10.5:1CR too much for single plug 3.2SS?
 

I have an opportunity to change my pistons in my 3.2SS with Mahle 98mm pistons allready installed, as I'm changing my cams to DC20.

I do not know the exact CR with the current pistons. Wössner makes a nice set of 98mm pistons with comp. Ratio: 10.5:1 for only 800$. Seems like the right thing to do "while your're in there" BUT: Is that too CR much for a single plug 98mm bore on 99RON octane?

What induction are you using? Carbs, Motronic, etc.

Megasquirt EFI with 42mm ITB (Triumph). Ignition is CDI+ (programmable). Exhaust is straight headers into 2 in 2 out dansk.

It's really tough to say, but most would say you need twin plug, which I completely agree with. When in doubt, twin plug.

To really delve into it though I would want more data, such as what is your port and intake valve size? How is head flow? Has it been measured? If one is really wanting to know, VE ie. cylinder filling is very important in determining what static compression can be safely run on various fuels. The volumetric efficiency of these, or any engine, will be dependent on whether or not it reaches nearly 100% or greater than 100% efficiency, which I'm just not entirely sure of with these but I have seen examples with big ported RSR motors and am certain they run above 100%, but only of course at very high rpm. Anything above 95% VE is excellent flow, but most engines, for purposes of power ranges all over the range run in the 80s.

100% volumetric efficiency means your engine dynamic compression, which with a DC20 cam is probably about 9-9.5:1 or so, meets static compression at a particular rpm which is where peak torque is made, which in your case is approx 10.5:1 with the pistons you quote. If your port size is reasonable then it is possible your engine is flowing (just as an example) at say 85-90% efficiency max placing the highest compression ratio at 9.45:1 (at 90% VE) with those pistons. That data places you entirely within acceptable ranges to run the pistons you suggest on pump fuel. Air density is also a factor. The design of 911 heads and flame front propagation is also a factor. With your ITB arrangement I expect you're flowing pretty well though.

It's based on a '78 SC, with 39mm intake ports. The heads are untouched.

I guess it's not possible for me to determine the actual and precise VE. But
even if I have say 95% VE it would still be 9.95:1CR and thus acceptable for single plug?

In theory yes, but a pointed concern is the placement of the spark plug is it lends itself to inefficient flame front propagation..... I just cannot be certain. That said, I doubt you're even at 95% VE, but high 80s or 90% may be about right. It might be worth a shot to run it and report back. I have more confidence in this as it's injected and better atomized fuel then if it were carbureted.

Yeah the Max Moritz style Mahle piston compensates for the off-center plug with an asymmetrical Dome design. The Wössner design is different.

Yeah, I'd go twin plug as 10.5 would probably be perfect for that with pump gas. Also, the DC20 cams don't have that much overlap as compared to S cam/DC40/60/80 which could have potentially helped at lower RPMs (see static v. dynamic compression discussion above).

Bottom line - if you're not running race gas, then I think 10.5 compression on single plug may be a risk for detonation especially on a hot day. If you have a knock sensor or are able to retard the timing, it may help but compression seems high for single plug. Are you in a state with 91 octane or 93?

Indeed, 10.5 CR is far too much for single-ignition and pump gas.

You'll need either twin-ignition or 100 octane unleaded race gas to run safely.

The only exception would be for long duration, narrow LC cams, however anything like that is not streetable at all. :) :)

This just isn't the case unless your heads/cams/intake/ex/flow for a very high cylinder fill ie. volumetric efficiency. Pump fuel can easily take some 10.5:1 with good thermal efficiency or flame front (hemispherical ignition or pent roof), and I don't see the above engine as one that will have such efficiencies that pump fuel would cause a particular issue on its own, rather my primary reservation is the flame front with these heads, not the effective compression.


I definitely stand by what I said before, when in doubt, twin plug. But VE must be taken into careful consideration. Let's also not forget the 3.2 Euro Carrera ran about this level of compression with single plug, but with a different piston design and a highly efficient/ported head albeit less efficient exhaust and intake which probably lead to a similar or lower VE.

