Jump to content
SAU Community

Compression Test Results


roys33
 Share

Recommended Posts

sounds like that motor has had alot of floggings in its life..

i have 170000ks and still have 170psi...

its like dropping your compression ratio down to 7.6:1, like dropping in some massive cams and loosing the bottem end. why would that be ok? even if they are even

Edited by SliverS2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

not scientifically, more estimating...

eg. my rb25 has 9:1 compression and it has 170psi

my old rb20 supposed to have 8.5 and it had 150psi

my old cordia had 7.6:1 and had 150psi , then after cam drop in , went down to 120psi

so estimating from above, all engines were healthy with moderate km's, 120psi must be quite low

must be a big difference between 170psi and 120psi..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

teach me wise one... 2 rb25's one has 170psi , one has 120psi

where did the 50psi go? if you were going to buy a motor for your car.. which would you be buying?

I'd buy the one with 120psi coz I can jam 60 pound of boost up its arse more easily

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes i sent it to him with my magic wond and magic hat..

obviously there is some error in the instruments, but i would like to think that all these sorts of equipment are tested to be within certain limits .. 50psi would be a rather MASSIVE error wouldnt it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd buy the one with 120psi coz I can jam 60 pound of boost up its arse more easily

i thought you would run from that cause it would be ready to blow up .. never heard anyone recommend to push a motor with more boost if its on its last legs.. usually tell you its a bad idea..is that so you can rebuild it for some $$$ hahaha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i thought you would run from that cause it would be ready to blow up .. never heard anyone recommend to push a motor with more boost if its on its last legs.. usually tell you its a bad idea..is that so you can rebuild it for some $$$ hahaha

I'll explain it better in a minute when I'm not driv.....umm....doing stuff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you get a compression test, the results are taken statically. That is why you will hear a lot of people refer to them as static compression results.

Three guys get a compression test done, Guy A has 165psi even on all 6, Guy B has 125psi on all 6 and Guy C has between 140-170psi on all 6.

The engines for both A and B are healthy engines. C is a dud.

What happens when a compression test is done is the engine is turned over by starter motor and is not being moved by its own power. This static result can give you an indication of how healthy an engine is but it does not give you any indication of what it will do when the engine is running. A hundred more things happen dynamically when the piston is in motion and under power of combustion. The rings will seal A LOT better and everything is moving MUCH faster so leak down past the rings is virtually no more than when it was standing still.

The reason C is a dud is because one cylinder has 170 and another has 140. The variation is far too high so therefore you can determine the engine has a problem.

If all results are even but low, it can be due to a number of things. Worn exhaust valve guide, carbon build up on valves or ports, lower tension on rings, piston to bore wear etc etc. It shows the engine is aging but still healthy because there is no variation. If its a worn exhaust valve guide, on a static comp test the valve will seat in a totally different position every time and your low results could be due to that. It doesn't mean the engine is going to explode.

We have seen RB26's with 120psi on all 6 making 600hp at the wheels on 30psi boost and 2 years later.....still going strong. Still has 120psi on all 6.

Of course we have to set some limits in our mind about how far is too far for a low result to become a bad result. For a straight 6 that's 8.5/9:1 comp ratio generally I use 120 as a lowest limit before telling someone the engine is had it.

For an Rb20 that was the lower comp ratio you might accept 100-110 as a lowest result.

Back on the worn guide thing, the valve will seal much better when in fast motion or if the spring is improved it could actually clear away any carbon or make itself a fresher seat. That is possibly why you saw a higher result when fitting your larger cams. Camshaft size won't effect static compression results unless the cause of your comp low result is due to valve train deficiencies.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh and I forgot to add that 50psi is nothing compared to the 1500-2000psi your combustion chamber sees at peak power and cylinder pressure.

