Ford Escort RS Turbo This forum is for discussion of all things pertaining to the Ford Escort Rs Turbo Series 1 and 2.

zetec turbo best c/r

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 02:42 PM
  #1  
NEWTON's Avatar
NEWTON
Thread Starter
Advanced PassionFord User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
From: under the bonnet
Default zetec turbo best c/r

which comp ratio would be best to run big boost thanks
Reply
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 03:00 PM
  #2  
crazycage's Avatar
crazycage
PassionFord Post Whore!!
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,995
Likes: 14
From: merseyside
Default

Originally Posted by NEWTON
which comp ratio would be best to run big boost thanks
about 9.1
Reply
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 03:07 PM
  #3  
Andy_R's Avatar
Andy_R
PassionFord Post Whore!!
20 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,438
Likes: 3
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Default

or 7.1
Reply
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 04:02 PM
  #4  
JamboRS's Avatar
JamboRS
focus rs 1672
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,025
Likes: 9
From: Earth most of the time
Default

cant say,engine needs to be specced for what it requires,too much other things to consider,turbo,head,inlet exhaust all needs to be considered
Reply
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 04:20 PM
  #5  
crazycage's Avatar
crazycage
PassionFord Post Whore!!
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,995
Likes: 14
From: merseyside
Default

Originally Posted by Andy_R
or 7.1
is yours 7.1 then mate ?? my new build is 8.8.1 ,what sort of power you going for? i want 330-360 .
Reply
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 08:15 PM
  #6  
juffer's Avatar
juffer
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 934
Likes: 0
From: worcester
Default

i'd say 7.4:1 thats what my engin builder said
Reply
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 08:27 PM
  #7  
AustenW's Avatar
AustenW
Advanced PassionFord User
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,952
Likes: 4
From: Nth Lincolnshire
Default

7.2:1
Reply
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 09:16 PM
  #8  
NEWTON's Avatar
NEWTON
Thread Starter
Advanced PassionFord User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
From: under the bonnet
Default

Originally Posted by crazycage
about 9.1
ive got rods and pistons from the states,that give 9-1 ratio with a 48cc zetec head,thought that might be a little high? i was thinking more the lower 8,,,,8-2:1example
Reply
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 09:42 PM
  #9  
rstdave's Avatar
rstdave
PassionFord Post Troll
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 0
From: Bristol/Bath
Default

Another open ended argument that's bin done a few times on here.....different people seem to use various c/r's and get good results.....i'd take the advice of your tuner and who's gonna map the car....if they've got proven results go with what they suggest imo! Personally i'd go for nothin below 8:1....but that's just my opinion and that of the tuner i take advice from.
Reply
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 10:07 PM
  #10  
JamboRS's Avatar
JamboRS
focus rs 1672
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,025
Likes: 9
From: Earth most of the time
Default

Originally Posted by crazycage
is yours 7.1 then mate ?? my new build is 8.8.1 ,what sort of power you going for? i want 330-360 .
andys will be a tame 300@wheels,though i dont reckon it will stay there for long,power bug will kick in,dunno what the engines specced for,though i think its well higher than the 300 that andys will settle for
Reply
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 10:28 PM
  #11  
NEWTON's Avatar
NEWTON
Thread Starter
Advanced PassionFord User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
From: under the bonnet
Smile

Originally Posted by rstdave
Another open ended argument that's bin done a few times on here.....different people seem to use various c/r's and get good results.....i'd take the advice of your tuner and who's gonna map the car....if they've got proven results go with what they suggest imo! Personally i'd go for nothin below 8:1....but that's just my opinion and that of the tuner i take advice from.
thats good advice ,nothing below 8-1,i dont want the car to drive like a pig off boost,ill be using the car a a fast road car and for a few track days
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 12:24 PM
  #12  
sas's Avatar
sas
should be good!
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 2
From: fife
Default

I am running 9.1 to 1 in my Zetec turbo.

S.
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 11:30 PM
  #13  
NEWTON's Avatar
NEWTON
Thread Starter
Advanced PassionFord User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
From: under the bonnet
Default

Originally Posted by sas
I am running 9.1 to 1 in my Zetec turbo.

