on a 2000 b18c1

190|190|195|190

 

good so long as theyre similar numbers...although i thought gsr engines were suppsed to be 200+ ?

 

VERY good. Mine is 155, 155, 160, 180 on my 102K mi B18B1.

Wanna trade?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by xteg01 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">good so long as theyre similar numbers...although i thought gsr engines were suppsed to be 200+ ?</TD></TR></TABLE>

i thought so too that's why i was kinda worried

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jasonw &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">VERY good. Mine is 155, 155, 160, 180 on my 102K mi B18B1.

Wanna trade?</TD></TR></TABLE>

sure...s2k for a DA...honda's a honda right

 

im not sure about the compression on the GS-R, but i know on the LS, the compression is supposed to be 200 even, just look around, and find out the factory compression, and then you will know if its good or bad....

 

supposely..it's around 200 too...but i just remember something...i forgot to wot it when i had it cranking DOH...how much difference could wot do?

 

i just did my 95 gsr comp. test and i got 195 across the board, so sounds good to me!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LoseRPunKx182 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">on a 2000 b18c1

190|190|195|190</TD></TR></TABLE>

Lol..that's low as all hell. You better retest it and make sure you performed the test correctly. I can't believe some of you are saying that his numbers are normal.

 

well could not having it at wot when testing cause this? that was one thing that slipped my mind when i was testing it

 

how do you guys get numbers like that(seems low to me, although they do seems to have a pretty close reading throughout the cyclinders)...

the test i conducted with my '94 gsr motor spitted out 240, 240, 235, 240.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LoseRPunKx182 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">well could not having it at wot when testing cause this? that was one thing that slipped my mind when i was testing it</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes.

 

ok well atleast i can see it's consistent with all the cyclinders and i know it's low cause i did it wrong.

 

B18c


Borrowed from TI.net

 

 

so what would you do if you have a compression test of 195 195 195 190 across the board????? What would this mean???? is it dangerous???? what would you have to do to get the compression up to 200??

 

think wot could jump me 80psi? lol

 

i think he is fine- its just a used motor - once it dropped below 170 worn rings etc

 

You need to make sure that your gauge is accurate to start with. I have heard cheap gauges can be off by a lot. What's more important is that your number are all close to each other. From that stand point you're lookin good.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mrquimbie &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> What's more important is that your number are all close to each other. </TD></TR></TABLE> and that doesn't mean that if they are all 120 that it's ok though.... but you're numbers are good...

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jasonw &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">VERY good. Mine is 155, 155, 160, 180 on my 102K mi B18B1.

Wanna trade?</TD></TR></TABLE> Whoa... that engine has been neglected and abused I would think... I have a 95 b18b1, and my numbers are 180,175,180,175... I think thats pretty goof for 120k miles on a ten year old car. And I hacve checked them twice with two different gauges because as stated before brands can be off, more so with the cheaper ones. so keep that in mind.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 95IntegraLSR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Whoa... that engine has been neglected and abused I would think...</TD></TR></TABLE>

You are correct sir! Except for the neglected part. Maintenance has been kept up on but, lots of stop and go traffic and lots of time in the upper RPM ranges.

I do need to test on another gauge to be sure about my numbers too.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LoseRPunKx182 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">on a 2000 b18c1

190|190|195|190</TD></TR></TABLE>

I have a 2001 b18c1 and I have 215 across the board...

 

 

all good!

 

Those of you with lower numbers need to realize that a rebuild may be in store soon. If you plan to stay stock drive it into the ground, but if you plan on upgrading choose wisely.