Its been almost 2 years since i actually got the motor ready to work on, and since then i have been side tracked (and lazy) about putting it together. Heres whats has been done to the stock 2.2 block:

--->Block or heaq Shaved (cant remember which he did)
---> Bored .30 over
---> 11:1 pistons
---> Reseated valves and cleaned up head
---> new everything water pump, oil pump, etc....
Ok, from here i am going to grab a pacesetter header, and possibly send my cam to Dave at Crane to get re ground.

From what i have listed the questions that i pose for you guys are as follows:

Would i need to get bigger injectors?
What should be done to the cam (specs wise)?
How much of a difference from stock am i looking at (not expecting much, but at least something)?

Thats it for now if i think of more ill post'em

Thanks for checking it out,
Drew

Well ill tell you right now there are no bigger injectors for our model cars. You have to do a top feed conversion if you want bigger injectors. We have side feed injectors and noone that anyone on her knows of makes bigger ones.


http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2090440

11:1 CR is going to be a little high for pump gas, plan on about 100 Oct race gas for that high of compression.
As for the injectors, as Long as you stay N/A with the stock ECU you will be okay. If you goto a stand alone, you would want to go to the top feed conversion.

Alot of the difference will come with the cam, nobody can tell you what to get. Because only you know how you want it to run. If you want good bottom end or top end, Myself I'd go some where in between the two. Who wants to get to 40 mph in 2 seconds. But kill the engine at highway speed, or run 120 mph and take forever to get there. I'd just look for the right duration and lift for the way the car will be ran.

The pump gas thing might be a problem, but the guy at the shop didnt mention anything about it? You sure??

There are some tricks that can help with that compression ratio, but they'll give some problems elsewhere. If you get a cam ground to make peak horsepower at a higher rpm, you'll generally end up with some overlap between the intake valve opening and the exhaust valve closing. This will effectively "bleed off" some cylinder pressure at low rpm. But you're going to get bit bad since the ecm (1) isn't programmed for the changes in air flow due to the cam, and (2) doesn't like letting the engine run above 6 thousand-ish rpm

The only option for more fuel with stock injectors is to increase the fuel pressure to about 85 psi with key on but engine off. This makes the injectors seem larger than the really are. When you do this the computer's not gonna be happy since it won't know the injectors are "bigger" and will flow too much fuel at low rpm.

If I were building this, I'd look for a 160 deg thermostat to try and keep cylinder head temperature as cool as possible. And if the head isn't on the engine yet, maybe call around to find someone who can coat the combustion chambers with a ceramic thermal barrier coating. That coating can be very helpful in keeping detonation from occurring.

Maybe look into one of the MSD timing computers to change the stock spark curve. You'll have way, way too much spark advance with a stock curve imo.

Good luck.
-->Slow

You can only go about 5-7 psi over stock before the injectors will lock-up, thats the problem with the side feeds. Besides, when the ECU goes into closed loop mode, the O2 reading will cause the ECU to trim back the fuel and he'd be back where he begin.

Whether he gets a cam with a long duration for more over-lap or a cam with a shorter Lobe separation angle the motor will have a definite lope to it the computer will not allow and once again retard the timing.

One solution is to try one of FlatOut Gaskets (the only company that makes a head gasket other than stock) thicker head gaskets, to reduce the CR. See page 3 of their catalog. You will need to have the block grooved for the O-ring though.

Unfortunately 10.5:1 CR is about as far as you can push this motor on pump gas and that is with just the right match of parts and chamber polishing with ceramic coating on the head and piston. With a 6000 rpm limit on the stock computer, you need to work with matching the parts in about the 3500-6000 rpm range, such as the PS header, which has a peak torque of approximately 4100 rpm and peak HP of approximately 5400 rpm.

Quote:

You can only go about 5-7 psi over stock before the injectors will lock-up, thats the problem with the side feeds.

I'm surprised that people have had trouble with this. I based my adjustments on published GM specs when I turned the pressure up on my stock injectors. I drove the car for several months that way without any signs of problems. Based on my experience I would make the same adjustments to any other car. But if people have had troubles... I dunno, I guess you might want to play it safe?