S.
why so high? what boost do you run on that comp? thanks
Reply
Old Feb 26, 2008 | 11:49 PM
  #14  
smitsturbo's Avatar
smitsturbo
PassionFord Post Whore!!
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,346
Likes: 0
From: aberdeenshire
Default

7.3;1 is what mine will have...im told
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 07:27 AM
  #15  
sas's Avatar
sas
should be good!
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 2
From: fife
Default

Originally Posted by NEWTON
why so high? what boost do you run on that comp? thanks
I am maybe getting carried away as I only have got upto 21psi and the thing is the fastest car I have ever driven. You have to run V-power fuel.

Last year my Zetec Turbo was 8.5:1 and in combination with its big turbo had a fair bit of lag, but now at 9.1:1 I have no lag and the car is very nice to drive.

Simon.
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 01:23 PM
  #16  
NEWTON's Avatar
NEWTON
Thread Starter
Advanced PassionFord User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
From: under the bonnet
Default

Originally Posted by sas
I am maybe getting carried away as I only have got upto 21psi and the thing is the fastest car I have ever driven. You have to run V-power fuel.

Last year my Zetec Turbo was 8.5:1 and in combination with its big turbo had a fair bit of lag, but now at 9.1:1 I have no lag and the car is very nice to drive.

Simon.
thanks sas,is your engine an st170 zetec?iam thinkin of a six speed box allso,you have any prices on the shafts and mounts to be made up?thanks again
Reply
Old Feb 28, 2008 | 11:12 AM
  #17  
Maki's Avatar
Maki
PassionFord Regular
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
From: Lithuania (whereTF is that?) :)
Default

The question would be what sort of a car you want to have?
Drivable car should have no les than 8.7:1 but if you want mad boost with big turbo, go as low as you can... the lower the CR the higher the boosts safe limit. You'll have the lag, but you'll have power that you will not handle when the turbo kickes in By the way with to low CR it is hard to start the engine. Thats' my opinion... 8.2:1 for me always as I like the power kick whick you don't feel so much with high CR cars and low boost. That's what they do to NA hondas ... high CR, low boost... 250 BHP and it pools all the time, but not as fun as our fords with that boost kick
Reply
Old Feb 28, 2008 | 12:28 PM
  #18  
NEWTON's Avatar
NEWTON
Thread Starter
Advanced PassionFord User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
From: under the bonnet
Default

Originally Posted by Maki
The question would be what sort of a car you want to have?
Drivable car should have no les than 8.7:1 but if you want mad boost with big turbo, go as low as you can... the lower the CR the higher the boosts safe limit. You'll have the lag, but you'll have power that you will not handle when the turbo kickes in By the way with to low CR it is hard to start the engine. Thats' my opinion... 8.2:1 for me always as I like the power kick whick you don't feel so much with high CR cars and low boost. That's what they do to NA hondas ... high CR, low boost... 250 BHP and it pools all the time, but not as fun as our fords with that boost kick
thanks mate,i like to feel the boost kick in hard more fun like that
Reply
Old Feb 28, 2008 | 01:30 PM
  #19  
Andy_R's Avatar
Andy_R
PassionFord Post Whore!!
20 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,438
Likes: 3
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Default

I dont know where the misconception that low compression = lag comes from, its simply not the case at all. An engine built and spec'd correctly matched with a decent turbo and with propper mapping, will not result in a laggy drive.
I've driven more than just a few Turbocharged cars where the complression ratio's are well into the low 7's (and below) which were all far from laggy.

Last edited by Andy_R; Feb 28, 2008 at 01:31 PM.
Reply
Old Feb 28, 2008 | 01:48 PM
  #20  
Maki's Avatar
Maki
PassionFord Regular
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
From: Lithuania (whereTF is that?) :)
Default

Originally Posted by Andy_R
I dont know where the misconception that low compression = lag comes from, its simply not the case at all. An engine built and spec'd correctly matched with a decent turbo and with propper mapping, will not result in a laggy drive.
I've driven more than just a few Turbocharged cars where the complression ratio's are well into the low 7's (and below) which were all far from laggy.

