|
Author
|
Topic: Total Seal Gapless rings
|
jsracingbbf
Gearhead Posts: 1677
From: Batesville,MS. , U.S.A.
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 12-23-2002 03:50 PM
   
Has anyone else tried these rings? if so what do you think of them? ------------------
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 |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 4538
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 12-23-2002 04:20 PM
I have ran the Total Seals that are gapless on the second ring. Truthfully, I saw zero performance gain over a good file fit moly ring. I ran both the Total Seals on the secondayry ring, and I also tried the Childs & Albert Zero Gap rings. The results were the same on both compared to convential file fit moly rings. Leakdown numbers were the same at the end of the year, compression tests were the same, and I got the same amount of alchy contaminationin in the oil. If they are the 2 piece design, the gaps of the 2 piece secondary ring will eventually line up and they will no longer be a gapless ring,(unless they have changed the design of them, the C&A's wont do this as they are a 1 piece design.) Also, more than one reputable engine builder back in Iowa wont use them (one of which builds alot of real high $$ sprint car motors). They claim that the gases that get past the top ring cant get away with the gapless design on the secondary ring, and will force itself into the ring land, unseating the ring from the cylinder wall causing it to flutter at a higher rpm. I decided that I would spend the extra money they cost somewhere else. [This message has been edited by kid vishus (edited 12-23-2002).]
IP: Logged |
Moneymaker
Administrator Posts: 19704
From: Lyons, IL, USA
Registered: May 99
|
posted 12-23-2002 05:45 PM
Don't waste your money or your time.  ------------------
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 |
jsracingbbf
Gearhead Posts: 1677
From: Batesville,MS. , U.S.A.
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 12-23-2002 08:46 PM
I've run them on the last two engines I've built and haven't had any problems. I don't know about performance gains but I did see an improvement on the leak down tester and slightly less oil contamination. Might be another good reason why oil contamination improved, who knows.
Whether it is worth the exhorbant price they want for the things though is questionable. Alex is probably right, not worth the extra money or hassle. I'll run them on this motor since they are already there. Probably switch back to regular Moly on next tear down. Not enough bang for the buck. Thanks for the advice guys!  ------------------
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 |
Dusty Kiser
Gearhead Posts: 126
From: Bethel,Oh USA
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 12-26-2002 09:47 PM
Ditto, Alex & Kid. A few years ago while rebuilding a metric Chev v6 I couldn't get the ring set I felt I needed. The end gaps were way over .030. I tried to get a .005 oversized set, but N/A per ditributor and catalog. I finally called Hastings engineering and was told not to worry about the end gap, they've tested gaps for umpteen years and could find no difference in performance. I replied I wasn't as concerned about the gap as ring tension, and they agreed that was critical. Bottom line, the catalog was wrong. The std ring for that engine was/is a 3.5plus.005 ring package. They did say gap was more important on low tension ring sets being used as OE by modern engine designers simply because it's a strong indicator of proper fit to cylinder. The distance from top land to ring, ring material cylinderwall material and finish and ring roundness when compressed are all more important than gaps, according to my information!
IP: Logged |
Moneymaker
Administrator Posts: 19704
From: Lyons, IL, USA
Registered: May 99
|
posted 12-27-2002 12:07 AM
They cause a pressure ring flutter which actually disrupts the seal.------------------
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 |
smblk t-bolt
Journeyman Posts: 67
From: port alberni BC Canada
Registered: Apr 2002
|
posted 12-30-2002 02:58 AM
I tried them in the last engine I built..didnt notice any real performance increase but I did notice some oil getting sucked past my guides and more preassure in the crank-case.guides were a bit worn but worked fine with the old rings...i think the zero gap created more vacum and sucked the oil past..for the money, spend it on something else.64 fairlane
lots of fiberglass
even more bondo
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
