Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Replacing my k03. But k03s or k04?  (Read 6903 times)
tao13
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +17/-47
Offline Offline

Posts: 471


« Reply #15 on: August 01, 2022, 11:47:55 AM »

k04 is the best option.......very good spool and keep 1.5 bar to the red line with all needed components, injectors, maf and a good cooling. Fuel pump not need to be change if it is in good conditions. If you works with 9.5:1 engine you will have more retards but at 1.4-1.5 bar boost will be ok.....BUT>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>K04 will btoken the RODS after some boost if the torques is agresive!
Logged
prj
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +1072/-481
Offline Offline

Posts: 6037


« Reply #16 on: August 02, 2022, 08:42:07 AM »

A little off topic but I was confused for why JE sells 9.5:1 stroker pistons off the shelf and currently readily available, but I realized they are probably made exclusively for race fuel(100octane+) or e85.

This forum is a lot more informative about actual tuning experience when it comes to choosing a CR for a BT 1.8t, which seems to always be 8.5:1 for 93 octane or 9:1+ or higher with race fuel, E85 or W/M. I was under the impression that you can use 9.5:1 on pump gas(93), no water methanol at that boost level but I guess I was wrong. 8.5:1 seems to be the best choice for high boost/knock Safety without sacrificing a noticeable difference in low end torque.
You will not feel any low end torque difference until down to 7.0:1 or so. This low end torque BS is a myth being continuously regurgitated on forums for no reason.
8.5:1 is not for high boost. 8.5:1 on standard fuel without any octane boosting is good maybe for 1.7-1.8 bar boost on large port head. After that you need to go lower CR or higher octane or you are going to have EGT problems. The cars with 9.5:1 CR run like 0.6-0.7 bar boost from factory. This is why they also have this CR. If you care only about power, even on a K03S you will make more power on 8.5:1 CR than on 9.5:1. But the fuel efficiency will suffer.

The reason for these astronomically high compression ratios are fuel efficiency requirements. It has nothing to do with "low end torque".

It was a common occurrence for me back in the past that people would ask me to tune their self assembled shit with 9.0:1 or higher CR on 98 RON, and made a pikachu face every time I said that it's a waste of time.
Was ages ago then, after a while I realized that there's never any point to tune anything you didn't build yourself, and this problem went away, along with a host of other issues.
Logged

PM's will not be answered, so don't even try.
Log your car properly - WinOLS database - Tools/patches
Neight
Newbie
*

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #17 on: August 02, 2022, 11:59:36 AM »

You will not feel any low end torque difference until down to 7.0:1 or so. This low end torque BS is a myth being continuously regurgitated on forums for no reason.
8.5:1 is not for high boost. 8.5:1 on standard fuel without any octane boosting is good maybe for 1.7-1.8 bar boost on large port head. After that you need to go lower CR or higher octane or you are going to have EGT problems. The cars with 9.5:1 CR run like 0.6-0.7 bar boost from factory. This is why they also have this CR. If you care only about power, even on a K03S you will make more power on 8.5:1 CR than on 9.5:1. But the fuel efficiency will suffer.

The reason for these astronomically high compression ratios are fuel efficiency requirements. It has nothing to do with "low end torque".

It was a common occurrence for me back in the past that people would ask me to tune their self assembled shit with 9.0:1 or higher CR on 98 RON, and made a pikachu face every time I said that it's a waste of time.
Was ages ago then, after a while I realized that there's never any point to tune anything you didn't build yourself, and this problem went away, along with a host of other issues.

Its funny when someone builds a 12.5:1 turbo setup thinking they are going to make SO much more than a low compression setup. Every time the dyno shows much less difference than expected and then octane requirements make them not pump gas friendly.
Logged
Amadeus
Jr. Member
**

Karma: +0/-8
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #18 on: August 02, 2022, 12:50:39 PM »

I just sold my JE 9.5:1 pistons after realizing that and getting feedback from guys on this forum. The stock Evo 8-9 comes with I think 8.8:1 with a bottom end that can hold up to 450wtq. So 8.5 it is for my G25-660 build. I was gonna go with the EFR7670 but full race discontinued their twinscroll manifold!!! I'm gonna have Race3 make me their V-Band Ramhorn Manifold and try out the G25-660 to see if I can hit 500whp with 2008cc, cat3658 cams, SEM intake manifold, 75mm throttle body, built AEB head, ID1050x and 93 pump gas from the US. But I'd be happy with 450whp if it can't and do W/M later on...

Then there's the dynamic compression ratio calculation with larger cams that will drop ACTUAL compression ratio. AND then turbine and A/R sizing to prevent high EGTs So just trying to make it easier for my tuner when the time comes and will eventually make my own tune when I figure out how to tune myself. Hopefully the G25 turbine isnt too small for all the flow that I'm expecting with my setup.

