Jump to content
SAU Community

Compression Test

ardie

By ardie,
in General Maintenance

 Share

Recommended Posts

ardie Experienced

ardie

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hey, i recently purchased a 96 r33 gtst series 2. i just ran a compression test on it the other day and found the readings hovered between 135 - 140 psi. this seems low 2 me cosidering the high compression of the rb25 but i might be wrong. i was just woundering if anybody could shine some light on if this is an issue or are these compressino ratios the expected? any advice would be much appreciated as i am worried that i have purchased a lemon.

Edited by ardie
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/108950-compression-test/
Share on other sites
SiR_RB Grand Master

SiR_RB

Posted
Posted
From memory, others have tested lower than this. (from what i've seen on SAU)

140 seems to be the average though. Someone will be able to tell you definately what it should be though.

yer im pretty curious to no wot it is also, u rekon 140psi? around there sumwhere?

ardie Experienced

ardie

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

ahh that might explain it, last time i did one on my mates VL turbo after a hard drive and i managed 2 burn my hands an impressive number of times, so when i did this it was cold. how would that have affected it? i got the actual readings back and there was only 3 psi variation accross all cylinders

Edited by ardie
wrxhoon Grand Master

wrxhoon

Posted
Posted
ahh that might explain it, last time i did one on my mates VL turbo after a hard drive and i managed 2 burn my hands an impressive number of times, so when i did this it was cold. how would that have affected it? i got the actual readings back and there was only 3 psi variation accross all cylinders

It sounds like you have a healthy engine but your readings are low. Test it again when hot and wot with a good battery and all spark plugs out . You comp gauge maybe wrong too but more than likely the test wasn't done as it should. A leakdown test is a better indication of the condition of the engine .

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kapr
      RB20DE NEO smallbox clutch.

      By Kapr · Posted

      For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...