Can anyone tell me what the compression should be on a f150 5.8 engine. 1994 if it were new or when it was new??? Trying to figure out where were at on this
engine. I checked with one source and they figured 175 and i thought that sounded kinda high. Any info appreciated.
HHHBTN

 

Is there some particular reason you are looking for this info?

I always ask because if it is something out of my experience library, it should be left to those who know, for sure !

Anyway it is a bit high, but we don't know if this is a stock engine or otherwise altered.

 

Hanky; Thanks; The engine is original 5.8 1994 in f150 4x4.
I been running down problems for ever it seems but i ran a compression test on it yesterday and knowing it is actually evenness of the cyls more than # as long as its up good enough. However i was wondering roughly how much it had probally dropped since new with 193k on the clock. Im running excellent even in my opinion im only 4.5% dif in all 8 with the best 136# worst 130/131.
So in my simple gunsmith mind if it were down from original say 10 or 15% wouldnt be an issue however if its running like 35-40% below i might . In my experience and guess i would guess the original was probally in the 150 range but told as above otherwise.
Thanks for your help

 

From my experience with the 5.8 the engine in a fleet operation that ran 7 days/wk gave pretty good service and was reliable, providing good maintenance was followed.
Routine maintenance pays off.

 

that is where im at i think fords are very good workhorse engines when welll cared for. The problem is this one does not fit in that catagory. The rear end had never been changed best i could tell or trans case and front dif was like calking grease, the tranny was on its way out when i got it home and changed the filter and oil and removed the additive the guy had in it to get it sold. been a real good deal. However the fluids all flushed and renewed and a new tranny and engine new plugs, rotor cap and everything renewed on it and the old girl works better than i expected. my compression question was to get an idea of power loss from the 193k based on original compression it should have had.
Thanks