|
Author
|
Topic: Rings: file-to-fit or drop-in & ring end gap location
|
Pierre
Gearhead Posts: 394
From: Near Paris, France
Registered: Apr 2002
|
posted 12-20-2002 08:00 AM
   
Again for a street performance is it worth the hassle of a file to fit ?I am getting different infos on where the rings end gap should be: some say spaced
1/4 turn appart, Tom MONROE says:
Compression rings should be at 5 o'clock & 7 o'clock and oil rings rails 11 & 1 with the oil ring expander at noon (when looking at the engine from the front of the car)
IP: Logged |
Pierre
Gearhead Posts: 394
From: Near Paris, France
Registered: Apr 2002
|
posted 12-20-2002 08:19 AM
Ooops.....I must have clicked a little too much on the rodent !
IP: Logged |
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 34763
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 12-20-2002 01:44 PM
For a street engine, filing gaps isn't really needed, just check them and make sure they are within specs.If you do file them, use a gap filing tool. {My machine shop always let me borrow theirs} You want the ends to be straight so that the gaps are accurate. ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 - '72 Mustang Sprint - '94 F-150 Be sure to remember our sponsors, Mustangs Plus, NPD, and Osborn Reproductions.
IP: Logged |
V8 Thumper
Gearhead Posts: 3603
From: Orange, Ca. United States of America
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 12-20-2002 08:51 PM
It's been my experience with 'drop in' rings that they tend to have HUGE gaps  , like .022+ and really inconsistent. I personally like file fitting; it takes a while to do, but you wind up with exactally the ring gaps that you want. N/A applications could follow the .004-per-inch rule, plus a thou or two for the top ring; minus a thou or two for the bottom. I gapped my rings to .018 for the tops, .015 for the bottoms in a 4.040 bore Windsor. Ditto on Steve's recommendation on using a ring gapper; Summit has a good inexpensive one (that's the one I use) or borrow one.Ring gap orientation~ that debate rages on! I like to put them 180* off one another, but by no means at 12 or 6 (thrust faces); the intake side being 12 o'clock, exhaust side being 6. I like oil expander rails at either 10 and 4 or 8 and 2, with the compression rings opposite of that so you have a staggered 'x' pattern. Each adjacent ring having 180* gap between them  ------------------
1965 GT coupe, 333ci aluminum headed/solid cammed stroker, four speed, 3.70:1 9" All Blue Oval, no blue bottle
http://mustangsandmore.50megs.com/V8Thumper.html
IP: Logged |
Moneymaker
Administrator Posts: 19964
From: Lyons, IL, USA
Registered: May 99
|
posted 12-20-2002 08:55 PM
Who's Tom Munroe?  ------------------
Alex Denysenko
Co-Administrator and Moderator NHRA/IHRA/SRA member and licensed Superstock driver
MCA member# 53321
NHRA and IHRA SS/LA National Record Holder '00, '01, & '02
Fleet of FoMoCo products including 88 ASC McLaren Mustang #28
Professional Manwhore
The Barry of BarrysGrrl Quote #1: "I never met a magazine mechanic I liked."
Quote #2: "Make sure brain is in gear before engaging mouth!"
Quote #3: "If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch!"
www.moneymakerracing.com
IP: Logged |
Pierre
Gearhead Posts: 394
From: Near Paris, France
Registered: Apr 2002
|
posted 12-21-2002 09:29 AM
I am convinced on the file fitting job since I DO NOT want to have to return a loose ring set !! and will definately get a tool and feeler gauge
I like the X pattern a lot more than the one recommended by Tom.BTW: This book is great (Ford SB rebuilt book), very thorough, but what made Tom Monroe so famous in this area ? Just curious
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 4923
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 12-21-2002 09:45 AM
Every motor I have ever put together had most of the ring gaps lined up when it was taken apart. And I know it wasnt put together that way. I figure the rings rotate in the lands, and so long as they arent lined up when it goes together, it doesnt make much difference where they start at because they arent going to stay there long anyways. But I could be really wrong on this one.
IP: Logged |
Moneymaker
Administrator Posts: 19964
From: Lyons, IL, USA
Registered: May 99
|
posted 12-21-2002 11:03 AM
Geeze.....and what do you do if you have a digital watch? I have always installed rings 180 degree apart working my way from the bottom up. ------------------
Alex Denysenko
Co-Administrator and Moderator NHRA/IHRA/SRA member and licensed Superstock driver
MCA member# 53321
NHRA and IHRA SS/LA National Record Holder '00, '01, & '02
Fleet of FoMoCo products including 88 ASC McLaren Mustang #28
Professional Manwhore
The Barry of BarrysGrrl Quote #1: "I never met a magazine mechanic I liked."
Quote #2: "Make sure brain is in gear before engaging mouth!"
Quote #3: "If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch!"
www.moneymakerracing.com
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 4923
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 12-21-2002 12:44 PM
I always start them out 180* apart, but they are never still 180* apart when I take the motor apart. Generally I have 5 or 6 cylinders that the gaps are all lined up. Am I doing something wrong?
IP: Logged |
Moneymaker
Administrator Posts: 19964
From: Lyons, IL, USA
Registered: May 99
|
posted 12-21-2002 05:59 PM
No Rob, you are not. It's a natural course of physics. Short of pinning or pinching the ring lands it's unavoidable. ------------------
Alex Denysenko
Co-Administrator and Moderator NHRA/IHRA/SRA member and licensed Superstock driver
MCA member# 53321
NHRA and IHRA SS/LA National Record Holder '00, '01, & '02
Fleet of FoMoCo products including 88 ASC McLaren Mustang #28
Professional Manwhore
The Barry of BarrysGrrl Quote #1: "I never met a magazine mechanic I liked."