Sent from my ASUS_I003D using Tapatalk
Logged
prj
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +1072/-481
Offline Offline

Posts: 6037


« Reply #19 on: August 04, 2022, 02:08:58 AM »

The more torque you want to make at a given displacement the higher the pressure in the cylinder is and the lower the compression ratio needs to be.

For 450whp on pump fuel on 1.8T I would use 8.0:1 CR...
Logged

PM's will not be answered, so don't even try.
Log your car properly - WinOLS database - Tools/patches
Amadeus
Jr. Member
**

Karma: +0/-8
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #20 on: August 04, 2022, 08:14:53 AM »

The more torque you want to make at a given displacement the higher the pressure in the cylinder is and the lower the compression ratio needs to be.

For 450whp on pump fuel on 1.8T I would use 8.0:1 CR...
I personally don't think 8:1 is necessary plus with the catcams it will lower actual compression ratio even further. Guys are making 500whp+ with 8.5:1+ on pump gas but if it does manage to clear the 500whp mark then Ill be looking into a W/M system either way.

Sent from my ASUS_I003D using Tapatalk
Logged
prj
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +1072/-481
Offline Offline

Posts: 6037


« Reply #21 on: August 04, 2022, 09:42:06 AM »

I personally don't think 8:1 is necessary
You can think all you want. I know.
Without octane boosting it will be. It sounds like you never in your life built or ran anything on pump gas that made any significant hp/liter.
Also, on a built engine or a hobby car there is no reason ever to have a compression ratio that is going to limit your power output and raise your EGT, as the only thing that will suffer with a lower CR is fuel efficiency, and at higher CR everything BUT fuel efficiency suffers. Reliability, thermals, power output etc.

Quote
plus with the catcams it will lower actual compression ratio even further.
I don't know why you keep on repeating this, because this is blatantly false. All things being equal to make a certain torque you need a certain cylinder charge.
This cylinder charge will be compressed based on the compression ratio. If you have leaky cams with overlap, it just means you need more flow to get the same cylinder charge.
In the end you still have to get and compress the same amount of charge into the cylinder. And what cams you have does not matter. Cams do not affect this whatsoever. Engine breathing will determine how much charge pressure you need to run to get a certain cylinder charge, but not how much torque it's going to make with the same cylinder charge being compressed after the valves are shut.
If at a given cylinder charge you are knock limited, you will make more power with a lower CR and the same cylinder charge, and of course there is less heat.

What does affect CR is if someone cuts a chunk out of the combustion chamber, after which the volume of the cylinder has to be measured using liquid to again know the true compression ratio.
If material is removed from the cylinder head, then the 8.5:1 piston can become 7.8:1 really quickly.

Btw, it's a really shitty idea to have overlap on a turbo engine higher in the rev range when backpressure starts being a factor. It completely destroys power output.

Quote
Guys are making 500whp+
Nothing to say to such internet gods.

My recommendation is to curb your enthusiasm until you have actually achieved something.
I don't need to look at what "guys are making" because I have my own hands on experience.
And there's a huge difference between a short dyno pull and sustained EGT.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2022, 09:55:35 AM by prj » Logged

PM's will not be answered, so don't even try.
Log your car properly - WinOLS database - Tools/patches
Amadeus
Jr. Member
**

Karma: +0/-8
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #22 on: August 04, 2022, 10:02:17 AM »

My recommendation is to curb your enthusiasm until you have actually achieved something.
I don't need to look at what "guys are making" because I have my own hands on experience.
And there's a huge difference between a short dyno pull and sustained EGT.
I take your word for what your saying since you claim to have the experience. I won't lie, as of right now I don't. And yea I haven't built my car yet. I'm just doing research and going off of what I've read on forums. So far I can see that everyone has their own builds and if I commented on someone else's build on audizine they would call me a troll, which one guy did right after I helped a guy get his car running. So I'm definitely open to more opinions about CR.

One guy from Audizine referenced one of the tuners on here about why you won't notice a difference in low end torque from 9.5 to 8.5, so that's all I wanted to hear because alot of mixed info out there.

That made me sell my pistons and now I'm set on getting either 8-8.5:1.

Sent from my ASUS_I003D using Tapatalk
Logged
Amadeus
Jr. Member
**

Karma: +0/-8
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #23 on: August 04, 2022, 10:55:21 AM »

I'm not sure why I'm thinking the G25 housing is too small because the 2.7 guys are using it as well as other platforms with 4+ cylinders. EGTs will definitely be higher and get hotter sooner but the speed at which it increases and the temp probably isn't as much as I might be thinking.

Sent from my ASUS_I003D using Tapatalk
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.02 seconds with 16 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.001s, 0q)