School me on Rings - Reply to Topic

Reply to Thread

Post a reply to the thread: School me on Rings

Your Message

 

Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces)

You may choose an icon for your message from this list

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Additional Options

  • Will turn www.example.com into [URL]http://www.example.com[/URL].

Topic Review (Newest First)

  • 03-26-2008, 09:42 AM
    Sleeper CP
    Quote Originally Posted by DJD View Post
    I used to use gapless second rings but after seeing some fluttering on the dyno i quit. Now i use the top gapless and have had zero problems but i agree that a good set of file fits are just as good in certain combonations. Everybody has something that has worked well for them and they get comfortable with them.
    How did you see "flutter" ? Power drop, after dyno tear down ? I have never had a problem with our zero gap second rings since '93 even with up to 350 hp worth of nitrous making over 1,100 hp ? The current 565" still has a set in it.

    If I was building an engine from scratch today I'd probably look at the "Hell Fire" rings.

    Sleeper CP
  • 03-26-2008, 06:37 AM
    cstraub
    I'm just glad I am able to share this tech with others. I have explained opening the 2nd gap up to some engine buidlers FC-Pilot and it has fallen on deaf ears. I find it hard to swallow sometimes when you have multi million dollar test facilities in Detroit and Mooresville, NC that are testing and proving the concept. It is now in the last few years piston mfg are changing their installation instructions and having engine builders open up the 2nd ring.
  • 03-26-2008, 01:36 AM
    DJD
    I used to use gapless second rings but after seeing some fluttering on the dyno i quit. Now i use the top gapless and have had zero problems but i agree that a good set of file fits are just as good in certain combonations. Everybody has something that has worked well for them and they get comfortable with them.
  • 03-25-2008, 09:29 PM
    gn7
    for the longest time I could figure out why my top ring grooves seem to look like trash at the end of the season. Always thought the BBC were just moving the ring around alot, and they do, but after reading an article written by a tech at speed pro about exactly what cstraub posted, I tried it, and have never gone back to zero gap 2nd, and have had no noticable power loss and the grooves are perfect. The plus side is, it is actually better for the piston pin bore oiling also



    100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
  • 03-25-2008, 08:49 PM
    SmokinLowriderSS
    fc Pilot and I had a few PM's over on that other board discussing gapless rings and his observations/experiences of 2nd-ring gapless setups certainly seem to be following what others have seen (and make plenty of sense as pressure build-ups between rings causing problems with the top ring).
    I don't think I would have any real hearburn going top-gapless (but personally don't have any ned in my setups) but would not do double-gapless.
  • 03-25-2008, 06:33 PM
    fc-Pilot
    Chris and Warp Speed,

    Thanks for the explanation. You both said it in a clear manner in which the concept could readily be understood. Last site I explained that on they told me I was full of crap and that I should shut up. I figured if they would be so bold then no logic in the world would take them away from their personal speed secrets. Hence the reason I don't say too much around this place. That and you guys say it much better than I can anyway. Once again, thanks for sharing your expertise.

    Paul Miller
  • 03-25-2008, 04:58 PM
    gn7
    Quote Originally Posted by cstraub View Post
    The area between the 1st and 2nd would second would build pressure and cause the top ring to flutter. Experimenting with gaps they found that by increasing the gap of the 2nd ring allowed the to reduce flutter and in doing so allowed them to run thinner rings. With the thinner rings this allow for less drag on the cylinders. The leak numbers on these engines were not good but at an average of 18HP gain in the mid to top end range on a 358 CID engine it proved to be worth some power.
    This is exactly why I stopped using zero gap seconds 5 yrs ago. Now I look at the gaps I set up on my second ring and just shake my head at what I use to run. As for leak down, just hook up an air hose and listen to the carbs and headers, if it isn't leaking thru there, I don't worry about it.



    100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
  • 03-25-2008, 02:16 PM
    cstraub
    Just let me know what you need and I will see what I can do to help...
  • 03-25-2008, 01:41 PM
    Airin' it Out
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigblockbill View Post
    So what else can we spend that extra money on now...I know a digital ignition with data logging capiblities!!!
    DAMMIT BILL, quit spending my money! Chris is trying to get it all!!!

    Chris and Warp, thank you for the education on rings.

    Chris--on a seperate note, I may have the revised flow numbers for my heads (after more port work is done) later this week or next week so we can order a cam and lifters. I may just add the rings to the order then.
  • 03-25-2008, 12:50 PM
    Bigblockbill
    Thanks for that great write up warp speed & Chris you both get an A in my book. When stated like that it sounds like gapless rings are not all they are cracked up to be and hence not what we want.

    So Hell Fire it is. And the good thing they are probably cheaper as well.