Good example is 1.6 CVH xr3i and 1.6 RS Turbo... Of the boost NA 1.6 is more responsive and thats got to do mostly with the CR

P.S. people should start knowing, that thing which we like to call "lag" should be called "spool up time".... in real theory "lag" is the time between shifts and not the time before turbo kicks in from the start that is called "spool up time"
Reply
Old Feb 28, 2008 | 02:02 PM
  #21  
Andy_R's Avatar
Andy_R
PassionFord Post Whore!!
20 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,438
Likes: 3
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Default

Im sure if modern day engine managment were added to the RS Turbo then the outcome would be somewhat different.
Reply
Old Feb 28, 2008 | 02:11 PM
  #22  
Maki's Avatar
Maki
PassionFord Regular
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
From: Lithuania (whereTF is that?) :)
Default

Originally Posted by Andy_R
Im sure if modern day engine managment were added to the RS Turbo then the outcome would be somewhat different.
The same thing's could be done to those NA 1.6 engines, so... it's just the comparition
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2008 | 12:42 AM
  #23  
NEWTON's Avatar
NEWTON
Thread Starter
Advanced PassionFord User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
From: under the bonnet
Default

Originally Posted by Maki
The same thing's could be done to those NA 1.6 engines, so... it's just the comparition
thaks everyone
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2008 | 05:37 AM
  #24  
JesseT's Avatar
JesseT
PassionFord Post Troll
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,866
Likes: 0
From: Finland
Default

Also, I can't think where the misconception of "big turbo need low CR" comes from as it's just the opposite. It's the restrictive exhaust housing that creates much of the detonation problems for high CR engines.
There are loads of turboed 16V engines running CR from 9-10 with 2bar boost and silly power with turbos like Holset HX50 fitted.
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2008 | 07:58 AM
  #25  
Maki's Avatar
Maki
PassionFord Regular
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
From: Lithuania (whereTF is that?) :)
Default

Originally Posted by JesseT
There are loads of turboed 16V engines running CR from 9-10 with 2bar boost and silly power with turbos like Holset HX50 fitted.
I know none maybe WRC focus, but we don't have that king of money I guess... I street life there is simple rule. low CR - high boost, high CR - low boost.... and for high CR/low boos't car you don't need huge turbo, but I dont know why are they using them, maybe for show off "look at me I have BIG turbo" or maybe for that reoson you've mentioned, restrictive housings... I can't say. In my region all the big boost and power cars have so low CR's that for starting they need additional injectors and so on...
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2008 | 06:13 PM
  #26  
rstdave's Avatar
rstdave
PassionFord Post Troll
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 0
From: Bristol/Bath
Default

Think there's more cars runnin big power/high comp than u think.....there are some jap cars, evo's definately that i know of running c/r in the 9's and over 700bhp so it's possible. Low comp is tried and tested obviously but more people are managing to get the power with higher c/r's now. As for high comp and big turbo's...that's the whole point, means you can get power without havin to run mega boost, don't know what the obseesion with massive boost is, if u can get the power running lower boost it's gotta be better...lower temps and strain on everythin etc. The low comp versus high comp is always goin to be argued either way but high comp/ big power can definately work if specced correctly!
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2008 | 06:43 PM
  #27  
Maki's Avatar
Maki
PassionFord Regular
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
From: Lithuania (whereTF is that?) :)
Default

Originally Posted by rstdave
...if u can get the power running lower boost it's gotta be better...lower temps and strain on everythin etc. The low comp versus high comp is always goin to be argued either way but high comp/ big power can definately work if specced correctly!
We talked about it ... simply no fun with no boost kick fuck jap crap
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2008 | 06:50 PM
  #28  
Red16's Avatar
Red16
10K+ Poster!!
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,788
Likes: 2
From: South Shields
Default

Originally Posted by Maki
Good example is 1.6 CVH xr3i and 1.6 RS Turbo... Of the boost NA 1.6 is more responsive and thats got to do mostly with the CR

P.S. people should start knowing, that thing which we like to call "lag" should be called "spool up time".... in real theory "lag" is the time between shifts and not the time before turbo kicks in from the start that is called "spool up time"
lag is the time it takes to make positive boost pressure... whereas boost threshold is the time it takes to get from just masking positive boost pressure to actually making full boost.
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2008 | 06:56 PM
  #29  
Maki's Avatar
Maki
PassionFord Regular
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
From: Lithuania (whereTF is that?) :)
Default

