Engine Compression

evilmustang · 02-14-2001, 06:31 PM

I did a tune up and decide to perform a engine compresion test. What do you guys think of the results? Is it okay for a 1990 5.0 LX coupe with 120,000 mile engine? Has anyone done this test and whats your results?

Cylinder 1= 150
Cylinder 2= 145
Cylinder 3= 145
Cylinder 4= 145
Cylinder 5= 150
Cylinder 6= 155
Cylinder 7= 150
Cylinder 8= 155

dinomite · 02-14-2001, 10:22 PM

If I did the math right, your lowest cylinders (145) are 93.5% of the highest (155) cylinders, I don't know exactly how to interpret that, though I believe that the dogma is that for a performance engine it should be no more than the high 90's, 75 percent for your average car. From my low wisdom, I would say you are pretty good.

02-15-2001, 12:04 AM

Your numbers are real close to what mine was when I checked the stock engine in my 89 last summer(100k miles). I did have one cylinder that was 160 though. From what I remember, they are supposed to be within 10% of each other.. looks like your ok.

mustangII460 · 02-15-2001, 02:27 AM

10 % of from best to worst is correct.

Since this this post is about compression.

If you get a real low cylinder,say 100lbs, try this.

Squirt some oil into the cylinder and crank it over. If the compression goes up your rings are worn. If nothing changes, your valve/head has the problem.

My .02$

02-14-2001, 06:31 PM	#1
evilmustang Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: compton, CA, USA Posts: 63	Engine Compression I did a tune up and decide to perform a engine compresion test. What do you guys think of the results? Is it okay for a 1990 5.0 LX coupe with 120,000 mile engine? Has anyone done this test and whats your results? Cylinder 1= 150 Cylinder 2= 145 Cylinder 3= 145 Cylinder 4= 145 Cylinder 5= 150 Cylinder 6= 155 Cylinder 7= 150 Cylinder 8= 155

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Cobra R Engine 5.4L V8	SkammyManX	Modular Madness	5	04-28-2005 11:25 AM
1968 engine numbers, 289 or 302?	andybud	Classic Mustangs	5	09-11-2003 12:14 PM
raced a Supra Twin Turbo	Stang35th	Stang Stories	63	08-23-2003 12:36 AM
Rebuilt Engine Problems	sleeperstang	Classic Mustangs	6	05-08-2003 10:19 AM
Very bad experience with Engine Dynamics of San Jose CA	JAGraff	Racer's Club House	0	05-12-1999 02:27 AM

02-14-2001, 10:22 PM	#2
dinomite The Dude Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 1,262	If I did the math right, your lowest cylinders (145) are 93.5% of the highest (155) cylinders, I don't know exactly how to interpret that, though I believe that the dogma is that for a performance engine it should be no more than the high 90's, 75 percent for your average car. From my low wisdom, I would say you are pretty good.

02-15-2001, 12:04 AM	#3
rbatson Guest Posts: n/a	Your numbers are real close to what mine was when I checked the stock engine in my 89 last summer(100k miles). I did have one cylinder that was 160 though. From what I remember, they are supposed to be within 10% of each other.. looks like your ok.

02-15-2001, 02:27 AM	#4
mustangII460 Factoy Five Roadster Join Date: May 2000 Location: Sevier Co,Tennessee Posts: 1,681	10 % of from best to worst is correct. Since this this post is about compression. If you get a real low cylinder,say 100lbs, try this. Squirt some oil into the cylinder and crank it over. If the compression goes up your rings are worn. If nothing changes, your valve/head has the problem. My .02$