glad to see so many people buying the bit older 240'swelcome aboard guys!

does this mean Don is finally gone?

if we could only be so lucky...

Damnit, why am I just now finding this thread?

7HE_DON wrote:now you can grab bragging rights by calc.'ing the problem out by comparing the two in a binomial equation(9.5)100% of 2397 minus (8.6)100% of 2397 = the difference of displacement in the compression pocket grooved underneath the cylinder block coverbut just by looking at the concept you should be able to understand that the compression is lower in the 92-94 KA engine. Reason is it does not compress at much cc because its located in the compression pocket in the cylinder cover

Uh I thought the compression for 91-94 was the same and 95+ was higher? Wasn't this because they switched from cast pistons to hyperreutectic (spelling?) pistons in 95 which had a higher compression ratio? I thought all DE heads were identical save the accessories, sensors on the intake manifold, and the distributor(and various cam profile changes but the actual head is the same)?

those pockets arnt accounted for in your compression cycle cuz you're compression 9.5:1 ... not 9.5:0

Uh how is 9.5:0 a compression ratio? That's like saying 9.5/0 is a number. How can you compress a mixture until it's 9.5 times smaller than no mixture at all? Typo maybe? Or maybe you're not as mathematical as you claim?!?

:bsflag

Ooops I didn't notice how old this thread was. I didn't realize someone ressurected it. Sorry