    So what else can we spend that extra money on now...I know a digital ignition with data logging capiblities!!!
  • 03-25-2008, 12:48 PM
    cstraub
    Quote Originally Posted by Warp Speed View Post
    As most of you know, the goal is to use the top (compresion ring) to seal the cylider pressure under firing and also seal the piston on the intake stroke to cause the most pressure differential we can.

    When you use a gapless second ring you are basicly trying to use it as a commpression ring (it is designed and intended to scrape any oil the oil ring missed). Any pressure that escapes past the top ring is now captured by the gapless second. That is all good and fine but this build up of pressure between the first and second ring un-seats the top ring from the ringland a renders it next to useless (Flutter as Chris Straub mentioned above) in sealing cumbustion pressure. It starts to move all over and now isn't in a good position to create a good pull for the intake charge either. Now that's ok because we have the gapless second ring to save us, but the design of such a ring is fairly heavy and hard to make ultra precision and with a good sealing finish to properly seal it to the ringland (and isn't desinged for this in the first place). It starts fluttering and now you have a bunch of stuff that is out of control and isn't working properly.
    A gapless top ring has the same stuff working aginst it. More weight, less precision in flatness and finish, tougher to properly seal to the ring land.
    A properly prepped and gapped (the top ring should be close to gapless during running temp anyway) ring set can net you the same results in blow-by, allot more efficiently. Especialy when piston speeds start to rise (either from rpm, stroke length or both).
    The long and short of it is, if you need to use a gapless to seal up I think you are missing something else. Piston ring design, and ringland precision and finish have come along way in the last few years. This coupled with a proven cylinder wall finish for a given ring package can net VERY low (almost non-existant) blow-by numbers.
    Warp,
    You must have gotten an A in typing. . .your much faster then my "C" grade typing...
  • 03-25-2008, 12:44 PM
    cstraub
    I think leak down numbers are about the biggest waste of time. .. I've never seen a performance engine "perform" sitting still. Some people live and die by leak numbers but as for me, I am not one.

    Years ago I had the privledge to "learn" from someone working with one of the top NASCAR teams and it was on ring seal. This was the stage of the game when they were loosing the ability to run compression in these engines and were seaching for power. One area was ring seal and ring flutter. The area between the 1st and 2nd would second would build pressure and cause the top ring to flutter. Experimenting with gaps they found that by increasing the gap of the 2nd ring allowed the to reduce flutter and in doing so allowed them to run thinner rings. With the thinner rings this allow for less drag on the cylinders. The leak numbers on these engines were not good but at an average of 18HP gain in the mid to top end range on a 358 CID engine it proved to be worth some power. The OEM's have since went to metric rings reducing the size of the ring without sacrificing longevity.

    The trend coming up will be to use tool steel rings. Cost on these will be coming down as advances in the mfg process and new honing techiques are being introduced to engine builders. At this point in time I would recommend a "gapped" ring using the piston ring mfg top gap recommendation and then opening up the 2nd ring accordingly.
  • 03-25-2008, 12:22 PM
    Warp Speed
    As most of you know, the goal is to use the top (compresion ring) to seal the cylider pressure under firing and also seal the piston on the intake stroke to cause the most pressure differential we can.

    When you use a gapless second ring you are basicly trying to use it as a commpression ring (it is designed and intended to scrape any oil the oil ring missed). Any pressure that escapes past the top ring is now captured by the gapless second. That is all good and fine but this build up of pressure between the first and second ring un-seats the top ring from the ringland a renders it next to useless (Flutter as Chris Straub mentioned above) in sealing cumbustion pressure. It starts to move all over and now isn't in a good position to create a good pull for the intake charge either. Now that's ok because we have the gapless second ring to save us, but the design of such a ring is fairly heavy and hard to make ultra precision and with a good sealing finish to properly seal it to the ringland (and isn't desinged for this in the first place). It starts fluttering and now you have a bunch of stuff that is out of control and isn't working properly.
    A gapless top ring has the same stuff working aginst it. More weight, less precision in flatness and finish, tougher to properly seal to the ring land.
    A properly prepped and gapped (the top ring should be close to gapless during running temp anyway) ring set can net you the same results in blow-by, allot more efficiently. Especialy when piston speeds start to rise (either from rpm, stroke length or both).
    The long and short of it is, if you need to use a gapless to seal up I think you are missing something else. Piston ring design, and ringland precision and finish have come along way in the last few years. This coupled with a proven cylinder wall finish for a given ring package can net VERY low (almost non-existant) blow-by numbers.
  • 03-25-2008, 12:20 PM
    Airin' it Out

    Hellfire rings vs. Total Seal Gapless rings

    Is there any advantage or disadvantage or reliability issues with gapless rings vs. non-gapless rings? Hellfire rings are not gapless (in summit's catalog anyway) and the Total Seal rings are gapless.

    Any advantage of one over the other?
This thread has more than 14 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95