Quote #2: "Make sure brain is in gear before engaging mouth!"
Quote #3: "If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch!"
www.moneymakerracing.com
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 4923
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 12-21-2002 06:56 PM
Cool. I was told one time that the gaps lined up due to detonation, but I had never saw any signs of it anywhere else so I had kind of doubted that theory.
IP: Logged |
jsracingbbf
Gearhead Posts: 1923
From: Batesville,MS. , U.S.A.
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 12-21-2002 06:58 PM
I 've always used the file to fit myself, but this last set I got a set of those gapless type. It was actually two rings for one land and you still had to file fit the rings. ------------------
Jerry
69 Mustang Pro ET Drag
70 Mustang retired former footbrake car "This is FORD Country, on a quiet night you can hear a chevy RUST!" "A self assured person can be perceived as arrogant by someone who is pulling their radio flyer full of self doubt."
IP: Logged |
soaring
Gearhead Posts: 116
From: New Mexico
Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted 12-23-2002 06:24 AM
For a street engine, filing is nice, but not necessary. In addition, I agree with KidVishus. About 2 seconds after the engine is fired up, the rings will not be aligned as you spent so much time getting them there. Why bother with such trivial details?
IP: Logged |
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 34763
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 12-23-2002 08:21 AM
Because when you first fire an engine up and your rings aren't seated yet you want all the piston seal you can get. ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 - '72 Mustang Sprint - '94 F-150 Be sure to remember our sponsors, Mustangs Plus, NPD, and Osborn Reproductions.
IP: Logged |
indyphil
Gearhead Posts: 1075
From: Lafayette, IN, USA
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 12-23-2002 08:34 PM
If you read the new issue of mustangs and fords they tell you that even for mild street engines this is not trivial. They compared total seal rings with file fit and a baseline of pre sized rings. They picked up about 20hp or something (i should read it again and be more precise) but the point is it picked up torque all the way along the curve, and it WAS significant. Read the mag anyway it has more details.
Phil
IP: Logged |
Pierre
Gearhead Posts: 394
From: Near Paris, France
Registered: Apr 2002
|
posted 12-24-2002 04:10 AM
quote:
Originally posted by indyphil:
If you read the new issue of mustangs and fords they tell you that even for mild street engines this is not trivial. They compared total seal rings with file fit and a baseline of pre sized rings. They picked up about 20hp or something (i should read it again and be more precise) but the point is it picked up torque all the way along the curve, and it WAS significant. Read the mag anyway it has more details.
Phil
Can you tell us what month it was because I'll ask my inlaws to send it to me with no delay
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 4923
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 12-24-2002 10:43 AM
Maybe on a really mild motor they got more power with gapless rings, but every major engine builder refuses to use them because they can make more power with file fit rings.
IP: Logged |
indyphil
Gearhead Posts: 1075
From: Lafayette, IN, USA
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 12-27-2002 09:34 AM
Sorry Pierre I was reading it in the grocery store while my wife was picking out the Turkey. It was on our shelves now so its probably the January Issue. They showed that file to fit were much better than one size fits all. Then they showed that gapless made a little more power than file to fit. Of course their baseline was a tired engine to begin with. It was only about power output, they didnt tell you anything about life or oil control. I know very little about the subject I just wanted to tell you what they did so you could read what I read.Phil
IP: Logged |
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 34763
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 12-27-2002 09:42 AM
It was a new SBC engine, but it had about 50 dyno pulls. The pregapped rings had over .030" gap when they pulled them out. The file fit picked up about 10 hp IIRC, and the Total Seal about 18hp, I think, making 450hp in the end. ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 - '72 Mustang Sprint - '94 F-150 Be sure to remember our sponsors, Mustangs Plus, NPD, and Osborn Reproductions.
IP: Logged |
Moneymaker
Administrator Posts: 19964
From: Lyons, IL, USA
Registered: May 99
|
posted 12-27-2002 10:52 AM
Anyone can pick up HP with a new set of rings over a worn out set. 
We've tested them (gapless) on everything from mild to wild. Same results every time. Nothing, nada, nitz, nine, zero HP increase.
Our experiance has been a horse power loss on stock to near stock engines. Don't you all think that if it was such a ggreat idea that Detroit would have adopeted it years ago? FoMoCo fooled around with gapless rings in the early 60's with their Mobil Economy run Comets looking for power and fuel economy. Results indicated poor cylinder wall life, and negligable decrease in fuel consumption.
Spend you money on something more worthwhile.------------------
Alex Denysenko
Co-Administrator and Moderator NHRA/IHRA/SRA member and licensed Superstock driver
MCA member# 53321
NHRA and IHRA SS/LA National Record Holder '00, '01, & '02
Fleet of FoMoCo products including 88 ASC McLaren Mustang #28
Professional Manwhore
The Barry of BarrysGrrl Quote #1: "I never met a magazine mechanic I liked."
Quote #2: "Make sure brain is in gear before engaging mouth!"
Quote #3: "If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch!"
www.moneymakerracing.com
IP: Logged |
Pierre
Gearhead Posts: 394
From: Near Paris, France
Registered: Apr 2002
|
posted 12-27-2002 03:04 PM
I figured that if it was such a perfect solution it would be known by now ! Plus I am not much of an early adopter/Beta-tester myself
I'll still read the article though....out of curiousity. Their articles are interesting but they never tell you the whole story...
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