The car has programmable CDI, so I'm avle to retard timing. And 99RON corresponds to 93 octane.

Oh, and I'm in northern Europe - we dont't get hot days at all haha!

The reason for posting this in the first place, is that my friend is running these pistons with 10.5:1 in his 3.0 EFI engine (95mm bore). This was even recomended from Wössner!

I'm sure you will be fine if you have someone locally running a very similar arrangement with no issues. I believe this is a highly misunderstood issue in the 911 world. Twin plugging is great, but in the end we only saw it on Porsche racing motors running very high VE arrangements until the 3.6 motors. It can be argued Porsche never really made a truly hot-rod road engine I'm sure because they didn't want to have to warranty the thing.

Nux,

Listen to Steve.

He answered you question with a simple no. Based on knowledge and experience without getting into all sorts of """"""" that doesn't make any sense.

Steve is a professional engine builder with years of experience building and "hot rodding" Porsche engines, many of them air cooled. He comes on here to help and offer advice, for free.

Who would you rather take advice from??? I know who I would.

I've being doing this along time and I'd be scared to build your engine if I had went with what I'm reading here.

The overlap of the cams compensates for the hi CR to some extent. still 10/1 is high. Detonation is the problem which will cause the piston to break slowly, then the compression ring will break....rebuild time again.

High octane gas and low temps will be important

Chris

LV,

I think if you measure the CR of a Euro 3.2 motor it is in the 9's. I measured one years ago but don't have my data any longer but do recall it being consistent with what others had measured in the mid to high 9's...

All of the 10.5 motors we build have twin plug. Mind you the cams we like are wider lobe center to give us a flatter power band. We are finishing up a 3.4 with what are essentially mod S cams on 108 centers.

So, there seems to be general consensus on: I't might be possible due to ITB with EFI and better flow and fuel atomisation - combined with high octane and low temp.

However, twin plugging is recommended.

I acknowlegde and greatly appreciate the advice from Steve and others with far more knowledge and experience than me. I guess I was looking for a way to save the $$$$$ in a twin-plug conversion, but I guess a blown engine is even more $$$$$.

So I'll probably not change my current piston setup, which I guess has 9.5 or 9.8:1. I do not believe it is worth the $$$$$ to raise the CR, which requires new pistons, studs, machining of heads, twin dizzy, additional CDI etc etc.

Thanks for the help guys.

Great info, thank you.

This is an interesting subject that I believe requires further objective testing with data. Twin plug is a great way to be safe, but is it truly 100% necessary when volumetric efficiency is at best approximated? Others in the EU, per the original poster, seem to think not. Would be a great topic, from a hobbyist perspective, to explore further with CFD and thermal dynamic testing.

Throwing out a static compression figure of 10 or 11 or 12:1 is great, but without knowing flow into the engine it's impossible to know if the engine is ever actually reaching that compression. If a cylinder capacity is 100cc and it flows at 85% efficiency, it's only ever moving at best, 85cc of air, meaning if supposed '10:1' pistons are installed, it is never actually reaching 10:1.

Compression ration is only one of the factors that needs to be considered. Bore size Piston dome shape, head volume, Quench, fuel and timing control, intake and exhaust all are factors in determining what is a safe compression. My BMW turbo 6 has 10.2 compression and boost on top of that. It can run on 91 octane gas, but it takes a lot of technology and computing power to make that work.

john

The next Euro 3.2 we have apart we will measure again.

Yes, many factors play into it determining whether or not it will work. You can always retard the timing and not risk it but then you leave too much power on the table... :)

You can always twin plug the heads and not run fire the second plug. I can't remember the increase in CC of the head for a typical second plug mod, but it would lower the CR a wee bit. Steve, do you have that data in front of you?

The other key it to actually measure the CR of your build. The JE 10.5 builds we have done all were with in .1 (10.4-10.6) with a 1mm deck height. I can't say what the Mahle builds measure out at as we haven't measured one. Would love it if you could measure it and report back.

