In that case, what's 7.6 @ 300 rpm normalised to 250rpm or 260rpm? Wouldn't it be even lower then?

A single low face is a big deal not 'extremely healthy' when looking at all the numbers, sure if you blindly take the average, it's great . Assuming it's a sticky side seal is a bit of stretch too. Would you recommend buying the car with those uneven readings?

 

This all started when the people were saying the car at the beginning of this thread was a dud. That's what I said was acceptable. So are you saying you agree with that?

 

I agree with you. It was a ported engine but I still think it should have scored higher with only 9000 miles on it. That's what the rebuilder told me and when on posted on the UK forums, others said it was ok but I stand corrected after this.

 

Just doing my bit.... and I am horrible with useless expenditure... I hafta watch that... I might be laid off soon!!

 

Here it is in a visual comparison to mine.



You be the judge.

 

I think you made my point there. "Cars for sale NOT healthy cars". Yes, many cars for sale are for sale specifically because they are unhealthy. That doesn't mean that the unhealthiness (high 6s) is acceptable, it isn't.

Part of the problem here is Gravey's typo (no seriously, I keep wanting to edit your post Gravey... please fix!)


Actually, yes. That low of mileage, a sticking seal can be corrected without anything expensive, so no, it isn't a big deal. I'd love to have an engine that good.

I don't quite agree with either of you. I'd not want to accept those numbers, but at some level, and at the right price, I could. It passes though, so it isn't an outright dud.

 

Sorry Pearl... this better?

 

That's the opposite of what he said.

 

"As I said before, I'm talking about cars for sale, NOT cars with issues." is his exact quote.

My point is that cars for sale ARE cars with issues

 

Yep, definitely confused now on what numbers I should accept for my prospective RX8!

 

Can you not see the pic of the test? I admit I confused the issue here. Those values ARE my normalized values. The values at 300 RPM were 8.5, 8.6, 7.9.


Sorry Mario!

 

Look at the bright side, you'll have good compression scores on paper when you have to sell it after losing your job.

 

Ideally, 7.5s and higher when normalized.

Gravey was just being confusing because he posted the normalized values, but kept in parenthesis the non-normalized RPM values, suggesting that those were his non-normalized numbers.

 

LMAO Big C.... you are such a jerk...

 

Jus tryin to help, bro.

 

You wanna buy it? it's yours for $50,000!

 

$50k Canadian?
What, like $1200 U.S.?

 

Ah, okay. Interesting.

Does no one ever sell an RX-8 unless it's having compression-related issues? I mean, I'm sure there's a ton of overlap between "failing" and "for sale", but I can't imagine it's anywhere near 100%.

 

Nah I think it's more like $99.98, might be a little off though....

 

Yeah, it's definitely not 100%, there is an exception to every rule. But there is definitely a strong bias toward dead engine RX-8s on for sale lots. The reason is simple... people dump the car hoping to foist the problem off on some unsuspecting buyer.

Having just spent months hunting for an RX-8 without failing compression and finally throwing in the towel and buying back my original RX-8 that I knew still had good compression (because I had tested it myself only 5,000 miles prior) ... Well, I only actually paid to have 4 RX-8s tested, 3 failed, the 4th was sitting right there at the failing line. 3 more had scores from the sellers that were failing that they were trying to pass off as "good". Only one tested good enough for me, but there was too much body damage.

Granted, I wasn't hunting Series2s, I suspect the success rate would climb considerably if I was, but on series 1... I'd guess 80% for sale (at a given point in time) are dead.

 

Starting it up, getting it warm, and leaving it for 10 minutes so that it's warm isn't the same as what I was responding to:


Did I say anything about about testing a cold engine? No, that was a product of your imagination ...

 

...

So you say that "Warming up the engine" that implicitly defines "fluids up to operating temperature" is different from a "hot engine from driving" which will always have "fluids up to operating temperature" assuming your thermostats are working correctly?

Or are you saying that warming up an engine and then letting it sit for 10 minutes has a different combustion heat load on the housings at the spark plug holes than driving around on and then letting it sit for 10 minutes?


I fail to see the actual difference here.

 

This is what you posted:



It doesn't say bring it up to full operating temperature, does it?

Warm = Warm

Not hot

Not cold

Just warm.

Regardless, a cold engine that is started and comes up to temp on idle is still not anywhere near as hot as if it had just pulled in from a 1 hour drive. The radiator fan shouldn't even have come on unless you leave it idling long after it's actually warmed. 10 minutes after shutting both off the difference between them is even more substantial. Technically the car is fully operational well below normal ECT operational temperature of 97*C.

or try it and see. I'm just letting you know if the sensor gets too hot it will provide false high readings. No skin off my back otherwise.

Team out ...

 

Ok, so after a 1 hour drive, how long should it have cooled down for before testing?

Hold up guys, my results might be too high due to overheated sensors, and my engine may in fact be just as low as the rest of them S2's, I mean R3's... not S2's... in the UK!

 

Given the lack of precise information in the manual about how how the engine should be, you don't really have any more backing for your argument about how hot "warm" is than I do, and in neither case should the direction you get to that temperature from matter in any way.