Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Looking into buying an R34 GTR, had a seller take the car of interest to a reputable workshop of my choice this morning for an inspection.

Compression test results are as follows:

C1 - 145

C2 - 147

C3 - 152

C4 - 148

C5 - 148

C6 - 130

Leak down test results:

C1 - 6.5%

C2 - 6%

C3 - 5%

C4 - 7%

C5 - 9%

C6 - 15%

Now, the motor has been rebuilt and has forgies etc that were done mid 2013 (seller has provided receipts). It has apparently only done ~ 6000kms since rebuild... But obviously I have my concerns.

After speaking with the owner of the shop who did the inspection he ensures me it is a solid example and will give me no grief for daily use. (No track work as it doesn't interest me + I live in the sticks).

Told me it pulls very hard and after performing a leak down test he has narrowed the cause of lower compression in cylinder # 6 down to the rings.

I am sure some of you folks have been through a similar situation in the past so I guess my questions are:

- Should I walk away?

- Should I run away?

- Is the deviation between the first five cylinders to the sixth of serious concern?

Any info/advice/experience will be greatly appreciated and help me make the right decision as these cars are not cheap!

Cheers

Edited by shaunus
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/453786-rb26-compression-test-results/
Share on other sites

  On 12/02/2015 at 11:13 PM, shaunus said:

I had turfed the idea of buying that particular GTR the minute Fats said "walk away"hahaha.

You have to keep in mind that Fatz will probably lowball the guy, snatch the car out from under you and turn it into a track whore or wreck it for profit. Ulterior motives are ulterior! :P

  • Like 1
  On 12/02/2015 at 7:55 AM, GTSBoy said:

Walk away or budget to pull it apart, hone it and re-ring it. It wasn't run in properly.

This is in all probability what has happened. Yes it should get redone - but budget that and if the numbers stack up and the car is still good why not?

Link to car?

http://www.carsales.com.au/private/details/Nissan-Skyline-1999/SSE-AD-3066429/?Cr=4

To be honest mate, spending 50k on a car you'd want it to be near on perfect mechanically. I don't have the time nor patience to be bothered pulling the motor.

  • Like 1

a set of mild cams would drop the comp 30psi on a comp test, if that were the case those numbers would start to become decent..

In most other similar posts everyone is fine with a 10percent variance so why the walk away in this case?

Edited by AngryRB
  On 19/02/2015 at 12:18 PM, AngryRB said:

a set of mild cams would drop the comp 30psi on a comp test, if that were the case those numbers would start to become decent..

In most other similar posts everyone is fine with a 10percent variance so why the walk away in this case?

A set of mild cams should affect all cylinders unless it's a scatter cam for a Mini. Besides, the leakdown results scale perfectly with compression results, indicating that it's all in the rings.

10% variance between cylinders is deemed acceptable for an original engine that's done a lot of miles. Not one that was supposedly recently put together carefully and only done 6000 kays since.

  • Like 1

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 mean, if you were to move the jacking points away from the original location, that is, away from the wheels and closer to the centreline of the car, then it will be more likely to overbalance and tip off the supports. Same as we talked about before. I was talking about moving for-aft. If the sill is bent outward or inward, then the car would obviously look unstraight from the outside. Hopefully that hasn't happened either. Again, you can do comparative measurements from the chassis rails to see if there is much deflection.
    • Can you elaborate what you mean with your first sentence? I meant move as in the bulge kinda seemed like it got pulled "outward" meaning it got pulled down and to the side with the jacking rail itself, so the load bearing bulge now sits lower than usual and is not level with the sill on the other side of the jack point. Either that or the jacking rail just got pushed in a good bit.
    • As well as being risky WRT tipping off anyway. Yeah, I wouldn't expect it to move. Just measure from the rear one to the front one on the good side, then measure that same length on the wrecked side. You will find the notches in the pinchweld, and the jacking pad. Just spray a spot of marker paint or something there.
    • but any other area than the bulge you are talking about will just cave in then? The front driver side is pretty bent so I don't know if that will work the way it is now. I can still kinda make out where that bulge is/was but it looks like the position of it also changed due to all the mistreatment? Hard to tell
    • Absolutely. Look very closely at the photo (of yours) that I took my second snip of. See how the sill is thicker material right behind the pinchweld, where the two notches are? That is the factory reinforced area for lifting. That pad is supposed to carry the weight. The factory jack (go look at it, and how it interfaces with the car at the pinchweld) shows you exactly how the load is carried from the car to the jack to the ground.
×
×
  • Create New...