CRWLR

Your compression is good.

I would chalk any error (high reading) up to one of two things, or a
combination of them. Either you pumped the cylinders up too many times, or
your tester is out of calibration. Either way, you made the same error
across all six cylinders and came up with numbers that arer within spec for
the allowable ------.




"DougW" <post.replies@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:P0lbc.44451$vJ1.35892@okepread01...
> Odd, the one cylinder I expected to be low wasn't
>
> 1 160
> 2 160
> 3 160
> 4 170
> 5 165
> 6 165
>
> That was with the engine "warm" to the touch. Figure
> since I run synthetic it's fairly runny either hot or cold.
>
> If I'm reading the service book correctly 120-150
> is the "normal" range. No way there is that much
> carbon in there. So either my gauge is a POS (could be)
> or the book is wrong.
>
> Nevermind. I just read another section where it says to
> turn the engine over three times. I cranked till the needle
> stopped moving. :/
>
> --
> DougW
>
>

CRWLR

Your compression is good.

I would chalk any error (high reading) up to one of two things, or a
combination of them. Either you pumped the cylinders up too many times, or
your tester is out of calibration. Either way, you made the same error
across all six cylinders and came up with numbers that arer within spec for
the allowable ------.




"DougW" <post.replies@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:P0lbc.44451$vJ1.35892@okepread01...
> Odd, the one cylinder I expected to be low wasn't
>
> 1 160
> 2 160
> 3 160
> 4 170
> 5 165
> 6 165
>
> That was with the engine "warm" to the touch. Figure
> since I run synthetic it's fairly runny either hot or cold.
>
> If I'm reading the service book correctly 120-150
> is the "normal" range. No way there is that much
> carbon in there. So either my gauge is a POS (could be)
> or the book is wrong.
>
> Nevermind. I just read another section where it says to
> turn the engine over three times. I cranked till the needle
> stopped moving. :/
>
> --
> DougW
>
>

CRWLR

Your compression is good.

I would chalk any error (high reading) up to one of two things, or a
combination of them. Either you pumped the cylinders up too many times, or
your tester is out of calibration. Either way, you made the same error
across all six cylinders and came up with numbers that arer within spec for
the allowable ------.




"DougW" <post.replies@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:P0lbc.44451$vJ1.35892@okepread01...
> Odd, the one cylinder I expected to be low wasn't
>
> 1 160
> 2 160
> 3 160
> 4 170
> 5 165
> 6 165
>
> That was with the engine "warm" to the touch. Figure
> since I run synthetic it's fairly runny either hot or cold.
>
> If I'm reading the service book correctly 120-150
> is the "normal" range. No way there is that much
> carbon in there. So either my gauge is a POS (could be)
> or the book is wrong.
>
> Nevermind. I just read another section where it says to
> turn the engine over three times. I cranked till the needle
> stopped moving. :/
>
> --
> DougW
>
>

DougW

L.W. (ßill) ------ III did pass the time by typing:
> Lookin' good. I think the three times is used to make sure the
> battery last long enough to complete the test. Did you open your
> butterfly?

Erm..

crap.

no. :(

That would explain why the engine didn't turn over so easily. heh.

I did remember to disconnect the ignition primary and pull the
fuel pump relay though. :)

--
DougW

DougW

L.W. (ßill) ------ III did pass the time by typing:
> Lookin' good. I think the three times is used to make sure the
> battery last long enough to complete the test. Did you open your
> butterfly?

Erm..

crap.

no. :(

That would explain why the engine didn't turn over so easily. heh.

I did remember to disconnect the ignition primary and pull the
fuel pump relay though. :)

--
DougW

DougW

L.W. (ßill) ------ III did pass the time by typing:
> Lookin' good. I think the three times is used to make sure the
> battery last long enough to complete the test. Did you open your
> butterfly?

Erm..

crap.

no. :(

That would explain why the engine didn't turn over so easily. heh.

I did remember to disconnect the ignition primary and pull the
fuel pump relay though. :)

--
DougW

DougW

L.W. (ßill) ------ III did pass the time by typing:
> Lookin' good. I think the three times is used to make sure the
> battery last long enough to complete the test. Did you open your
> butterfly?

Erm..

crap.

no. :(

That would explain why the engine didn't turn over so easily. heh.

I did remember to disconnect the ignition primary and pull the
fuel pump relay though. :)

--
DougW

DougW

Mike Romain did pass the time by typing:
> You 'can' have that much carbon in it.....
>
> You are the guy with the shitty wires and a miss?

Just one shitty wire and that was on #6. Installed a new
set of wires (thank you lifetime warantee) and it runs like
a top. (slightly wobly, and ticks a bit, but like a top)

> I have opened up more than a few and there can be a lot in there. I did
> the head gasket on mine a while back and decarboned it before hand.
> There were still a couple loose chunks of carbon in it because I didn't
> road run it after the clean and these chunks were close to 1/8" thick,
> more than 1/16" for sure. This engine only had 40K on it.

Wow, that is a lot of carbon buildup! Don't think it's that bad or
with my extra boost I'd be getting a lot of detonation. The plugs
only had a very thin flaky layer of carbon on them. Still too much though.

Probably O2 sensor again. Had this problem before with the sensor
reading just a smidge off but still in spec. Wish there was an easy
way to test those sensors apart from having a scope.

--
DougW

DougW

Mike Romain did pass the time by typing:
> You 'can' have that much carbon in it.....
>
> You are the guy with the shitty wires and a miss?

Just one shitty wire and that was on #6. Installed a new
set of wires (thank you lifetime warantee) and it runs like
a top. (slightly wobly, and ticks a bit, but like a top)

> I have opened up more than a few and there can be a lot in there. I did
> the head gasket on mine a while back and decarboned it before hand.
> There were still a couple loose chunks of carbon in it because I didn't
> road run it after the clean and these chunks were close to 1/8" thick,
> more than 1/16" for sure. This engine only had 40K on it.

Wow, that is a lot of carbon buildup! Don't think it's that bad or
with my extra boost I'd be getting a lot of detonation. The plugs
only had a very thin flaky layer of carbon on them. Still too much though.

Probably O2 sensor again. Had this problem before with the sensor
reading just a smidge off but still in spec. Wish there was an easy
way to test those sensors apart from having a scope.

--
DougW

DougW

Mike Romain did pass the time by typing:
> You 'can' have that much carbon in it.....
>
> You are the guy with the shitty wires and a miss?

Just one shitty wire and that was on #6. Installed a new
set of wires (thank you lifetime warantee) and it runs like
a top. (slightly wobly, and ticks a bit, but like a top)

> I have opened up more than a few and there can be a lot in there. I did
> the head gasket on mine a while back and decarboned it before hand.
> There were still a couple loose chunks of carbon in it because I didn't
> road run it after the clean and these chunks were close to 1/8" thick,
> more than 1/16" for sure. This engine only had 40K on it.

Wow, that is a lot of carbon buildup! Don't think it's that bad or
with my extra boost I'd be getting a lot of detonation. The plugs
only had a very thin flaky layer of carbon on them. Still too much though.

Probably O2 sensor again. Had this problem before with the sensor
reading just a smidge off but still in spec. Wish there was an easy
way to test those sensors apart from having a scope.

--
DougW