Compression Ratio, Will I be able to tell the difference? Options

[sdoolin]

Rebuilding(ish) my 2056. On my first build I was able to achieve a compression ratio of very nearly 9.0:1. With this build, I am having to add .020 spacers below the jugs to get any measurable deck height in the jugs. I am calculating a compression ratio of 8.6:1.

Will I notice the loss in compression ratio?

[sdoolin]

Thank you both for the thoughtful replies. My original build is here - http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=273923.

The cam is a Webcam 9130. I set valve geometry on the first build and cut pushrods to length.

That build went very well, and the engine was very strong and reliable for just over 4k miles. It was a lot of fun. Due to my own mistakes after a rebuild to fix oil leaks, I find myself here. The only difference from this build to the original build is the crankshaft (and of course new bearings). Importantly in the first build I had to shave the tops of the jugs to achieve the compression I desired (9.0:1(ish)). Now I am having to use a .020" spacer under that same set of jugs to achieve close to my desired compression ratio.

I am trying to build this more on the reliable side than the hyper performance side to answer Hawk's question. And Hawk your not a dope.

I agree with measuring everything, repeatedly. So I took Hawk's advice and clayed all 4 cylinders. I am measuring 0.15", 0.15", 0.146", and 0.15" exhaust valve clearance across all 4 cylinders. Intake valve clearance is 0.14", 0.14", 0.102" and, 0.11". I'm going to try to get the intakes all closer to one another. I am comfortable with my deck height measurements (discussed previously).

Visually I am not seeing coil bind at the valve springs, but I haven't measured that yet. I was hoping to avoid that, but now feel obligated. I have done it before. But I really agree with the point about not leaving any performance on the table with respect to the cost of these heads. They are the single most expensive automotive parts I have ever purchased (except for the 3.8l pistons & cylinders for my 993). That is not a complaint towards HAMM.