Originally Posted by Red16
lag is the time it takes to make positive boost pressure... whereas boost threshold is the time it takes to get from just masking positive boost pressure to actually making full boost.
We read different books
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2008 | 06:57 PM
  #30  
Big Will_'s Avatar
Big Will_
Borg Warner EFR Equipped!
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,810
Likes: 2
From: In the unit, building a 450bhp Time Attack Focus!
Default

I haven't cc'd mine yet but theoretically mine should be low to mid 8's and i'm aiming for 450-500bhp
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2008 | 11:21 PM
  #31  
JamboRS's Avatar
JamboRS
focus rs 1672
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,025
Likes: 9
From: Earth most of the time
Default

Originally Posted by Red16
lag is the time it takes to make positive boost pressure... whereas boost threshold is the time it takes to get from just masking positive boost pressure to actually making full boost.
i thought lag was the time from positive boost pressure to full boost,boost threshold is the time it takes for the turbo to spin up,as in off boost comin onto positive boost

no?
Reply
Old Mar 2, 2008 | 06:05 PM
  #32  
wul young's Avatar
wul young
Regular Contributor
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
From: CENTRAL SCOTLAND
Default

Originally Posted by Andy_R
I dont know where the misconception that low compression = lag comes from, its simply not the case at all. An engine built and spec'd correctly matched with a decent turbo and with propper mapping, will not result in a laggy drive.
I've driven more than just a few Turbocharged cars where the complression ratio's are well into the low 7's (and below) which were all far from laggy.
totally agree andy,mines is 7.5.1,spect to run 28psi,and 1 thing is for sure,my car has no lag whatsoever,thats with t34,andy and several other people who have been in my car will verify this,as said proper management, mapping,ignition advance etc play a vital roll between lagy and not.

Last edited by wul young; Mar 2, 2008 at 06:06 PM. Reason: ad on
Reply
Old Mar 2, 2008 | 08:52 PM
  #33  
rstdave's Avatar
rstdave
PassionFord Post Troll
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 0
From: Bristol/Bath
Default

Originally Posted by Maki
We talked about it ... simply no fun with no boost kick fuck jap crap
Guess it depends what u want out of your car......if fun's havin a car that's laggy as a peach off boost then lightin em up everywhere when it finally makes boost then fair enough! If it's a quick point to point car then linear power's what you want really....as for jap crap, agree it's not what i'm into either but there's no arguing their methods make for some fuckin quick motors!!
Reply
Old Mar 2, 2008 | 09:55 PM
  #34  
Maki's Avatar
Maki
PassionFord Regular
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
From: Lithuania (whereTF is that?) :)
Default

Originally Posted by rstdave
If it's a quick point to point car then linear power's what you want really....
Then you should stay NA... plenty of cars with big power enough to spin wheels on dry, so why going turbo way at all in FWD car?
Reply
Old Mar 3, 2008 | 09:58 PM
  #35  
rstdave's Avatar
rstdave
PassionFord Post Troll
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 0
From: Bristol/Bath
Default

Originally Posted by Maki
Then you should stay NA... plenty of cars with big power enough to spin wheels on dry, so why going turbo way at all in FWD car?
Should i now lol......what because i don't want some lag monster with a massive boost spike that just lights up the tyres??!! Don't know what the fascination with spinning the wheels is...plenty of big power turbo fwd cars that put in some very impressive times without doing so....and funnily enough they're the ones that manage to avoid having massive boost/torque spikes!! I've got an rst so obviously have nothin against turbo and fwd...think you're totally missing the point....that they can be made to go quickly without just lightin up the tyres!
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
robnock
General Car Related Discussion.
21
May 13, 2019 05:29 PM
robnock
General Car Related Discussion.
0
Aug 22, 2015 10:51 AM
Chopshop85
General Car Related Discussion.
8
Aug 17, 2015 06:38 PM
turbobill
Technical help Q & A
3
Aug 9, 2015 05:21 PM
turbobill
Technical help Q & A
0
Aug 1, 2015 08:55 PM




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:03 PM.