My potential compression ratio

blue missile said
Moper,
I feel that in the long run I have an advantage in that I am building the power plant last.
I can not tell you how many cams, "new and improved" I have plugged into the engine dyno, including all sorts of roller cams, and nothing happens to fit my combination like the 285. Now the 295 gives me more power but the power band climbs up into territory im not interested in going to.
I also have to agree with DGC333, in that chart is pretty much a worst case scenario put together by people who are not taking into account such things as quench and coatings which we have access to today.Its just a baseline reference when talking about true or Dynamic Compression. It also takes no account of altitude adjustments.
Andrew

My own order of operations is once the powertrain is "up" (meaning chassis/bodywork/paint/etc is done) the whole driveline has to be done at once to get the most from it. Engine would be first, then trans and final gearing in that group. Because so much depends on the camshaft. The main issue I have with the calculators are they are just like fantasy football. They have only a part based on reality, the rest are mathematical estimates and compromises to get the result anyone can interpret. So while you run a dozen cams and they show little difference on the dyno program, you could swap in 12 cams and see drastic differences in the empiric results of a dyno session. That's one of the reasons I tend to recommend cams I know yielded results I want. I've gotten away from saying "run this cam" and more into "run a cam around these specs" because of that. People have favorite brands or part numbers, some only have one or two points of reference, some have no idea how they work but read a lot, some simply don't know and don't want to, they just want an engine that works...lol I also think Dave's (DGC333) build is a great one to copy.