210, 201, 205, 205

not too bad on 95k miles, and a ricer as a previous owner.

 

 

def good numbers for 95k miles

 

ummm....call me what you want....but the man that never asks never knows..


how do you do a compression test....?


is it something you can do yourself......what tools...so on and so forth????

 

Remove your sparkplug cover, remove your spark plugs, screw in the compression tester in place of the plug, and with someone in the car turning the key..... you will get a reading on the device . Repeat for each plug obviously. Thats a basic explanation for ya!

 

thanks

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by B18C-Rsi &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Remove your sparkplug cover, remove your spark plugs, screw in the compression tester in place of the plug, and with someone in the car turning the key..... you will get a reading on the device . Repeat for each plug obviously. Thats a basic explanation for ya!</TD></TR></TABLE>

You forgot: pull fuel pump fuse and have car at WOT

I also recently did a compression test at 105,000 miles. 245, 240, 240, 220


Modified by Mugen Mike at 11:27 AM 7/29/2004

 

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

You forgot: pull fuel pump fuse and have car at WOT

I also recently did a compression test at 105,000 miles. 245, 240, 240, 200 </TD></TR></TABLE>

Those aren't bad #'s b/c anything above 200 is usually a good sign but at the same time, i would keep an eye on that lower compression cylinder just b/c consistency across the board is key !

Edit: I could be talking out of my *** too though.......i have just always thought that!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mugen Mike &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I also recently did a compression test at 105,000 miles. 245, 240, 240, 200 </TD></TR></TABLE>

ouch! whats up with cylinder #4!!!!!

consistancy is more important than the actual # unless they are all rediculously low

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .D2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

ouch! whats up with cylinder #4!!!!!

consistancy is more important than the actual # unless they are all rediculously low</TD></TR></TABLE>

Whoops!! That #4 cylinder should read 220

 

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

Whoops!! That #4 cylinder should read 220 </TD></TR></TABLE>

Well that changes my post above obviously

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .D2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

ouch! whats up with cylinder #4!!!!!

consistancy is more important than the actual # unless they are all rediculously low</TD></TR></TABLE>

I thought i was reading my own post there for a second ............at least we both agree with each other!

 

good numbers.

 

Heck, I'm bored as can be so I'll jack your thread .. here's my numbers .. 250,250,250,253..

Is it true that high lift cams such as JUN3 will cause the compression gauge to read lower than actual compression ??