Cheers

Your BMW turbo 6 is using direct injection. Totally apples to oranges in this case. You could probably run even higher static CR and a ton of boost no problem with direct injection, and it'd be fine.

Twin plugging is not that expensive if you use some sort of EFI that can run coil-on-plug, its the 12 plug distributor that's the expensive part.
I've run Volkswagen COP for several years now, they work fine for N/A engines, fits nicely in the valve covers and can be found at a good price.

I agree with Steve. The key words he said was "run safely." Yes, you can build an engine that will run on 10.5 compression with high octane gas and is perfectly timed and tuned and will operate fine. But, what happens when you get that random batch of "bad gas" that causes detonation? Or something happens to your timing and it accidentally gets a bit too advanced? There's very little room for error there.

In general, modern engines can run much higher compression because they actively monitor the quality of the fuel and conditions through a knock sensor. Without the ability to detect knocking (detonation, or pre-ignition of the spark), then you need to play it "safe" (as Steve said), and design down for the "bad gas days".

-Wayne

Just to clarify my intentions further, I am completely on-board with twin plugging in this situation, it's the best way to be safe. There is undoubtedly too few knowns other than engine builders stating they know what works in some situations, but with no actual data. While there is no substitute for real-world experience, the data is worth discussing.

Wayne can you comment on the VE and thermodynamic connotations? I believe it's too important an issue to assume for instance that a CIS engine swapped to 10.5:1 compression would be as safe as a ITB engine running same static compression. One is obviously filling the cylinders more effectively which results in a greater effective stroke thus higher effective compression. Simply stated, a CIS arrangement simply doesn't draw the same amount of air at its peak operating rpm, which is shown via torque in a NA motor, thus the potential fuel requirement is not same for a CIS engine running identical innards as its ITB counterpart. So mechanically speaking, given same for same components inside the engine, a CIS engine is not cranking same air at peak efficiency for same compression as an ITB engine, regardless of all internal components, thus octane requirements are different.

There is lots of discussion always about what the safe CR for single plug is. We have never built a 10.5CR single plug. We always resorted to commonly held wisdom that said it was not a good idea.

So, I would like to hear from the folks that have actually tried it or tried something similar and ran into pre ignition issues. Would love to see all of the relevant specs.

We know twin plugging a 10.5CR is safe. We are building a twin plugged, COP, moderate (relatively speaking) cammed, ITB equipped motor right now. But what are the real limits of the single plug and who can post data to support it?

single plug with J&S or twin plug

compression ratio
 

You need to actually CC the heads to determine the true compression.1st valve job with cutting the seats lowers it.It is very easy to machine the top of the piston crown flatter to dial in a safe ratio.But you need to know the C.R.to begin with and then you can apply all the various theories that abound on this forum.Twin plug over 10 to 1 for sure.A companies C.R.of their piston is just a suggestion.Putting 2.8 92mm pistons on a 2.7 motor results in a C.R.of over 12 to 1 not 10.3 due to a different head design.

Well I can confirm at least 3 of my local boys are running +10:1 CR with single plug.

1. A 2.7 with EFI, EDIS ignition and 10.1:1 JE pistons
2. A 3.0 with Bitzrace EFI and cut down Airbox, standard intake runners on a '79 with 10.5:1 Wössner pistons. Standard ignition.
3. A 3.0 with PMO carbs on 10.5:1 JE's with single plug (heads are ported). MSD ignition, but otherwise standard.

So I know it is possible. None of these are race cars, but they do see some track time.

I don't know anyone who has single plug on a 3.2 or 3.4 with high CR though.

Where are you based Nux?

Here in the UK, my 3.4 ran fine as single plug with a measured 10.45:1 CR. Always run on 98/99 Ron. I used the flat dome piston as part of the Mahle 98mm kit.

Will hopefully be back from the builder as a 3540cc on ITBs shortly, but had moved to Motec/COP in the interim.

Interesting!!!

I'm in Denmark. We have 99RON as well. Did you use a knock sensor or anything like that?

