|
Author
|
Topic: Is this how all you guys set your rings?
|
n2oMike
Gearhead Posts: 2694
From: Spencer, WV
Registered: Jan 2001
|
posted 05-17-2003 08:53 AM
   
Or does it REALLY matter, since they will be turning anyway... I've tried different ways, and haven't noticed any real difference.  ------------------
Mike Burch
66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads
10.63 @ 129.3
http://www.geocities.com/carbedstangs/cmml_mburch.html
http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/healey/367
http://www.mustangworks.com/cgi-bin/moi-display.cgi?220 [This message has been edited by n2oMike (edited 05-17-2003).]
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6405
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 05-17-2003 09:13 AM
That thing confused the heck out of me. 
I generally set the top and second rings 180* apart, and the oil rings between the wrist pin hole on the non thrust side. I don't know if it really matters since they all spin round and round. But at least that's where they start. When in a hurry I have just put them on "where ever" and haven't noticed any difference.
IP: Logged |
V8 Thumper
Gearhead Posts: 4652
From: Phoenix, Arizona
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 05-17-2003 09:15 AM
I've always put them at 180* stagger, with the expander at, say 9 o'clock, the bottom rail at 2, top rail at 8. Bottom compression ring at 10, top ring at 4 forming an 'X' pattern. It seems to work for me... I leaked down my motor and came up with 2-3%  ------------------
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 |
Tea'sGrabber
Gearhead Posts: 276
From: Seattle, Wash.
Registered: Feb 2003
|
posted 05-17-2003 09:16 AM
Who's pistons are you using?------------------
Todd 71 Mav Grabber All orig 306 cu.in. Cast Iron heads. Carillo Rods.Best et. 10.71 @ 124 thru the mufflers.
IP: Logged |
n2oMike
Gearhead Posts: 2694
From: Spencer, WV
Registered: Jan 2001
|
posted 05-17-2003 09:30 AM
quote:
Originally posted by kid vishus:
That thing confused the heck out of me.
Yea, that is confusing... From the look of the valve notches, the piston on the left would be rotated 90 degrees clockwise, and the one on the right 90 degrees counterclockwise. This would put the top ring AND oil expander pointing towards the front of the engine. The second ring would point towards the rear, and the oil expanders would be staggered towards the rear. I think....  ------------------
Mike Burch
66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads
10.63 @ 129.3
http://www.geocities.com/carbedstangs/cmml_mburch.html
http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/healey/367
http://www.mustangworks.com/cgi-bin/moi-display.cgi?220 [This message has been edited by n2oMike (edited 05-17-2003).] [This message has been edited by n2oMike (edited 05-17-2003).]
IP: Logged |
scottford351
Journeyman Posts: 96
From: reedsville ohio usa
Registered: May 2003
|
posted 05-17-2003 01:50 PM
I really cant see that it would matter.when Ive tore my motors down the rings are not in the same place that I installed them.
IP: Logged |
Mario428
Journeyman Posts: 82
From: Charlottetown, PEI, Canada
Registered: Nov 2001
|
posted 05-18-2003 07:14 AM
The thing I do not like about the method shown is all the oil ring gaps in the same quadrant of the piston.
I would put the 2nd ring gap where they show the 1st ring gap. 2nd ring is primarily oil control.
I'm sure the suthor could give reasoning at extensive length but the rings do move around so any arrangement can become meaningless beyond satisfying yourself at assembly time.
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
