• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

Compression Test Results, what do you think?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lynx331
  • Start date Start date Oct 17, 2004
L

Lynx331

New Member
Jan 5, 2004
308
0
0
Chicago IL
Oct 17, 2004
#1
  • Oct 17, 2004
  • #1
I finnaly did a Compression test on my 87 GT. The car has 132,000 Miles on it. Heres a picture with the results for each cylinder? Is this good?
 

Attachments

  • Compression Test.webp
    8.1 KB · Views: 261

tomst9

Founding Member
Jun 17, 2002
851
0
0
Bethlehem Pa
Oct 17, 2004
#2
  • Oct 17, 2004
  • #2
i would say thats pretty good. They are all within 20% of eachother.
tom
 

90mustangGT

I felt sorry for girls because
Founding Member
Jan 15, 2002
2,773
17
89
Dallas, GA
Oct 18, 2004
#3
  • Oct 18, 2004
  • #3
1-6 look real good, 170-182psi, but 7-8 at only 100, that's way more than good. Your engine is alive, you only need 70psi for combustion but your really getting close. Put a teaspoon of oil in the cylinder and test those two again and see if the number changes much, if it does that probally means it the rings, otherwise check to see if you have a valve related or gasket related problem.
 

HISSIN50

"How long does it take to get help in here?
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
31,179
33
129
Oct 18, 2004
#4
  • Oct 18, 2004
  • #4
all 8 look awesome - 12 psi difference from high to low is great.

what Jason is referring to in his post is the wet test i talked about in your other thread on doing compression tests. i would bet all the cylinders would go up very similar amounts with your numbers (if you had a low cylinder, the wet test helps isolate where the leak is).
 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master
Apr 10, 2002
9,039
6
79
Charlotte, NC
Oct 18, 2004
#5
  • Oct 18, 2004
  • #5
90 Mustang - I think you read the data incorrectly. All between 170 and 182 - 7% spread; and most of them between 175 and 180. Looks awesome.
 

TrickStang37

New Member
Oct 17, 2004
292
0
0
Oct 18, 2004
#6
  • Oct 18, 2004
  • #6
never seen a real tight motor with good compression #'s make more power than a motor with lower #'s. as stated above, as long as their within about 20% theyre fine.
 
L

Lynx331

New Member
Jan 5, 2004
308
0
0
Chicago IL
Oct 18, 2004
#7
  • Oct 18, 2004
  • #7
kewl, thanks guys
 
8

87'GTstang

New Member
Feb 16, 2004
1,025
0
0
Oct 18, 2004
#8
  • Oct 18, 2004
  • #8
TrickStang37 said:
never seen a real tight motor with good compression #'s make more power than a motor with lower #'s. as stated above, as long as their within about 20% theyre fine.
Click to expand...
The higher the compression, then the more the "power" from the combustion is efficient had stays in the combustion chamber percentage wise. By definiton the tighter the engine then the higher the compression numbers should be. By all means, the better the compression then the more power the engine will produce. Each engine has a given minimum compression needed to turn over so it will vary. I believe the 5.0 and many others is at 100 psi, so yes, those numbers are very good!
 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master
Apr 10, 2002
9,039
6
79
Charlotte, NC
Oct 18, 2004
#9
  • Oct 18, 2004
  • #9
Not to take the thread in a different direction - but you have to be careful not to read too much into cranking compression numbers. While they do provide a relative snap-shot of how things are between the cylinders, the type of cam in the car makes a HUGE difference on the cranking compression numbers. The more overlap, the less psi on a crank-test. While static compression ratio impacts the numbers, two engines with equally well-sealing and integrous bottom ends can end up with drastically different cranking compression numbers based on different static CR and camshaft overlap. In fact the one with less CR and a milder cam can have HIGHER numbers than the one with more CR and a cam with more overlap. So don't run too far too fast with what those numbers mean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Engine Questions on compression test results
  • dqureshi06
  • Jan 6, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
5
Views
386
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jan 7, 2025
Noobz347
M
Misfire
  • Mike3
  • May 30, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
1
Views
64
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 30, 2026
Mike3
M
H
Ongoing Battle With Hydraulic Lifters
  • hailer06
  • Jun 8, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
137
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 9, 2026
Noobz347
L
Engine Why won't the motor start if I have spark and fuel
  • LeviAnderson
  • Nov 20, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
386
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Nov 20, 2025
AeroCoupe
A
1987 5.0 speed density Foxbody crank no start
  • Alan2204
  • May 23, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
10
Views
152
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 30, 2026
Mcmahst
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?