Nope, It had a live remap of the motronic ignition/fuel map after 1000miles running in, nothing more.

Good real world info. We can only assume the engines in question are operating at maximum effective flow efficiencies which do not equate to the engine ever reaching near their static compression, or a point of detonation, whatever that point is which is going to be slightly different engine to engine given all the intake variables. The unknown with these is at what point of effective compression and diameter of cylinder bore does pump fuel become an issue? This is a thermal dynamic question which is slightly different for each engine and is highly dependent mostly on flow efficiencies and fuel.

note:
98/99 RON is equivalent to US 93 octane. 93 US is indeed closer to 98RON though

my new 10.5 CR carillo/cp pistones measured in at 10.2CR. The shape however I belive calls for twin spark so thats what I did. Obviously running MS and EDIS adding a second set of plugs was cheap and easy to do.... Shape of combustion chamber is important

Steve, the Euro Carreras have 10.3 CR on single plug, how can a 10.5 CR be far too much? There must be many more factors than just the compression ratio, like ignition timing, spark energy, cylinder bore (flame front travel), cam shafts, etc, etc.
Many US muscle cars had both larger bore and single plug ignition, with way over 10:1 CR.

Please explain!

"Many US muscle cars had both larger bore and single plug ignition, with way over 10:1 CR. "

It depends on the piston top and CC design. Flat top pistons are generally more tolerant of higher CR than a domed piston because the dome interferes with the flame front and creates pockets at the periphery that can lead to detonation.

If you measure the CR of factory engines, you'll find that there are significant disparities between advertised CR and actual CR. I've never seen any air-cooled engine from Porsche that met their published CR specs (with the exceptions being their race engines). This means that Mahle pistons are almost always several tenths below spec and this is a good thing, allowing the safe resurfacing of heads at valve job time.

For the Euro Carrera, I've found CR to be between 9.6:1 and 9.9:1, depending on head volumes and deck heights.

For American muscle cars, they were almost always VERY close to advertised CR, however they were intended for the fuel of the day (Chevron White pump). :) :)

Pent-roof or hemi chambers with central plug location do not have the same thermal inefficiencies as 911 heads. You will almost never see a twin plug with a central plug.

The issue is not just the size of the dome of the piston, it's the flow of the heads! You could have a giant piston dome in a 911 but have a very choked intake and exhaust meaning it's not ever reaching a level of effective stroke where the static compression is met. It may never detonate with that giant piston dome because it's not moving enough air to where that level of combustion has a problem. That point is that twin plugging a 911 engine isn't just a question of piston dome size, it's many other factors pertaining to how much air the thing is moving and if that air causes a problem. The safe way is to twin plug everything, but it's remains questionable and must be studied case by case whether or not it is 100% required for absolutely everything.

as steve mentioned, the stock CR ratio are optimistic. this is not uncommon, same as ferrari's, alfas etc that run cross flow hemi heads have much lower CR ratios than advertised.

yes high octane fuel with lead was abundant. but on the architecture side, many of the muscle cars ran with a wedge head, high swirl, large quench area. this makes it much less sensitive to knock or detonation then say 426 hemi. being water cooled, the thermal stability is more constant than aircooled heads.

yes a taller dome is needed for increased CR at the determent to the CC shape. 964 pistons shapes were better and flatter with a flat plateau than say a 3.0 RSR classic dome which i recall at 10-10.3. Still effective CR wasnt really that high couple with higher duration cams on the RSR.

hemi heads have inefficient large surface area and distant crevice areas. they are relatively slow burning but are high flowing. because of this they typically need more ignition advance. advancements in ignition control, twin plugs and ceramic lined ex ports helps with the elevated CR on the 3.6 motors.

my 2 cents

These are the actual Wössner 10.5:1 pistons for a 3.0 911 (95mm bore):

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1508184386.jpg

Pic of my 98mm Single plug Mahle by comparison

Note, these have now had valve pockets machined to accommodate some more 'hirsute' cams as part of the 3.5 build - this pic was taken prior to this.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...97d4a42c91.jpg