Anyone know typical 3.2 compression readings? The car I'm looking at is between 173 and 180 on all cylinders.

 

What were the leakdown results?

 

173/180= 4% Seems that is a very acceptable # .

 

They didn't do leakdown based on the compression results and mileage/condition. Perhaps not the totally thorough approach, but I've read varying opinions on this.

 

My undestanding is that leakdown test will show worn valve guides, where compression test will not. Considering the reputation 3.2s have with valve guides...

 

I spoke with the mechanic and while he said that a leakdown will give indication, he didn't see any other indications of valve guide wear. He has had the car overnight on one or two occasions and didn't see smoke on startup, and didn't see any of the wrong fumes in the wrong places. Hence he seems confident that it isn't currently an issue. I wonder if that is legally binding?

 

Nostatic- That sounds similar to what my mechanic said about the car I had looked over. If they don't see anything wrong and everything looks good a good mechanic doesn't need to investigate any further unless you specify.

If I might, I'd like to add my 3.2 PPI results to this post and ask for opinions also. Nostatic- I hope that this provides you w/ additional info. and does not detract from your post.

My results are from a 1986 3.2 Carrera w/ 130K miles- a few thousand are track miles.
1- 160 8%
2- 140 8%
3- 155 5%
4- 140 5%
5- 160 8%
6- 150 8%

The shop said that the car looked well taken care of and everything looked as it should for having 130K miles.

Opinions on these results are welcome! I'd like to try to get a feel for how worn the engine is and how these figures compare to others. Can anyone give an estimate of how long the engine may go or how low these #'s could be before the engine would need a rebuild?
TIA.
-T