Honda dealership did compression test my 2001 ITR and all four cylinder had 195 psi. Is this good or bad. thanks

 

if it's straight across, it's fine.

compression tools are not all equal. some read higher and some read lower.

 

what he said

 

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=793978

Just out of curiosity... Why didn't you take the Ideas/ comments posted here and apply them to your question?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by thk &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">if it's straight across, it's fine.

compression tools are not all equal. some read higher and some read lower.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I gotta disagree...I wouldn't touch a car that new with compression that low.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by itr 00 0108 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I gotta disagree...I wouldn't touch a car that new with compression that low.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Disagree all you want. Unless it's some atrocious number like low 150s, it's all relative.

I mean, my compression scores were in the 245s. That's definitely out of the norm too but it can be attributed to the tool.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by thk &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Disagree all you want. Unless it's some atrocious number like low 150s, it's all relative.

I mean, my compression scores were in the 245s. That's definitely out of the norm too but it can be attributed to the tool. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Yours are higher...which is fine...his are lower, which isn't good IMO...anything below 200 for a Type R is getting down there.

Obviously we have different standards.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by itr 00 0108 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I gotta disagree...I wouldn't touch a car that new with compression that low.</TD></TR></TABLE>

How do you know the gauges are calibrated properly?

If there's a concern, do a leakdown test.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by itr 00 0108 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I gotta disagree...I wouldn't touch a car that new with compression that low.</TD></TR></TABLE>


the best way to test it is using a different compression gauges.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

How do you know the gauges are calibrated properly?

If there's a concern, do a leakdown test.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I don't...so whats your point? I could ask that about every compression test...all I know is the range that the car should be in, and 195 is below that range.

Why am I being attacked for my personal preferences? Get real.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by itr 00 0108 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I don't...so whats your point? I could ask that about every compression test...all I know is the range that the car should be in, and 195 is below that range.

Why am I being attacked for my personal preferences? Get real.</TD></TR></TABLE>

THAT low?? lol, its WITHIN spec.

 

I'd first find out if they did the test properly

1) Warm engine
2) Open throttle

John

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by itr 00 0108 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't...so whats your point? I could ask that about every compression test...all I know is the range that the car should be in, and 195 is below that range.</TD></TR></TABLE>

And what does the helms say about compression test spec?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why am I being attacked for my personal preferences?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Because your "personal preferences" are absolute horseshit and have no rhyme, reason or tech to back them up with.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

And what does the helms say about compression test spec?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

It says 195 is within spec.

 

Minimum of 135, Nominal 199, Maximum Variance 28.

Page 3-2 of the 98-01 Integra Helms Manual.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Because your "personal preferences" are absolute horseshit and have no rhyme, reason or tech to back them up with.</TD></TR></TABLE>

agreed.. personal preferences do not necessarily equal what the service manual says..

 

For all those people including I who get 200+ equally how does that work... are we doing something wrong when the range is lower?

 

That is the "Nominal" value.

There is not a "Maximum" listed in the service manual.

Nominal = normal
Minimum = your ***** gonna blow up soon

 

Anything above 130 Honda defines as "nominal". Also, Honda says there shouldn't be a variance greater than 28 points between each of the cylinders.

Just to give you something to compare to, my 94 GSR motor with 99k miles had 195 comp across the board and ran a 15.0 completely stock so that's not a terrible number.

My R motor with 20k miles tested 240 240 240 243

 

ok, thanks

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Because your "personal preferences" are absolute horseshit and have no rhyme, reason or tech to back them up with.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Dude, you are absolute ***....case closed...it's people like you that make this board suck compared to others....people like you have such a elitist attitude and no reason for it.

There are ways to be tactful when people are wrong...you chose to be rude...great guy!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by itr 00 0108 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Dude, you are absolute ***....case closed...it's people like you that make this board suck compared to others....people like you have such a elitist attitude and no reason for it.

There are ways to be tactful when people are wrong...you chose to be rude...great guy!</TD></TR></TABLE>

Shall I go dig up your posts? You don't help this board at all.

Elitist?? LOL, look in the mirror.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by itr 00 0108 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">There are ways to be tactful when people are wrong...you chose to be rude...great guy!</TD></TR></TABLE>

You were called out on being wrong and attributed it to personal preference. I did not attack you. I asked a question and proposed an additional test.

You continually post information as fact when it is wrong. And most of your posts have a very abrasive/negative attitude. Its really gotten old.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by itr 00 0108 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
There are ways to be tactful when people are wrong...you chose to be rude...great guy!</TD></TR></TABLE>

you spout incorrect knowledge as fact and then challenge people when they tell you you are incorrect.. you expect that they're going to be nice? not here, buddy..

 

Wow did this ever get ugly. Anyway, to get back on topic, a general rule that can be applied is that as long as the numbers are all within 10%, then they're just fine.