Just got qoote from toal seal on rings. Got to be equal and possible better for less. $550 is twice old price. Yes 10 years ago but d a m m n!!

I KNOW 4.310 OR 4.375 S AMLL BORE AND NOT AS COMMON with all the big inch motors running.

I though the old .047 dyke top,with gapless 2n and 3/16 oild pretty basic.Guess not.


Probably just pop cpl oil rings on 2 cylinders and wait to order new ones with pistons this winter for 526 or 540 depending on the pistons I can find with the compression I want.

What are you guys with methanol running and especially MFI guys? Look for suggestions to compare.

My top two are .043 with a 3.0 mm oil ring.

I always dyno a fresh engine so I can make 3-4 pulls on gas to seat the rings well. Ron's Terminator injection after that.

quote:

Originally posted by Lenny5160:
My top two are .043 with a 3.0 mm oil ring.

I always dyno a fresh engine so I can make 3-4 pulls on gas to seat the rings well. Ron's Terminator injection after that.

Tony, just curious why you prefer gas to break it in, have you had a bad experience on methanol?

I’ve never dyno’d our junk, always assemble, get it running on gas and immediately switch to the terminator so I can be sure every cylinder is seeing the same amount of fuel for ring seating purposes. I pull the cable out so the idle is leaned out and put some load on the engine by footbraking it and once it’s warm I’ll put it on the two step with the transbrake. Then bring to the track, warm up again, and let it rip.

Kind of stuck with what have now till order new stuff. .047 dykes and 1/16 second and 3/16 oil. Looking at idea od gas ported top ring instead of dyke. More than likely go thinner rings for all.

The currant package worked great for blown alky, but probably far from optimal for new build for injected N/A.

If not for bigger bore 4,250 to =.060 or .125 and boost in compression of 2.5 to 3 :1. I WOULD JUST throw new set on what I have. I have never had alky motor w/o gapless. Thoughts?

That dang need fpr more is a Bytch. 40 to 58 ci and 3:1 if good power boost. Hrad to pass on even if out of budget. Hell could lose 10 pounds anyway ,who needs food.LMAO

Did not aske and my bad. Material. Moly, ductile iron, SS, or______. I have a recommendation for one manufacture and two requests out. Never bad idea to compare IMO.

Got to do some research on Ap sgteel rings must be some bad SOB's. dbls the price. Never ran them. Always had SS or ductile iron.

While hat to spend butt load on rings.If makes difference and not just over kill to brag about I will go for the extra step. For once I do think the Hemi thing makes any difference , since ring has no idea what name is on the VC.LOL

We have the Total Seal AP steel gas ported rings in our ProCharged SBC. I like them so far with about 75 runs on them now. Yes, they are pricey!

2BKING

.043 .043 3/16
AP steel top, Napier 2nd, std tension oil

Lateral gas ported pistons

Think I like pistons with lateral ports more than rings. Looks like has to weaken rings. May not but I do not see it making them stronger.

The cost may be partly me. I always order a ten-set of pistons and rings. Might be wasted, Well until Vlave or something FUBAR's one and you need just one or two. Plus every 4 sets you get a spare set.LOL heck, the way I have screwed up shyt w/o making a halfA$$ pass might need a 12 set.

Are these all gapless? If so....why?

not sure who you asked. Mine answer is yes right now and probably will be in the future. I have run gapless second rings for decades and rarely had bad leak downs. Always got good performance out of them.

Now with new stuff, I may not go gapless if get a good reason that proves out.

If you are running a vacuum pump....well I wouldn't run any gapless because of the cost. I rant C and A gapless for a few seasons and they were overly wearing on the cylinders. Decided to try regular gapped rings, and they were just fine. No large leakdown nor power loss. Never went back because there was no reason to.

quote:

.043 .043 3/16
AP steel top, Napier 2nd, std tension oil

Lateral gas ported pistons

Same here, have produced the best results.

Bob

I'm the outlier here. I just run moly faced iron top, napier ductile second and 11lb gold oil rings. 1/16, 1/16, 3/16 not and I repeat not gapless.

I ran the AP steel stuff for a while and just couldn't justify the cost for the ROI with my slow junk.

Funny thing about leakdown numbers. I had an engine that leaked 2% on all cylinders after break in. Mid season I checked it again and it was as bad as 30% on some and it freaked me out a little. Still ran the exact same numbers as new. LOL I just stopped checking leak down on something without a problem.

While I have vacuum pump it may be short lived.

