Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Sure it's nice and even but below minimum reccomended.

Safe compression is anything between 135 ~ 180psi (as per the Nissan Japan Service Manual)

Your engine is tired.... it's had a hard life and needs a refesh.

Re-coondition the block & head, new bearings and piston rings and you should be fine... budget for new pistons just in case but I suspect you may get away without them. However if you plan on putting horsepower into this engine then I suggest you put forged pistons in. Tomei make very nice 0.5mm (20 thou if you speak to any Australian engine builder) overbore pistons for the RB25. CP Pistons are an alternative if your busget isnt that high. Also don't forget to put a 1.2mm Head Gakset in if you're goin to run higher boost.

hey all, just did a compression test on my car and was curious about the readings,

1- 120

2- 119

3- 120

4- 120

5- 119

6- 119

i would just like to know all your opinions on the condition of my engine

thanks

slo33

I got my compression test done with around 130 across all cylinders. Motor seems fine, mechanics said that was a good result.

Dont pull your engine out , it looks like you ahve a good engine there .

The comp test gauge may be reading low , who did it ? if a pro did then treir gauge is reading low and they probaly know it .

If your engine was stuffed its unlikely that it would be so even , my bet is it woul vary a lot more than that , regardless if you are loosing comp from valves or rings .

Do a leak-down test if you want to be sure .

Standard comp for rb25det is 12.2kg /cm2 (about 170-175psi ) @300rpm , limit 9.2 and difference limit between cil 1 kg/cm2 .

rb25de standard comp is 12.8 kg/cm2

rb26 dett 12kg/cm2

I wouldn't say that an engine down on compression by over 30% is a good engine. Sure the gauge may be reading low and it wouldn't be a bad idea to get a test done somewhere else, however if this is the true compression of the engine then it needs a refresh.

Also an engine doesn't have to be blown up to need a re-build. If it's had a hard life but has been serviced and looked after properly then the compression test should look like this one. If something happened like a cracked ringland or dropped valve, then 1 (or more) of the cylinders would read lower than the rest for sure.

I wouldn't say that an engine down on compression by over 30% is a good engine. Sure the gauge may be reading low and it wouldn't be a bad idea to get a test done somewhere else, however if this is the true compression of the engine then it needs a refresh.

i doubt it would be worn like that, but anyway as an example i had a compression test done for a friends car one gauge read 160psi across first few cylinders before getting jammed, grabbed another working compression gauge it read 140psi across the cylinders.

I wouldn't say that an engine down on compression by over 30% is a good engine. Sure the gauge may be reading low and it wouldn't be a bad idea to get a test done somewhere else, however if this is the true compression of the engine then it needs a refresh.

I didnt say that either , what i said was "its unlikely that a worn stuffed engine would have even compression " not imposibble though just unlikely .

Old worn engines dont have so even compression on all cilinders and that leads me to believe that it may have good comp much higher than the test .

If the true comp is 120 psi on all cil that engine would be gutless in stock form with stock or near stock boost a 6 cil bommy will kill it .

Thats the reason i suggested he does a leak-down test that will prove the state of his engine .

and my car seem to run better than most other 33's, i raced another 33 with front mount, 13psi and 3" exhaust and i beat him by car lengths ( my car just had standard shitty little side mount cooler, 11 psi and 3 " exhaust) it made 240 at the tyre spretty easy though

  • 2 years later...

Just got a compression test done today theres abit of difference in the results, but overall looks pretty healthy

Dry / Wet

1. 160 / 180

2. 160 / 170

3. 150 / 170

4. 155 / 175

5. 155 / 190

6. 160 / 180

Edited by skyzaman

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'm going to slap an old nismo logo sticker on my spare one and sell it to the land of the free for a thousand bucks
    • lol, probably should have read further!
    • Well - they have arrived.  And they are easy on the eye to put it mildly... These only have three bolts - but for a start there is a key that fits with vacuum like precision..  And as you can see by my ruler, the interface is large..   I listened to a podcast on HP Academy about Dan (KiwiCNC) and I'm more than comfortable he knows what he is doing. R35 Bearing assembly should arrive later today so can mock that up for a look. Can't wait to get these on and get some brake pressure logging too. IMG_3860.MP4
    • I would be very confident that they are the same parts (the 2 different SKUs). It seems very clear that you can drop the cam in the 2-way opening, or in the other opening. If you arrange it in the other opening in the same way that you see any other 1-way diff, ie, with the flat of the cam up against the 1° side of the opening, then it would work as a 1-way. It can only spread the ramps when driving forwards - cannot spread the ramps on overrun. It would then appear obvious that if you put the cam into the opening "backwards", that you would get the angled flats of the cam working onto the "points" of the 1° side of the opening, which would give you ramp spread in both loading directions. I do wonder if the forward direction of the 1.5-way config is equivalent to the forward direction of the 2-way, seeing as the cams are flipped and the angled surfaces on those would need to be the same on each side - AND - clearly when installed in either the 2-way or 1-1ay configuration they are not intended to work exactly the same (the ramp angles on the 2-way are 10° different between forward and backward, and the ramp doesn't exist in the 1-way config). 'twere me, I think I would rather actually have a set of rings that offered the 2-way with two different sets of ramp angles, say the 55/45 of the existing design and maybe a 45/37.5 combo for a less aggressive effect), AND another set of rings with a dedicated 1.5-way opening and a dedicated 1-way opening. The 1.5-way opening would actually have the steeper angle on the overdrive side that causes it to be less pushy than the forward drive angle, like you see in many other diffs. But really - if this Nismo thing is thought out properly and all those surfaces work on each other the way that they need to, who am I to argue?
    • I would be very confident that they are the same parts (the 2 different SKUs). It seems very clear that you can drop the cam in the 2-way opening, or in the other opening. If you arrange it in the other opening in the same way that you see any other 1-way diff, ie, with the flat of the cam up against the 1° side of the opening, then it would work as a 1-way. It can only spread the ramps when driving forwards - cannot spread the ramps on overrun. It would then appear obvious that if you put the cam into the opening "backwards", that you would get the angled flats of the cam working onto the "points" of the 1° side of the opening, which would give you ramp spread in both loading directions. I do wonder if the forward direction of the 1.5-way config is equivalent to the forward direction of the 2-way, seeing as the cams are flipped and the angled surfaces on those would need to be the same on each side - AND - clearly when installed in either the 2-way or 1-1ay configuration they are not intended to work exactly the same (the ramp angles on the 2-way are 10° different between forward and backward, and the ramp doesn't exist in the 1-way config). 'twere me, I think I would rather actually have a set of rings that offered the 2-way with two different sets of ramp angles, say the 55/45 of the existing design and maybe a 45/37.5 combo for a less aggressive effect), AND another set of rings with a dedicated 1.5-way opening and a dedicated 1-way opening. The 1.5-way opening would actually have the steeper angle on the overdrive side that causes it to be less pushy than the forward drive angle, like you see in many other diffs. But really - if this Nismo thing is thought out properly and all those surfaces work on each other the way that they need to, who am I to argue?
×
×
  • Create New...