Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys just did a compression test in my R33 RB25DET

Results

Cyl 1 - 155

Cyl 2 - 155

Cyl 3 - 140

Cyl 4 - 152

Cyl 5 - 155

Cyl 6 - 157

What do you guys think of these results? Good? bad?

Is Cyl #3 to low??

All comments welcome!!!~!!

After seeing others' compression tests on RB25's, I really question wtf was up with mine.

I'll be sure to post it up later this evening when I can give exact figures, but mine varied between 125psi and 135psi dry (unsure if warm or not tbh)

It never burns oil. Oil level never drops between services (5 - 7500kms) and I had very minimal blowby. Am now running 15psi through it, and makes 285rwkw.

Either the test was done incorrectly, the pressure tester thingywatsit is faulty, or I have a rebuilt engine with lower compression. Sorry to hijack a brand new thread, but don't spose I could get any insight on my situation?

I'll be sure to get another pressure test+leak down done when I put turbo back on and take for retune - will be at a different workshop to the first test too.

i know what you mean Troy, when i drove from perth to gold coast mine used a bit of oil and i tested to find 125 on 1-5 and 6 was 120.was making 350rwhp at 16 psi. sounded low but even so kept driving. eventually opened it up and found 5 pistons had broken ringlands exactly the same size piece broken and number 6 had slightly picked up. apart from it using a bit of oil i always thought i had a rebuilt engine with low compression

Yeah it's odd. Regardless, I'll continue driving it as is and taking care of it, until shit hits the fan I suppose. Then off to Melbourne or Sydney for a rebuildz - which we all know is when the REAL fun begins.

Yes my vechicle doesnt use any oil either, although there was a little oil in the metal intake pipe just before the turbo comp housing. Other then that the car runs quite well, besides the boost tapering off in high rpm.

i hate hijacking threads.. i havent done a comp test but ive had a reletative compression test done (i have no idea what the difference is or if there is a difference in the comp tests) but the scale shows 0-100 on my print out.. All cylinders are 90 or above. No excessive oil use running 11psi.. no idea what power my car is making either.. I just assumed if its above 90 then it cant be alll that bad (the reason i ask is my mate said my engine is totally f**ked after reading the rel. comp. test)

Edited by defari

^^^

sounds like you had a leak down test not a compression test, so those numbers are % not pressures.

People also have to remember that if you play with cam timing or you have different cams then comparing to factory compression figures will tell you nothing.

Edited by D_Stirls
^^^

sounds like you had a leak down test not a compression test, so those numbers are % not pressures.

People also have to remember that if you play with cam timing or you have different cams then comparing to factory compression figures will tell you nothing.

agreed, we gained 20psi compression just by setting the cam gears correctly after another shop set them wrong, went from 130 to 150psi on RB26

also, what kind of tester are you using?

My first tester said 120psi across all 6.

My Second Tester said 220psi across all 6.

My Third said 160psi across all 6.

As long as they are all within 5-8psi of each other.

If not, turn the boost down and wait for it to blow up gracefully.

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...