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

Compression test results.

  • Thread starter Thread starter strtrcr50
  • Start date Start date Feb 9, 2008

strtrcr50

New Member
Jun 21, 2006
0
4
0
Previously from Dirty Jerzey exit 7a
Feb 9, 2008
#1
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #1
What are acceptable compression test results?
I have
1 - 185 psi
2 - 190 psi
3 - 195 psi
4 - 198 psi
5 - 183 psi
6 - 187 psi
7 - 193 psi
8 - 195 psi
Is this ok?
 
3

347HO

Member
Jan 13, 2008
462
2
16
Seattle
Feb 9, 2008
#2
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #2
Probably need your camshaft events
Where you dialed in your camshaft
On a stock engine, no new parts?
 

strtrcr50

New Member
Jun 21, 2006
0
4
0
Previously from Dirty Jerzey exit 7a
Feb 9, 2008
#3
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #3
stock engine. hci to go on soon.
 
3

347HO

Member
Jan 13, 2008
462
2
16
Seattle
Feb 9, 2008
#4
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #4
strtrcr50 said:
stock engine. hci to go on soon.
Click to expand...

Your numbers are for a lack of a better word... extremely high.
May I ask how you cranked the motor over to get these readings?

When "hand" cranked CCW two complete turns I would expect between 160psi to 180psi on a well maintained 5oh.
 

Fast63

New Member
Sep 20, 2007
717
0
0
Feb 9, 2008
#5
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #5
maybe his gauge reads high. Either way, good numbers because they are relatively close together in reading. Slap on the HCI
 

strtrcr50

New Member
Jun 21, 2006
0
4
0
Previously from Dirty Jerzey exit 7a
Feb 9, 2008
#6
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #6
spun the motor on the starter with the accelerator pedal all the way down.
 
3

347HO

Member
Jan 13, 2008
462
2
16
Seattle
Feb 9, 2008
#7
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #7
Fast63 said:
maybe his gauge reads high. Either way, good numbers because they are relatively close together in reading. Slap on the HCI
Click to expand...

So if you use your starter to crank the motor and you get high numbers, then you turn it over by hand and you get 90's and 80's... that's good because they're close together?
But this test does not know whether it's rings or valvetrain, so in that respect I agree with you... install the heads, cam and intake and do it again, correctly to see where you are at.
 

795.0pacecar

lover of pudgy polygamists
Jul 11, 2003
480
0
17
Senoia, GA
Feb 9, 2008
#8
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #8
Those are very good numbers, I have seen them that high before, in fact, mine were in the 180s-190s and my car runs like a champ and doesn't burn a drop of oil.
 
3

347HO

Member
Jan 13, 2008
462
2
16
Seattle
Feb 9, 2008
#9
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #9
795.0pacecar said:
Those are very good numbers, I have seen them that high before, in fact, mine were in the 180s-190s and my car runs like a champ and doesn't burn a drop of oil.
Click to expand...

Okay... those numbers are ON par with an almost "full out" race engine with near to zero miles on it.
These numbers only tell me the engine is being cranked over with the starter, and more than two complete cycles when results are documented... or the engine has an aftermarket camshaft or heads or gaskets or a re-indexed camshaft.

When doing diagnostic tests on the engine... they are only effective when the tests are done correctly.

If you've done this test correctly... then you have the first "used" stock engine I have heard with these numbers
and that aint a bad thing either.
 

dcurtis

10 Year Member
Jan 19, 2006
688
7
39
Feb 9, 2008
#10
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #10
looks good to me
 

795.0pacecar

lover of pudgy polygamists
Jul 11, 2003
480
0
17
Senoia, GA
Feb 9, 2008
#11
  • Feb 9, 2008
  • #11
I've never seen a stock mustang with numbers quite that high, but I have seen as high as 170-180 on a stock mustang. My engine obviously isn't stock.

Compression tests are done with the engine warm, spark plugs out, throttle open, and using the starter.
 

Fast63

New Member
Sep 20, 2007
717
0
0
Feb 10, 2008
#12
  • Feb 10, 2008
  • #12
347HO said:
So if you use your starter to crank the motor and you get high numbers, then you turn it over by hand and you get 90's and 80's... that's good because they're close together?
But this test does not know whether it's rings or valvetrain, so in that respect I agree with you... install the heads, cam and intake and do it again, correctly to see where you are at.
Click to expand...

Honeslty, I don't know why anyone would turn the engine over by hand to check for compression results. You don't run the engine that slow, it idles approximately how fast the starter can turn it. Plus the starter is consistent, doing it by hand is not.

No compression test ever can say if rings or valvetrain are bad, only that there is a loss of compression. You need to do a leakdown test to find what the problem is. The psi being close between all the cylinders means that either all your cylinders have a problem, or none of them do. With numbers that high, basically it means none of them do.

As far as the psi, I think race engines have well over 200 if they are naturally aspirated. It also does depend on the cam as previously mentioned. My dad owned a comet when he was young that had a 260 with 220psi because of his pop up pistons. Total street car though. My 1985 5.0 had 110psi stock, and the book said that is normal. WHen I upped the compression, I am only getting 130 now, but I know there are no problems with my engine and that is normal psi for it.

