Building motor for LC guy, should he go high/low compression

[douglas vincent]

He is currently not turbo.

I can make him an open deck turbo block, with turbo heads.....

Obviously lower power versu NA setup, but he wants to turbo down the road.

He knows the cost to turbo it will run $1200-2000.

I am giving him the option since it would only cost him an additional $175 over $750 for the rebuilt motor..... (rings, rebuilt heads, new main and rear, all gaskets, new timing belt and pulleys, pretty good deal....)


What do you guys think?

[206er]

yeah, go low comp

[DLC]

He's gonna want to turbo it a lot faster when Geo Metros beat him to the next stop light

[douglas vincent]

And he's auto....

Its a 1994 GT wagon....

He has full suspension work, blah, blah blah,

I just don't want to sell him a slug... but a decent low comp motor to start with, well, I am making 300 whp on the same basis, minus the heads of course,, so its a damn good start!

[BAC5.2]

Steve (evoloutionmovement) had a turbo block with N/A heads. It wasn't what I'd call slow, so much as it seemed as though acceleration was somewhat uninspired.

If he's gonna turbo it, go "low" compression. 8.5 or 9:1 is fine.

[evolutionmovement]

Torque didn't seem to change and it has more lower down than my Mazda3, but the horsepower is lower than the higher compression. Started to run out of breath a little earlier. I'd say it went from about 8 seconds to 60 when the higher compression motor was running its best to maybe mid 9s. Certainly not fast, but it still blew away a 1992 Honda Accord with a CAI and header I didn't realize I was racing until he asked me what I did to my car the next day. I think he was pretty demoralized when I told him. I have a manual transmission, though.

[douglas vincent]

He chose to go low comp!