anthonym Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 I want to see how down we are on the original.Anthony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revilla Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 I think those results you showed me looked pretty healthy to be honest! But let's see what other people have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthonym Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 They are an average of 10% down on two years previously. Last refresh was 2010 I think, so hence wishing to learn the original numbers to get an idea of the rate of loss.1 -10% being 206 : 1862 -13% being 210 : 1823 - 16% being 220 : 1844 - 19% being 215 : 175from 28/6/17 to 9/8/19I note that the further they are from the front, the more the loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revilla Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 In my experience the results can vary quite a bit between different gauges, test conditions etc. so the absolute numbers should be taken with a bit of a pinch of salt. You are more looking for the differences between cylinders to identify obvious issues, but clearly that won't pick up a general wear and year issue across them all. Your No 4 is a little bit down but only about 5% relative to the others. 10% would be more worrying. Out of interest 1) In what order did you test the cylinders? 2) How long did it take you to complete the test, i.e. roughly ow much time elapsed between testing the first and last cylinders and 3) Was the engine cranking as fast at the end of the test as it was at the start, or was the battery beginning to tire? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SM25T Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 Block cooling steadily during the testing ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthonym Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 1- 43212-I guess 4 minutes, maybe less3-just the same.doesn’t mention it here http://www.stevecarter.com/R500/R500main.htm though compression ratio is 11.5 : 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now