I accidentally quoted the wrong max pressure, however. Delphi / GM lists max pressure as 72.5 psi, not 85 as I quoted above.

Maybe I've found the problem. People have a tendency to misunderstand how to determine max pressure. Someone with a 4:1 rising rate FPR, for example, running 8 psi boost and using a base fuel pressure of 43 psi is asking the injectors to operate at 32 psi above the base pressure under full boost. This puts the injectors at 75 psi actual pressure right away. Subtracting 8 psi boost from the "spray" side of the injector puts the differential pressure (this is what the max pressure specification refers to) at 67 psi, so they will operate ok. But if the base fuel pressure were turned up 7 psi, well, now the differential pressure increases by 7 psi and is exceeding the maximum allowable differential pressure of 72.5 psi by 1.5 psi. Now you might see injector problems. Switch to a 6:1 or 8:1 ratio and those poor injectors don't stand a chance.

In the case of a non boosted engine with a 1:1 ratio FPR, fuel pressure could be set to the maximum spec when there's no vacuum applied to the regulator. Since there's no boost to increase fuel pressure, there's no problem with pressure rising above the max set pressure. If a rising rate regulator could be found which multiplies fuel pressure at 0 psi boost levels, I'd exbe able to upect to se this to successfully increase fuel flow at WOT without killing driveability at idle. Setting up the corect ratio might be a trick, but it could be done.

Anyway, as with all free advice on the 'net, take this with a grain of salt. It could be nothing more than a product of my drugged mind.

-->Slow

slowolej wrote:(this is what the max pressure specification refers to)

Geez, I'm learning something new from you and Jack every day

FBD, definately take the suggestion to look into an MSD ignition if you want to run that compression on pump gas, and definately make sure the combustion chambers are mirror polished with no exposed spark plug threads.



fortune cookie say:
better a delay than a disaster.

How about a specific model for that MSD so i can start looking

And i remembered another thing he said he did to the motor, decked the block..i think this is why he said its be alright.

And how do i adjust the fuel pressure?

Drew

MSD 6212 is the programmable model I have, 62112 I believe is the newer 'plus' version, not sure what the model for the base model is...

Decking the block will actually raise compression, definately not helping to make it 'alright'. I have some Ross pistons that measure .030" over my stockers, 9.0:1 compression. I may be willing to trade if you'd like to boost instead. I have everything needed to make the 11:1 work, and it might be fun to finish the build NA, just to see what it can do.

You can raise the base pressure by placing an aftermarket adjustable FPR after the stocker.



fortune cookie say:
better a delay than a disaster.

what do you mean??

Do you have any pictures of the pistons?



275hp & 306tq - 1999 2.2 ohv
13.2 @ 108 mph
-1996 2.4 liter + Turbo + Built motor + Torco + More boost = Lots o' Power
-2000 Mustang GT + 2004 Cobra motor, Whipple 2.3 supercharger,
built rear-end,Dodge Viper spec T56 6 speed, bolt-ons = wheelies at the track!!!!!

I understand that higher compression will increase the chances on an engine but why wouldn't he be able to run 92 octane with 11:1? alot of other 4 cylinders have compression around this range and run on premo. I know that the 2200 head doesn't flow good, but what if the chambers were polished and coated? I planned on going this route originally with my 2200 build. I'm just curious and would like some honest feed back. If he has his heart set on this compression ratio couldn't he install an alky kit to help keep the temps down?

Ever see a movie where guys are carrying nitroglycerin? They're usually sweating bullets, nervous as hell. "Don't jiggle that stuff. It's highly unstable, could blow at any second!" When you play with increased compression ratios or forced induction you begin to put yourself into a similar situation.

There are many characteristics to automotive fuel. Rate of combustion, energy content, temperature at which each component begins to boil, what percentage boils off at a specific temperature are all part of the description of a particular type of fuel. The octane rating is a description of the tendency of the fuel to resist self ignition or detonation. Detonation, of course, is what happens when nitroglycerin goes "Boom!"

