Search results

...and the only thing to be gained by reworking the head/s injectors would be the ability to burn gasoline? Bah. Personally would rather just optimize the fuel system to burn the alternative fuels that they seem to already tolerate fairly well.

Oh yeah, I understand that part Ed. Wasn't trying to suggest that boost is equal to high compression pistons as a substitute, just seemed like if an engine holds up to one it will hold up to the other. That's all I wanted to clarify.

Thanks. So then it doesn't matter whether the cylinder pressure is generated by high-compression pistons or a high-boost turbo, if an engine can tolerate one it should be able to take the other equally well? In that case it sounds like the compression wouldn't be much of an issue, but figuring...

Thanks, but just so I'm clear, can you please explain to me in a little more detail how they're different? Think I've got an idea, but want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding anything.

No, what I was getting at is that I'm having a hard time understanding what the concerns are regarding raising the compression ratio in engines that are already being subjected to massive amounts of boost. Was just wondering why they're hold up to one and not the other.

Regarding compression, what's the difference between the static compression ratio and the effect that a turbo has? With a turbo, I guess it's more in/out, but the compression ratio would still determine how much that air is compressed beyond whatever psi it's at when it enters the engine. Is...

That's how I understand it. Multifuel 12V 6BT would be pretty rad, but then the only thing you'd gain is the ability to burn gasoline and that's really not such a big deal if the whole point is being able to burn everything else.