Engine A might have 2000psi whereas Engine B might have 1850-1950psi due to his lower static result. Both cars will make within 5-10 HP of one another and potentially live just as long as one another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share




  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • There are a few variables here, some are relevant but not critical (IMHO) to help answer your question. The two major things: 1) Ignoring anything to do with forced induction - all engines have their own natural torque curve, and it will ALWAYS roll over higher in the rpm.  There is a fixed relationship between power and torque.  When dealing with kw and nm, the relationship between them is roughly: kw = (rpm * nm) / 9549 nm = (kw / rpm) * 9549 The peak torque of an engine (without boost) will typically climb until somewhere nearish the middle of it's operating rev range, give or take a bit - then start dropping again.   The nearer the minimum and maximum rpm of the engine the steeper that drop off tends to be. 2) Boost simply increases the density of the air going into the engine, which inflates the torque at that point.  The ramp up in the torque curve you see on a turbo engine is due to the boost rising, but it's essentially just multiplying the torque you'd see if it was naturally aspirated.  The roll over you see at the end will typically be what would have always happened with the engine, whether it was naturally aspirated or turbocharged.   If the torque never started dropping then power would climb infinitely. The cool thing about this is you absolutely can tune the power delivery to suit the needs of the owner and/or the limitations of the car, and I regularly do this.    With modern turbos we've got to the point where a setup that someone may run well over 20psi of boost with could actually reach target boost well under 4000rpm if the tuner/owner WANTED to - and a lot of people seem to do this when there is actually no realistic benefit, generally it just adds a massive amount of strain to the engine and drivetrain and often actually makes the car harder to drive. As a general rule I tend to tune the boost curves for cars I tune to reach a "useful" torque level through the rev range and will often end up with a curve that ramps hard to a point, then creeps for the rest of the rev range - not to make the boost curve "soft" as such, but more to make sure its neither laggy nor pointlessly violent in it's delivery.   There have been cars I've tuned to be almost like a centrifugal supercharger (or naturally-aspirated-ish) where they actually only hit like 8psi of boost before opening the gate, then ramp up the next 10psi over the rev range... if the car is "loose enough" to drive. On the flip side I've tuned a car that had stock cams and the engine's natural torque curve fell over HARD in the higher rpm and resulted in a slightly awkward power curve to work with, in that case I actually started ramping up boost to boost torque in a way to offset the engines "NA" torque drop off... at peak rpm actually running a good 5psi+ more boost that what the "flat curve" would have defined.  This gave the owner an extra 500rpm or so of useable rev range, and had a fairly solid impact on times he was running at motorsport events due to being able to hold gears a bit longer and also falling into a more useful part of the rev range in the following gears. Here's an example of an RB in a GTSt I've done the "softened" boost curve to not pointlessly ramp straight to the max boost target early in the rpm, but still made sure it builds useful boost.  If you went in the car you'd not guess at all that the boost curve was doing anything "weird", it feels like it spools immediately and accelerates relentlessly (traction dependent) and holds to max rpm.   I don't know if you'd guess what the boost curve was doing by driving the car, or even looking at the dyno plot... but imho it suits the combination.  
    • therefore on the first examples, as we see, changing cams (graph 2) influences the quantity of torque at high revs its OK for me. so a tuner can act on the wastegate via the boost controller to increase the boost at high revs? on the last example, the boost does not decrease ok, but the torque does. this can come from cams etc etc ok. but on the other curves the boost is not constant, it increases, this is what I find strange to my mind. even more so if it comes from the relief valve. sorry I'm very new don't blame me. in my mind I couldn't imagine how the boost could be higher after the spool  
    • right, but fundamentally, for a given mechanical setup, you are either using all the torque (and therefore power) it will give, or you are choosing to run it less efficiently. Many tuners will have a practice of identifying peak available torque and then winding it back a couple of % for safety, but unless you are working around a very specific issue like a weak gearbox, there is nothing to be gained by making 20 or 30% less than the engine can
    • You can manipulate the torque delivery by ramping in boost gently, then throwing it all in after peak torque to keep the torque flat. It's nothing magical.
    • Tuning the wastegate to do it. That is all. Most people want the boost to not fall off like the most recent example. Those also look like dyno runs with an Auto/Torque converter setup, which does fun things to the graph. The boost tapers down like that because the turbo cannot supply the same amount of air at 7000rpm that it can at 3000 in terms of PSI. That, or the tuner has decided that it tapering off like that is what someone chose to do. IF you have a wastegate that can't bleed enough air to slow the turbine, and IF that turbo can flow enough air to feed the engine at high RPM, you get 'boost creep' which is a rise of boost pressure beyond what you are capable of controlling and/or want. None of these show symptoms of that, but if you had a run that was 20psi at 3000rpm, and 27psi at 7000rpm, it could be an example of that. Or simply that the person wanted boost later for their own reasons... The dyno graphs don't always show the full context.
×
×
  • Create New...