Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 13:49:42 -0500
Reply-To: John Rodgers <j_rodgers@CHARTER.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: John Rodgers <j_rodgers@CHARTER.NET>
Subject: Re: Interpretting Compression Values- 88GL?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
You asked what hole to through money into? Start with an oil change -
that 10W40 is way to light for an 88GL. I have one. You need dino oil
20W50 or Mobil1 15W50 Synthetic. I recently switched to Mobil One , but
havn't the experience yet to make a report. Engine was rebuilt and has
not reached 50K yet, so I switched from the 20W50 to the Mobil 15W50.
But the 20W50 is the oil for the WBX unless you are in an extremely cold
climate. Also, by want to be sure you have the right oil filter - a
Mahle filter. it has the correct relief valve spring tension in it to
prevent lifter bleed down whn the engine is stopped. This filter
eliminates/reduces the tendency towards Vanagon Lifter Clatter Syndrome.
Sorry, can't help about the compression probs.
Regards,
John Rodgers
88 GL/2.1L Driver for 5 years now - 85GL/1.9L prior
Matt Sutton wrote:
>Hi Folks,
> Did a compression check today, and need some help finding what these
>numbers really mean. Here's the results:
>Cylinder #1: 125-130 psi (9 bar)
> #2: 145 psi (10 bar)
> #3: 140 psi (almost 10 bar)
> #4: 145 psi (10 bar)
> Test done per Bentley, car fully warmed up, accelerator floored. Test tool
>was a universal compression tester from NAPA (not easy to use, but
>re-checked results for cylinder #1 a couple times.) Cranking/rise times
>pretty even.
> Other info: 88GL(manufactured 87), 116k on engine. Exhaust/cat
>non-stock, and in poor shape (see later note). There were some long standing
>FI problems, now fixed. 950 miles since last oil change(10w40), very little
>to no oil consumption (have topped off once), and the oil itself looks
>pretty clean. Plugs look similar, no fouling. 22.5 mpg on last long trip,
>though this is mostly an urban daily driver (Brooklyn NY).
> I'm shopping for a new exhaust system, and did the comp. test to figure
>if I'd be throwing away resources on a not-long-to-live engine. Right now
>I'm pleasantly surprised by cylinders #2-4, concerned by the unevenness of
>#1. How bad is this? What causes and cures? Which hole do I stuff money
>into?
>TIA
>-Matt Sutton
>
>
>
| 
