Welcome! Please use the navigational links to explore our website.
PartsASAP LogoCompany Logo Auction Link (800) 853-2651

Shop Now

   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver

Tractor Pulling Discussion Forum

compression ratio-verses-low end torque/lugging

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
B Barenie

01-27-2006 16:30:55




Report to Moderator

I want to pick the correct static compression ratio for a Division (2) farmall super (m).

Tractor will be pulling any gear, from 5500lbs-7000lbs with either non-cut tires or top cut only.

Speed limit will be what ever (michigan. Indiana, Ohio allow !
Tractor will be running 370ci, Propane head will not be allowed.
What I'm asking is this Question ?
Does compression hurt the bottom end ! Pulling heavy, or below 540 rated rpm dyno numbers

Does a tractor that want's to pull multiple classes, have to balance h.p. from light to heavy?
A doscile tractor that is forgiving in 5500lb,
but can hunt in 7000lb
After 10-1 what is really accomplished ?

Thank for any experienced opinions !

Bud barenie

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
buickanddeere

01-28-2006 07:06:17




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to B Barenie, 01-27-2006 16:30:55  
More compression is more pressure in the combustion chamber during the compression stroke. So yes the engine's bottom end will bear more pressure. #1 thing to avoid and it will break even the best custom $$$ bottoms ends let alone a stoker. Is DETONATION, knock, ping etc. Those pressure spikes of uncontroled combustion can be several times normal combustion chamber pressure. Yet we all have seen some want to be hero still holding full throttle on an engine where detonation can be heard. That is shortly before something went bu$t. Tuning an engine on a dyno will find the ideal spark advance. Rather than "how much" advance you can dial into an engine. It should be "how little" advance can I run without loosing power.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
ChadS

01-28-2006 09:12:19




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to buickanddeere, 01-28-2006 07:06:17  
Alot of failure happens to engines that are not put on a dyno to properly set everything up. Flying by the seat of their pants tuning on high performance engines, your not putting the engine under a load to set the timing advances, and fuel. Then, when they put the stress test on, the part that isnt right will show up in a hurry, hopefully, they shut down if they hear something,, Why risk it? I know some of these monsters out there cant be dynoed,, but you can to a certain extent with a good pto,, you dont have to work them to death,,, just enough to put a load on the engine to see whats going on. if something is not right, it will show really quick. Ive ran my H at 290psi, which is out there,,,, everything had to be right, and did not abuse it while under a load on the dyno. See, it was a higher rpm engine, usually when I pulled, it was at higher rpms to keep the power up,,, I lugged it way down once down at princeton, that was the hardest that engine ever worked,, Just ran out of torque,,,, But it wasnt detonating, or preigniting either. Of course, Im builing a new engine again too,, few runs later, I cracked a sleeve, then cracked the block,, So, Im backing the pressure down,, but, a quesion arises,, If I had 100hp at 290psi at 540,, would I still have 100 hp if the pressure was down to a respectable 250psi??? Been told no,, But i havent done anything yet. Still building the deck plated block. Chad

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
buickanddeere

01-28-2006 22:17:34




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to ChadS, 01-28-2006 09:12:19  
Increasing the compression does not give a linear improvement in HP. Your H engine will lose a smaller % of HP going from 290 down to 250, than it would going from 250 down to 210. It's possible the reduction of shouding in the combustion chamber with a lower piston dome. Will allow more efficient combustion as the flame front doesn't not have to turn corners or hit as many shock waves. It's possible that the 250 psi engine could make 95+HP, depending..... ....

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
ChadS

01-29-2006 04:11:10




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to buickanddeere, 01-28-2006 22:17:34  
Ok, the old piston was a flat top, with a slight dome, maybe .100 tall if that,, that made 290psi. This time, the piston has a combo of a dome, and a crater,, the dome goes into the head, and the dish is under the flat area of the head, giving more room for an explosion, heres the kicker though,,, the dome this time is 3/8 or more taller, but the dish is just over 5/16 deep. I do belive the compression will be in the area of 250-275 max,,I Wonder if the piston shape will give me back the HP I lose when I lower the compression. This new block, it will hold up to 290,, In the process of deck plating it, I bored the block beyond the limits, pressed in sleeves, and then putting in a dry sleeve insert, then the deck plate holds the top of the block in place, along with something more to hold the sleeves in place. Chad