When you increase cylinder pressure during the compression stroke you increase the temperature of the fuel / air charge. The higher the temperature achieved, the easier it is to start the mixture burning and the faster it will burn once started. Although they are both related to temperature, how easy it is to start the burn and how fast the burn happens are two different characteristics.

If cylinder temperature is high enough, fuel will start to burn without waiting for a spark. This is self ignition. Once the fuel starts to burn, the fuel's burn rate and the cylinder temperature determine how quickly the fuel / air react. Most often the fuel will react fast enough to generate a huge amount of pressure trying to push the piston back down at the same time the crank is trying to push the piston up. You can probably imagine how enough of this will cause problems. It doesn't usually take long for something to fail if this situation is allowed to continue.

Now here's where the image of the guys carrying nitro really helps out. With low cylinder pressures the temp achieved in the chamber is generally cool enough to prevent autoignition. But when you increase compression ratio or start applying boost, you bring the chamber temperature much, much closer to the autoignition temp. Now here's the thing: You never know exactly what the autoignition temperature is. You only know when you're below it, or above it. But the goal is to extract the most power possible by keeping the chamber just barely below autoignition temp. Kind of like carrying an unstable explosive, no?

The combustion chamber isn't perfect. Neither is the piston, or the coolant flow inside the head, or the air / fuel charge distribution, or the spark plug, or anything else man touches. This all works against you to make some places in the chamber get hotter than others. Well if you're trying to play the game of carry the nitro, trying to keep chamber temps right below the autoignition point, any hot spot is going to cause a problem. It's like hitting a bump... Boom! So the goal is to eliminate the potential hot spots.

First, remove any sharp edges inside the combustion chambers. Make sure the transition between the chamber and the machined flat portion of the head is smooth and rounded. Make sure there is no aluminum casting flash protruding. Make sure there are no dings in the valve head or piston face. Next, keep the quench area, the part between the flat part of the head and the piston, to a minimum. .035" or less is the number that the top builders shoot for. View the coolant passages in the head looking for casting flash which can be removed. Use a colder thermostat to reduce the overall temp of the coolant inside the head, and make sure the water pump and radiator are in top shape to ensure the coolant has every chance to remove heat. Ceramic thermal barrier coatings applied to the piston, chambers, and valves are expected to greatly reduce any tendency for hot spots to form. Spark plug heat range should be selected to keep plug temps on the cool side of optimal. Plug reach should be considered as any portion of the plug extending into the chamber has the potential to get hotter than its surroundings. In other words, remove anything and everything which may act as the bump that sets off the explosive.

"But wait! There's more!"

I hinted that the shape of the combustion chamber plays a part in the speed of combustion and the tendency for detonation. You can imagine how the shape of the chamber can lead to hot spots. But chamber shape also affects the burn rate. Hemispherical chambers have been found to provide the most even combustion. They are the least impinging and the least likely to have hot spots. Any other chamber shape is a step down. Most of us don't have the tools, time, and money it takes to alter the shape of the combustion chamber so chamber shape isn't a big factor in terms of things we can modify. But it is a factor when trying to understand how some engines can successfully run higher compression than others. Piston shape is also a factor. A flat topped piston is better than a domed piston for combustion properties, as the domed piston will protrude into the combustion space and hinder combustion. Given the choice, making high compression with a small chamber and flat top piston is generally preferred over a large chamber and big dome.

There are other factors, like aluminum versus iron, valve and plug placement, coolant distribution, cam grind, and more which affect an engine's ability to resist detonation and use higher compression. What this all means is that it's dang near impossible to say "Brand X engine runs 12:1 on 92 octane, so my 2.2 / 2200 should be able to." What all this really means is if the brand X engine is running 12:1 on 92 octane, you should spend time understanding how it's able to do this successfully so you can apply it to your engine.