Your statement is the very reason I have always run them. Less crankcase pressure has to mean less blowby.

When first ran injection I had an issue blowing the breather caps out of VC. Alan Starr told me to put total seals in and you will fix that. Since 99.9% of what old man said worked. I did it. Well, guess what?. This was 1986 and do not think anyone ran a vacuum pump and about positive nobody built one for race cars. Heck, most pulled them off street car and trashed them then.LOL

quote:

Originally posted by wideopen231:
not sure who you asked. Mine answer is yes right now and probably will be in the future. I have run gapless second rings for decades and rarely had bad leak downs. Always got good performance out of them.

Now with new stuff, I may not go gapless if get a good reason that proves out.

You can do as you like, BUT the reason most people got away from the gapless 2nd ring is because, once the compression gases get pass the top ring, they have nowhere to go and then lift the top ring causing "ring flutter". This is the same reason that ring manufactures are recommending larger 2nd ring gaps.

Joe

If I remember right my Dyno guy told me gas ported pistons/ rings are good for about 50-60 Hp on 1000 Hp alcohol motor.

You want more horsepower and that is a decent return for the money. Good ring packages do make power.

quote:

Originally posted by Curly1:
If I remember right my Dyno guy told me gas ported pistons/ rings are good for about 50-60 Hp on 1000 Hp alcohol motor.

You want more horsepower and that is a decent return for the money. Good ring packages do make power.

Figure additional 14 to 28 ci depending bore,3:1 compression and gas ported all got to be worth good amount of power. now dyke has simialr effect as gas porting,not sure if as effective. Going from 11.9 to 15: with .040 gasket and can run .090 if want which will drop compression a ton.

quote:

Originally posted by sr4440:

quote:

Originally posted by wideopen231:
not sure who you asked. Mine answer is yes right now and probably will be in the future. I have run gapless second rings for decades and rarely had bad leak downs. Always got good performance out of them.

Now with new stuff, I may not go gapless if get a good reason that proves out.

You can do as you like, BUT the reason most people got away from the gapless 2nd ring is because, once the compression gases get pass the top ring, they have nowhere to go and then lift the top ring causing "ring flutter". This is the same reason that ring manufactures are recommending larger 2nd ring gaps.

Joe

So gapless top ring with gas-ported pistons? Not sure how workable or good that would be. unless Childs and Albert style gapless where one piece ring instead of two piece like the total seeal, Not that gapless is requirement or a must. Just always had good luck with them in past.

Still waiting on a couple of quotes. delivery times estimates and ring suggestions from piston manufactures.

quote:

Originally posted by 183N:

quote:

Originally posted by Lenny5160:
My top two are .043 with a 3.0 mm oil ring.

I always dyno a fresh engine so I can make 3-4 pulls on gas to seat the rings well. Ron's Terminator injection after that.

Tony, just curious why you prefer gas to break it in, have you had a bad experience on methanol?

I’ve never dyno’d our junk, always assemble, get it running on gas and immediately switch to the terminator so I can be sure every cylinder is seeing the same amount of fuel for ring seating purposes. I pull the cable out so the idle is leaned out and put some load on the engine by footbraking it and once it’s warm I’ll put it on the two step with the transbrake. Then bring to the track, warm up again, and let it rip.

I don't recall ever having an actual problem just running one on alky, but it's been a long time since I've done so. My dyno guy has a fleet of cars on alky and gas, and I know he prefers to do it that way so it probably came from him initially and we keep doing it.

It may not matter as much with a known-good tuneup. When it's a new combo, you always prefer to start out fat. I believe the thinking is that if it is too fat, it will wash down the cylinder walls and prevent a good seal.

quote:

Originally posted by sr4440:

quote:

Originally posted by wideopen231:
not sure who you asked. Mine answer is yes right now and probably will be in the future. I have run gapless second rings for decades and rarely had bad leak downs. Always got good performance out of them.

Now with new stuff, I may not go gapless if get a good reason that proves out.

You can do as you like, BUT the reason most people got away from the gapless 2nd ring is because, once the compression gases get pass the top ring, they have nowhere to go and then lift the top ring causing "ring flutter". This is the same reason that ring manufactures are recommending larger 2nd ring gaps.

Joe

^^^THIS^^^
I never understood the gapless 2nd ring for this reason. I always run a wide 2nd ring gap. The 2nd ring is an oil scraper and nothing more. Also if your engine has good vacuum the vacuum will pull from the bottom past the 2nd ring and keep the top ring pulled tight against the ring land preventing any flutter or loss of ring seal