Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Recently my R32-GTR started running really rough at all rpms, so i did a compression test. 

the results: 

Cylinder 1: 165 

Cylinder 2: 165

Cylinder 3: 130 => 165 when doing a wet test.

Cylinder 4: 155

Cylinder 5: 165

Cylinder 6: 175

Cylinder 3 with 130 concerns me, do i need a rebuild? should i check for other reasons my engine is running bad? and what could cause this (suspect its the infamous ringland) i also have pressure in the sump, but no smoke from the exhaust. 

extra: i have changed, injectors, plugs, coil, ignition module and wiring loom so far. 

Thanks for all replies! :) 

-NorGodzilla

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/480764-bad-compression-on-one-cylinder/
Share on other sites

Given the evidence of a significantly different cylinder health, of course it could be to blame.

However, just about everything else on the car could be responsible. AFM, CAS, wiring and connectors for each, coil loom, dirty/dud injector and/or the injector loom. Low fuel pressure from failing pump, boost rag, blocked cat, burnt valve, chipped cam lobe, timing out, valve timing jumped a tooth.....do you want me to go on?

I get that there is alot that can cause this. i have checked the cas, maf's, injector filters, fuel pressure, i dont have a cat, i have a new coil loom, timing, and that the timing belt has not jumped a tooth. still i understand that there is a hundred more things that can cause this. anyhow thanks for the input.

46 minutes ago, tridentt150v said:

The difference between a dry and wet test says bore issues, rings, lands, gudgeon out etc to me.

Oh yeah, but while the compression was a bit low, it probably isn't low enough to cause rough running on its own. I mean, it might, but it's just as likely to not. Hence why I gave the laundry list. Many other things more likely to cause rough running than a cylinder down 15% or so.

  • Like 2
On 13/07/2020 at 1:24 PM, GTSBoy said:

Oh yeah, but while the compression was a bit low, it probably isn't low enough to cause rough running on its own. I mean, it might, but it's just as likely to not. Hence why I gave the laundry list. Many other things more likely to cause rough running than a cylinder down 15% or so.

Very true, I wasn't really thinking of the rough running issue when I replied.   I guess he went hunting rabbits and looks like he might have shot a squirrel :)

  • Haha 1
On 13/07/2020 at 4:36 AM, tridentt150v said:

The difference between a dry and wet test says bore issues, rings, lands, gudgeon out etc to me.  Can you get a bore scope and have a look, you might see marks on the wall?

i have now taken a look with a camera on the cylinder walls, it seems like there is a decent amount of scratches in all cylinders, i suspect this is just normal wear, due to the engine being almost 30 years old. in cylinder 3 there seems to be one scratch that is alot deeper than the others, this one seems to be quiet deep into the cylinder wall. i understand that this can explain the pressure in the sump and blowing out the dip stick. do you guys think i should continue searching for other issues that may cause the engine running rough, or should i pull the engine now, any suggestions on what to do?

Well, look, the engine is f**ked right now. You should rebuild it just in case that scratch is the warning that something is about to break away/seize the piston/wreck a valve/turbo/etc.

If you do that, then whatever the very likely other cause of the rough running will still be there when you try to start up the freshy and run it in, which won't be good.

So fix both.

  • Like 2

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...