And never, never forget that no amount of work in the chamber can ever make up for bad fuel. In the early days of automotive engines, gasoline was nowhere near the quality it is now. The first modern Chevy V8 introduced in 1955 was considered high compression for the day. It used an 8.0:1 compression ratio (7.5:1 with auto trans). Better fuel "brewing" combined with octane enhancing alcohols and other additives make today's gas much more tolerant of high cylinder temperature and pressure. A study of gasoline technology is never a bad idea, and a Google search for the "gasoline FAQ" will turn up an extremely in-depth document which will provide days if not years worth of reading.

hth
-->Slow

P.S. I never even got to mention how bad it is if oil gets into the chamber.

2LiTeR2SEAter wrote:what do you mean??

which part?

Juice pushrods wrote:I know that the 2200 head doesn't flow good

flow well The head flow really doesn't have any effect, unless it's compressing the air in the cylinder (really, really, think Indy, good flow), but even then it's minimal.
I believe Slow did a great job of taking care of the rest.

slowolej wrote:Ever see a movie where guys are carrying nitroglycerin? They're usually sweating bullets, nervous as hell. "Don't jiggle that stuff. It's highly unstable, could blow at any second!" When you play with increased compression ratios or forced induction you begin to put yourself into a similar situation.

Great, now every time someone mentions running increased compression, I'm going to have a that image stuck in my head...

slowolej wrote:Make sure the transition between the chamber and the machined flat portion of the head is smooth and rounded.

Thank you. I've always wondered why they would leave that edge there, but I always figured it would have to be for sealing purposes or something.

slowolej wrote:Next, keep the quench area, the part between the flat part of the head and the piston, to a minimum. .035" or less is the number that the top builders shoot for.

This would probably be why the builder shaved the block, no?

slowolej wrote:View the coolant passages in the head looking for casting flash which can be removed.

Wouldn't the flash actually aid in cooling, as it would increase surface area without really decreasing cross-sectional area (more heat transfer, same mass flow)?

slowolej wrote:Spark plug heat range should be selected to keep plug temps on the cool side of optimal.

What would you suggest for his situation, assuming other precautions have been taken?

slowolej wrote:I hinted that the shape of the combustion chamber plays a part in the speed of combustion and the tendency for detonation. You can imagine how the shape of the chamber can lead to hot spots. But chamber shape also affects the burn rate. Hemispherical chambers have been found to provide the most even combustion. They are the least impinging and the least likely to have hot spots. Any other chamber shape is a step down.

So what would be the advantage to other designs, such as the heart-shaped chamber used in the 2200?

slowolej wrote:Piston shape is also a factor. A flat topped piston is better than a domed piston for combustion properties, as the domed piston will protrude into the combustion space and hinder combustion.

This is probably why Adler wanted to see pictures of your pistons...

slowolej wrote:P.S. I never even got to mention how bad it is if oil gets into the chamber.

lol, I think this one may be self-explanitory for high compression engines
Excellent write-up ....wait, no,



fortune cookie say:
better a delay than a disaster.

OUTSTANDING slow!

Quote:

slowolej wrote:

Next, keep the quench area, the part between the flat part of the head and the piston, to a minimum. .035" or less is the number that the top builders shoot for.

Quote:

This would probably be why the builder shaved the block, no?

A note about the min comp distance, .035" is for forged steel rods and crank, if you're using stock, I would reccomend about .038"-.040" to allow for rod variances and stretch.

Quote:

slowolej wrote:

View the coolant passages in the head looking for casting flash which can be removed.

Quote:

Wouldn't the flash actually aid in cooling, as it would increase surface area without really decreasing cross-sectional area (more heat transfer, same mass flow)?

The casting flash might allow for air pockets to form and stay in a vortex, preventing the coolant from flowing over that area causing a hot spot. The rough cast texture, in the coolant passages, is better for creating more surface area to dissipate the heat.

Quote:

slowolej wrote:

I hinted that the shape of the combustion chamber plays a part in the speed of combustion and the tendency for detonation. You can imagine how the shape of the chamber can lead to hot spots. But chamber shape also affects the burn rate. Hemispherical chambers have been found to provide the most even combustion. They are the least impinging and the least likely to have hot spots. Any other chamber shape is a step down.

Quote:

So what would be the advantage to other designs, such as the heart-shaped chamber used in the 2200?

