quinch non hemi head? anyone, anyone, Bueller.....