The "correct" way to test compression is as strtrcr50 said, turn the starter with the gas pedal all the way down. Make sure you remove the coil wire first!!!!
 
3

347HO

Member
Jan 13, 2008
462
2
16
Seattle
Feb 10, 2008
#13
  • Feb 10, 2008
  • #13
Fast63 said:
Honeslty, I don't know why anyone would turn the engine over by hand to check for compression results. You don't run the engine that slow, it idles approximately how fast the starter can turn it. Plus the starter is consistent, doing it by hand is not.

No compression test ever can say if rings or valvetrain are bad, only that there is a loss of compression. You need to do a leakdown test to find what the problem is. The psi being close between all the cylinders means that either all your cylinders have a problem, or none of them do. With numbers that high, basically it means none of them do.

As far as the psi, I think race engines have well over 200 if they are naturally aspirated. It also does depend on the cam as previously mentioned. My dad owned a comet when he was young that had a 260 with 220psi because of his pop up pistons. Total street car though. My 1985 5.0 had 110psi stock, and the book said that is normal. WHen I upped the compression, I am only getting 130 now, but I know there are no problems with my engine and that is normal psi for it.

The "correct" way to test compression is as strtrcr50 said, turn the starter with the gas pedal all the way down. Make sure you remove the coil wire first!!!!
Click to expand...

See... this is one example of someone who "assembles" and engine and another who "builds" an engine.
I'm not saying anyone elses method is wrong... it's just not correct in my opinion.
As I and probably many others do when building an engine, nothing is taken for granted and no measurement or clearance goes unchecked.
You can be sure I will check my final assembly of my build and crank it over by hand and check multiple items. One of them being cranking psi. During the build other items checked are PTV, roller tip to valve stem alignment, crank to block clearance, rod cap to block clearance, rotational torque are only a few... there are many more.
Those of you who wait till the engine is installed... well then it's too late when you have something wrong.
And anyone bringing up the subject that the engine is already installed and has miles on it... yep, I still crank it by hand. This way I KNOW where I am from where I WAS.
Again, not saying you're wrong... there are just different ways getting to the same goal, and some methods are better than others.
 

Fast63

New Member
Sep 20, 2007
717
0
0
Feb 10, 2008
#14
  • Feb 10, 2008
  • #14
347HO said:
See... this is one example of someone who "assembles" and engine and another who "builds" an engine.
Click to expand...

It is ignorant to say my example is of someone who "assembles" an engine. I have "built" my own and "assembled" my own before. I have checked all the things you listed before myself as well as other things. I just think it is overkill to check compression before the engine is in the car because if you REALLY ARE meticulous about checking things, knowing that the rings, valves, and gaskets, etc are in good shape, means you know your compression will be fine. I don't even check compression on an engine that I built or assembled unless there is a problem with the way it runs or I just want to know how many psi I have.

I still do not see the point of testing it by cranking it by hand. You turn it so slow that the compression is bleeding out through the ring gaps while you are turning it.
 
3

347HO

Member
Jan 13, 2008
462
2
16
Seattle
Feb 10, 2008
#15
  • Feb 10, 2008
  • #15
Fast63 said:
It is ignorant to say my example is of someone who "assembles" an engine. I have "built" my own and "assembled" my own before. I have checked all the things you listed before myself as well as other things. I just think it is overkill to check compression before the engine is in the car because if you REALLY ARE meticulous about checking things, knowing that the rings, valves, and gaskets, etc are in good shape, means you know your compression will be fine. I don't even check compression on an engine that I built or assembled unless there is a problem with the way it runs or I just want to know how many psi I have.

I still do not see the point of testing it by cranking it by hand. You turn it so slow that the compression is bleeding out through the ring gaps while you are turning it.
Click to expand...

My point is in your post above.
You will not know your rings, valves or much anything else is correct till you have the engine installed. Not the best time to find something is amiss.
If you've never made mistakes or overlook small details with all the engines you've "built" over the years... you're doing very well.
Myself... I cannot claim that perfection.

I realize this has not much to do with an engine installed from factory and "we" going into it after the fact.

The method I described allows you to check compression numbers down the road, and compare them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
01 mustang 3.8 fuel pressure issue
  • Mhaley2006
  • May 29, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
325
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Aug 9, 2026
JohnKay
J
Forced Induction Total Timing under boost
  • Dontknowchit
  • Aug 27, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
2
Views
364
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Aug 28, 2025
Dontknowchit
Resolved 93 Mustang 5.0 - Cranks but does not start
  • dan50
  • Jul 18, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
6
Views
314
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 18, 2026
dan50
D
Engine 85 GT Backfires through Carb
  • DienstXIV
  • Oct 3, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
19
Views
815
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Oct 7, 2025
85GTStangGuy
5
Resolved Code 70?? KOEO
  • 5.0-5MT
  • Jun 23, 2024
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
17
Views
2K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Aug 6, 2024
General karthief
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?