Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi, yes i did a search and the answer i'm looking for didn't come up.

So my question is when i did a compression check, my values were from 135 to 145, i know an RB25DET static ratio is 9:1 but this doesn't tell me if my readings are fine, How do i calculate my values to see if they are good or not?

These are my results:

1 - 145

2 - 140

3 - 135

4 - 140

5 - 140

6 - 145

Motor was fairly warm and stupid compression tester was hard to get tight but think they should be about right.

No mods other than turbo back exhuast and pod filter.

Cheers , Adam.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/130019-compression-test/
Share on other sites

thanks for that, just put my mind at ease, was worried about #3 being a bit low.

Cheers.

Ohh and Dave we need to have beers soon. ;)

Good reading would be near 160psi, youre engine is getting a little tired but will still be good for a while yet.....

Guys, The absolute value is not that important. As long as its not excessively low eg. ~125 then what matters is how close all the cylinders are.

The reason it only matters how close the cylinders are is that every compression tester reads slightly differently. Obviously quality, parts used etc effect the result. Also the temp of the engine and the amount of voltage in the battery effects it as well.

My car showed 10 psi difference between two compression test guages within two weeks. And the second one was higher!

Those results look ok to me. Generally the cylinders you do last start to show lower figures as the batteries looses a tiny bit of its beans! Again I have seen this as well.

I wouldn't worry. Keep taking it to the track!

Leakdown test is by far the most accurate means of checking the condition of the engine. It actually tests the pressure the rings can hold as well as valves and stems.

Interesting, i wonder what SK would say about this. SK???

NFI, i will be taking it to the track as often as i can. Its got good power for a stocker, at SAU dyno day it made 175rwkw so not too shabby. When i did the comp test it was in this order 1, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, why??? i was just go front to back but then tought that number 6 is the one that stuffs up, usually, so...

How do i do a leakdown test??? do i need to take it to a mechanic?

Just noticed wrxhoon is watching this thread. I think he will give you a much better explanation than I can. I learnt all about this from him.

Leakdown test you need an aircompressor and a special air tool. Best taking it too a good mechanic. I wouldn't worry though as if you are making good power all signs point to a pretty good engine. I would start to worry when it starts burning oil or starts to not make power.

Hi, yes i did a search and the answer i'm looking for didn't come up.

So my question is when i did a compression check, my values were from 135 to 145, i know an RB25DET static ratio is 9:1 but this doesn't tell me if my readings are fine, How do i calculate my values to see if they are good or not?

These are my results:

1 - 145

2 - 140

3 - 135

4 - 140

5 - 140

6 - 145

Motor was fairly warm and stupid compression tester was hard to get tight but think they should be about right.

No mods other than turbo back exhuast and pod filter.

Cheers , Adam.

Adam, my motor was getting the same readings last time it was checked at UAS..

still makes good power, and nearly 0 blow by in the catch can ..

still made 294rwkw @ 18psi

Nfi made a good point on battery voltage. The two you tested first, when battery would of had more charge are the highest readings.

Try it again going in reverse order from lowest reading cylinder to highest and see if theres a difference?

And as mentioned, a leakdown test will give a better indication of engine health.

these tests look fine. Even if one cyl. is a bit low some carbon bulid up etc can cause this...

leakdown for more accurancy but really you only need to do ti if u find a problem with the compression test to pin-point the cause of the low reading.

Number 3 looks a little on the low side in comparison with the others. Assuming you have a good gauge , done the test when the engine was at operating temp ( very hard without geting burnt), the starter, battery were good and had the throttle wide open then all cylinders read low, they should be around 170 psi.@300rpm

khunjeng: carbon built up will increase compression..

Number 3 looks a little on the low side in comparison with the others. Assuming you have a good gauge , done the test when the engine was at operating temp ( very hard without geting burnt), the starter, battery were good and had the throttle wide open then all cylinders read low, they should be around 170 psi.@300rpm

khunjeng: carbon built up will increase compression..

Actually test was done when the motor has cooled abit so i wouldn't burn myself, and the throttle was shut, I will do it again and post new readings.

Yeah good point about the battery. Thats why I have the car hooked up to a battery charger whilst doing the tests. I wait 5 mins between each cyl so the battery gets topped up.

Btw also some readings may be artificially high if there is a lot of carbon deposits (raising the comp ratio).

Actually test was done when the motor has cooled abit so i wouldn't burn myself, and the throttle was shut, I will do it again and post new readings.

With WOT the redings will be higher, make sure you keep cranking the engine until compression stops rising.

A fully charged 40+amphour battery should be good enough to complete the test, make sure all the plugs are out before you start the test.

Busky2k, they are not 'artificially' high if you have carbon built up, the combustion chamber is somewhat smaller so compression will increase. Same as if you shave the cyl head or block or even have a thiner h/gasket.

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
×
×
  • Create New...