As for the combustion chamber design, the heart shape is to create swirl and tumble in the combustion chamber, for a more homgulus mixture.

Quote:

slowolej wrote:

Piston shape is also a factor. A flat topped piston is better than a domed piston for combustion properties, as the domed piston will protrude into the combustion space and hinder combustion.

Quote:

This is probably why Adler wanted to see pictures of your pistons...

An even more efficient piston design is a dished piston. The same principles apply for the piston as for the combustion chamber, as far as flame propagation is concerned.

Just a few thing added/answered.

Doesn't Venom still make higher flow injectors for the 2.2? I've heard a few horror stories about leakage, but I thought that these could run approx. 10% more fuel than than the stock side-feed? I know that is not enough for a boosted setup, but wouldn't it help in a N/A setup?

The last time I had checked (about a year ago), Summit was still able to special order them.

I will be following this thread very closely as I am in the planning stages of a LN2 rebuild (from the block up) myself...

I'll throw this question out into the ring: the performance crank offered through JBP, is it worth the $900 or so? Especially in light of upgrading/modifying a lot of the other stock components, wouldn't the final build benefit from improving the crank as well?


Thx.





L8r...
____________
. . . . jb . . . .
...Son Fire!


*** Need some 1995 Cavalier parts ???
*** FOR SALE: doors, windows, interior, engine parts, fenders, etc. -- email me!

I've heard the same about the Venom Injectors. As of last week the Venom fuel pump is no longer available through Summit, you might want to check the availability of the injectors. With all the problems with the Venom injectors, I wouldn't even think of any of their electircaly operated components.

As for the JBP crank, I've have heard nothing but good things about it, except for the price. If you have a core, a reputable crank shop should be able to do the same work for a bit less. If you can afford it and your using after-market rods and pistons, then the crank is definitly worth some added reliability and frees up some power.

im just wondering where the build guide scarab was puttin together is... ive been waiting very patiently.



JBO'S Mr. 64.....

MadJack: Thanks for the info. Do you know anyone who ponied up the coin for the crank from JBP? I am strongly considering it, but would like to talk to someone who is actually using it...

Mr.64: Yes, that would be nice to see... I've been gathering as much search data off of the org as possible, but it certainly is not organized yet, and that is part of my problem of getting started... I need to know WHAT I am doing before I do it! Heh, heh.


Let's keep this thread going as there is a ton of great info in it already...





L8r...
____________
. . . . jb . . . .
...Son Fire!


*** Need some 1995 Cavalier parts ???
*** FOR SALE: doors, windows, interior, engine parts, fenders, etc. -- email me!

Stock crank supposedly will hold every bit of all-motor build you can throw at it. If you go 350+hp then its time to get an aftermarket crank, unless I missed a few variables I believe this is true. And no one has reported to have broken a stock crank yet that Ive heard of.

I root for the underdog...figured I might as well be one

When i said what do you mean i was responding to Notec when he mentioned something about a trade of pistons.

Im reading this and still wondering about if this can be done, its been so long since i have seen the pistons (they arent here at a buddies) but i do remember them having a lightning bolt on the one side of them.

And i am wondering if it really was 11:1 and not sometihng like 10.5:11 or less but with the block decking/shaving that would bring it higher, i dont see how and why he would make the motor so it wasnt going to work.

The lower thermostat i think is a great idea, but what about not having a heater core. Does that matter because when mine took a @!#$e i just looped it with a U turn hose and the car actually runs cooler that before.

This is a great thread with some good feed back.

Drew

jb, I don't recall who it was that had the crank, but there was atleast two.

Gearhead2200, Yes the stock crank is plenty strong enough, but the biggest thing from the crank is the gains fron lightening the throws and then the aero wing profile.

Hmmm... might be tough to find those two. I'll just have to do some deep searching, I guess...

Aero wing profiling??





L8r...
____________
. . . . jb . . . .
...Son Fire!


*** Need some 1995 Cavalier parts ???
*** FOR SALE: doors, windows, interior, engine parts, fenders, etc. -- email me!