I'm not about to start taking engine building advice from someone who selected all his parts for the assembly without so much as calculating the compression ratio.

I think you're getting overly defensive, and starting in on personal attacks which I'm not about to be drawn into. All I am saying is that the shorter rod to stroke ratio you are forced to run is a less than optimal compromise. It also goes against the convential wisdom of performance engine building, which you obviously are not aware of.

there is a big difference between a mechanic and an 'engine builder'. There's much more to it than selecting various components that will fit together.

Just to clarify this for you, because you're not the first to incorrectly think I'm saying "that thing will never run"... I'm absolutely certain you will be very pleased with the fruits of your labour into which you have obviously invested so much pride. But the fact remains, the same parts on an A14 block with std A14 rods, will have much more potential. And until you did that, you will have learnt nothing about this from personal experience. But its just a very mildly tuned street engine so at the end of the day, it isn't going to matter all that much.

All I was doing was pointing out some of the consequences of reducing rod to stroke ratio in a 'performance' engine. If you really want to know more about it and refuse to read it anywhere but here, I'll get to work on my assignment tonight, or if it's quiet today I might be able to make a start sooner. I think I made it pretty clear I was less certain about the negative impact on volumetric efficiency than the other effects, but it is a natural progression from the reduced sensitivity to valve timing events caused by the different piston dynamics resulting from the shorter rods. But volumetric efficiency is certainly partially a product of valve events.