Higher Compression in 2.0 i.e.: Does flattening of head make sense?
Posted: 06 Dec 2004, 17:42
Hi Lanciafriends!
Had to buy myself a new Thema, for I'd crashed mine on a stone wall because of ice.
Lucky me and due to the soft structure of the Thema-body, I did not get hurt at all.
I instantly wanted to have the uncharged 2.0-version again because I think it has the best fuel-, speed- and tax-efficiency.
My new '95-2.0-i.e.-Thema ist very beautiful, but its engine cannot compete with the one of the old '92-2.0.ie.
While the old one easily made 205 kmph, the new one only performed the 193 promised by Lancia as topspeed so far.
The old one made 80 in the third gear up a steep hill of 3%. Not yet tried the new one there, but I estimate the old one must have had 15-20 hp more than normal.
And, FUEL EFFICIENCY!:
I never ever needed more than 9.6 litres with the old 2.0, not even when I constantly nailed down the accelerator to the ground in town, but I wasted 13.4 litres with the new one on a long distance lead-foot-drive through Germany.
And meanwhile, I think it is not only a pitty but a real nuisance that the tank of the III-series has 5 litres less volume than of the II-series.
Does anybody know here what prompted the Lancia technicians to downsize the volume of the tank?? Was it because they needed room for the ABS or because of bad fuel ventilation in the I- and II-series?
Would the II-series tank of a '92 fit into a '95-Thema??
Now, important QUESTION:
Can I raise compression, performance, fuel efficiency and thereby action radius by flattening the head of the uncharged 834-DOHC-engine a little bit?
Maybe I will have to use 98 octane fuel instead of 95, I know.
FAQ:
HOW MUCH CAN THE HEAD of the 834 BE FLATTENED EASILY AND WITHOUT ANY MECHANICAL RISKS OR TROUBLES ON THIS WONDERFUL ENGINE?
Please, if anybody knows preciseley, TELL ME!! +
FJB.
Had to buy myself a new Thema, for I'd crashed mine on a stone wall because of ice.
Lucky me and due to the soft structure of the Thema-body, I did not get hurt at all.
I instantly wanted to have the uncharged 2.0-version again because I think it has the best fuel-, speed- and tax-efficiency.
My new '95-2.0-i.e.-Thema ist very beautiful, but its engine cannot compete with the one of the old '92-2.0.ie.
While the old one easily made 205 kmph, the new one only performed the 193 promised by Lancia as topspeed so far.
The old one made 80 in the third gear up a steep hill of 3%. Not yet tried the new one there, but I estimate the old one must have had 15-20 hp more than normal.
And, FUEL EFFICIENCY!:
I never ever needed more than 9.6 litres with the old 2.0, not even when I constantly nailed down the accelerator to the ground in town, but I wasted 13.4 litres with the new one on a long distance lead-foot-drive through Germany.
And meanwhile, I think it is not only a pitty but a real nuisance that the tank of the III-series has 5 litres less volume than of the II-series.
Does anybody know here what prompted the Lancia technicians to downsize the volume of the tank?? Was it because they needed room for the ABS or because of bad fuel ventilation in the I- and II-series?
Would the II-series tank of a '92 fit into a '95-Thema??
Now, important QUESTION:
Can I raise compression, performance, fuel efficiency and thereby action radius by flattening the head of the uncharged 834-DOHC-engine a little bit?
Maybe I will have to use 98 octane fuel instead of 95, I know.
FAQ:
HOW MUCH CAN THE HEAD of the 834 BE FLATTENED EASILY AND WITHOUT ANY MECHANICAL RISKS OR TROUBLES ON THIS WONDERFUL ENGINE?
Please, if anybody knows preciseley, TELL ME!! +
FJB.