I’m not a salesman but I do have a shop. Thousands of examples out there now in just a few years. I’m one of them. Don’t take my word for it! Just ask anyone else including the major tuners and shops and they’ll say the same thing
If y'all like it, that's all that matters.I’m not a salesman but I do have a shop. Thousands of examples out there now in just a few years. I’m one of them. Don’t take my word for it! Just ask anyone else including the major tuners and shops and they’ll say the same thing
He already bought the GSS.
OP has not purchased anything yet
It's the way the pressures in the cylinder develop. It's the reason OEM's use lower compression on supercharged cars.
Ah gotcha, that's not the OP.OP has not purchased anything yet
I’m the OP and I havent purchased anything yet
I can explain this if it’s a legitimate question.
Not exactly. High boost and low compression has lower peak cylinder pressure, lower stress, and lower peak in-cylinder temps than low boost and high compression at the same power level. It’s an interesting thermodynamic kinematic relationship.
With some underlying assumptions about adequately cooling the intake charge, etc.
Only the temperature part. Peak cyl pressures are still lower even without intercooling.
But it would get wonky on how much boost you'd have to run to equivocate based upon fuel quality and knock. Boosting to the moon on low compression is safer, but if you tried it with no intercooling I'd imagine you'd run into knock quite early (on lesser fuels). So you'd have to run even more boost, which would make the problem even more.
