X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:54:36 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-d21.mx.aol.com ([205.188.144.207] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.6) with ESMTP id 923098 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:14:24 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.144.207; envelope-from=Sky2high@aol.com Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-d21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r6.3.) id q.1dd.4d299d3d (3310) for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:13:30 -0500 (EST) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <1dd.4d299d3d.30f7073a@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:13:30 EST Subject: Re: [LML] Porting and Polishing X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1137028409" X-Mailer: 9.0 Security Edition for Windows sub 2340 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1137028409 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/11/2006 3:21:06 P.M. Central Standard Time, WarbirdAeroPress@cox.net writes: Can any of you guys with LNC2's tell me about your before and after differences when you went with higher compression pistons and porting/polishing the cylinders? Scotty G, Before any of those treatments, most had more money. During the last century, I was told that the biggest bang (now, now Walter) for the buck was from higher compression ratios (within reason) for NA engines. The other improvements require a more thoughtful treatment of the entire induction system for real benefit. EIs count, too. Some use ECI cylinders where ECI claims porting improvements (flow). Some will say that is BS. Wanna race across the countryside? I don't think many have made such mods on their current engine and then reported pre/post performance. Grayhawk There is more to performance than brute power - although not much more. -------------------------------1137028409 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In a message dated 1/11/2006 3:21:06 P.M. Central Standard Time,=20 WarbirdAeroPress@cox.net writes:

<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>

Can any of you guys with LNC2's tell me a= bout=20 your before and after differences when you went with higher compression=20 pistons and porting/polishing the=20 cylinders?

Scotty G,

Before any of those treatments, most had more money. During=20= the=20 last century, I was told that the biggest bang (now, now Walter) for the buc= k=20 was from higher compression ratios (within reason) for NA engines. The= =20 other improvements require a more thoughtful treatment of the entire inducti= on=20 system for real benefit. EIs count, too.

Some use ECI cylinders where ECI claims porting improvements (flow).&nb= sp;=20 Some will say that is BS.

Wanna race across the countryside?

I don't think many have made such mods on their current engin= e=20 and then reported pre/post performance.

Grayhawk

There is more to performance than brute power - although not much=20 more.

-------------------------------1137028409--