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
buickanddeere

01-29-2006 18:01:31




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to ChadS, 01-29-2006 04:11:10  
Thust/pressure on the piston is identical no matter if it's flat, domed or recessed. Dia is the only factor. Going to the high dome & deep crater piston will take the quench ability away from the combustion chamber. To make max HP with the best flame front caracterisitics requires a flat top piston. "Quench" is a good thing. Get that flat top piston 40 to 60 thou from the flat area of the head. And they will make more power at the same compression ratio as the crater/dome pistons. Flame fronts do not like to turn. The airfuel mixture getting squished out from the flat area of the piston and the flat area of the head. Promotes combustion chamber turbulance. This better mixes the air/fuel and reduces the dead non combustion along the head and cylinder wall as the unburned mixture gets swirled out into the flame area. Combustion efficiency is just as imporant as compression.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
ChadS

01-29-2006 20:30:01




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to buickanddeere, 01-29-2006 18:01:31  
I understand. I was looking at a 806 firecrater, but found a Chevy piston that is almost a dead ringer to the specs to the 806, but a larger bore. Its a flat top, with valve reliefs. Thanks! Seen a real nice grand national for sale down here,,, a mere 14 grand for it, but it sure it pretty! Chad



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
buickanddeere

01-30-2006 16:55:51




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to ChadS, 01-29-2006 20:30:01  
Rust and dent free? Hasn't been bent in an collision? My poor old girl has about 290,000 miles on it.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
ChadS

01-31-2006 06:40:11




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to buickanddeere, 01-30-2006 16:55:51  
yep, the dude bought it new, had all the paperwork, had 25k on it and never been touched. but, that could be a hard 25k too, so it could go, or blow,,, but a nice original car. Chad



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
buickanddeere

01-31-2006 15:23:10




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to ChadS, 01-31-2006 06:40:11  
Wished I had the cash for it. I just spent over six figures doing home repairs/renovations I wasn't expecting.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
ChadS

02-01-2006 19:24:47




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to buickanddeere, 01-31-2006 15:23:10  
Ive been building a car for the past few months,, 69.5 maverick. I put a 88 t-bird engine in it (5.0 roller engine) I just got it converted to Sequential Electronic Fuel Injection, like what you see in like a 90 mustang,,, I built the wiring harness and bench tested it all out. Its working good! Just have to install it into the car! Oughta be a fast little car huh? Chad



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
buickanddeere

02-02-2006 13:29:35




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to ChadS, 02-01-2006 19:24:47  
Sounds like the best of old and new. Disk brakes on the front?



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
ChadS

02-03-2006 06:49:25




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to buickanddeere, 02-02-2006 13:29:35  
Not yet, still has the stock drums. The weather has been crappy to go junkyard shopping. Once I get the fuel pumps ran, and the high pressure lines ran, It"ll run. Yesterday, I hooked up the computer and got the ignition side working which helps a bunch on the 302. I wonder why the ford V8"s have to have such a hot spark to run properly. The computer sends a spark so hot, that I dont wanna be anywhere near it! LOL! CHad

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Charles McNelly III

01-27-2006 22:27:45




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to B Barenie, 01-27-2006 16:30:55  
370ci. How did you get this? I figure no sleeves and a least 6.250" stroke. Just a thought but couldn't you advance the cam so the power comes on at a lower rpm? Charles



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Charles McNelly III

01-27-2006 22:18:36




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to B Barenie, 01-27-2006 16:30:55  
370ci. How did you get this? I figure no sleeves and a least 6.250" stroke. Just a thought but couldn't you advance the cam so the power comes on at a lower rpm? Charles



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
b barenie

01-27-2006 20:55:38




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to B Barenie, 01-27-2006 16:30:55  
thanks for both of your reply's !

that was a question that i needed answer to!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
TONY JOHNSON

01-27-2006 20:54:48




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to B Barenie, 01-27-2006 16:30:55  
the size of cam is what your worried about. dont go too large of duration.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
stroker 88

01-27-2006 19:19:08




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to B Barenie, 01-27-2006 16:30:55  
compression is the one thing that increases h.p. across the whole r.p.m. range.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CLIFF S

01-27-2006 18:12:54




Report to Moderator
 Re: compression ratio-verses-low end torque/luggin in reply to B Barenie, 01-27-2006 16:30:55  
Compression CAN LOUG down to almost idle if its built right and more than the 10-1 that your talking about!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
[Options]  [Printer Friendly]  [Posting Help]  [Return to Forum]   [Log in to Reply]

Hop to:


TRACTOR PARTS TRACTOR MANUALS
We sell tractor parts!  We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums


Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy