|
|
| Author |
Message |
kielbasa
Turbo Slant 6
Joined: 09 Dec 2010
Posts: 537
Location: Orange County
|
|
Post subject:
ring gap 225
(Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:54 pm)
|
 |
|
|
whats the prefered ring gap on a .060 over bore? im using NON file to fit sealed power rings. my top ring is at .018, and 2nd ring is at .015. how do these compare to file to fit numbers?
using Sealed Power ZE196X060 rings
using Sealed Power Z244NP60 pistons if that matters
its a stock build, no nitrous or anything fun
|
|
| Back to top |
|
CNC-Dude
Turbo Slant 6
Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 566
Location: N. Ga.
|
|
Post subject:
(Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:27 pm)
|
|
|
|
| File fit rings have the two ends of the ring overlapping, and you have to file them to get any gap at all, so there isn't really a comparison. The top ring gap you have might be a little big for that small of a bore size for some people.
_________________
There's no such thing as too much cam....only not enough engine!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
slantzilla
Board Sponsor & Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2002
Posts: 9377
Location: Park Forest, Illinoisy
|
|
Post subject:
(Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:34 pm)
|
|
|
|
Normal ring gap on a cast or forged piston is .004" of gap per inch of bore or thereabouts.
Double that for hyper pistons.
_________________
Proud supporter of Mike Jeffrey Racing Engines since 1999.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
kielbasa
Turbo Slant 6
Joined: 09 Dec 2010
Posts: 537
Location: Orange County
|
|
Post subject:
(Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:41 pm)
|
|
|
|
ive used file to fit before, quite a few times, and they never were "over lapping". they would have a very small gap, such as a .005 gap. but never over lapping.
and i ment comparison as, what are my numbers compared to what exactly they should be at, that you can get with file to fit.
if i go the route of .004 for each inch of bore (top ring) .01384 (basicly .014)
and .005 for 2nd ring .0173 (basicly .017)
that means each ring is only .001 larger then what the rule of thumb numbers are.
my question is, is there, if any, significant differences in .001 larger then desired #'s
|
|
| Back to top |
|
CNC-Dude
Turbo Slant 6
Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 566
Location: N. Ga.
|
|
Post subject:
(Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:56 pm)
|
|
|
|
| All the file fit rings i've used have always been overlapping and needed some slight filing just to get any gap at all. I don't think you will have any negative issues just being slightly over on the gap by a .001 or so. Looser is better tighter anyway.
_________________
There's no such thing as too much cam....only not enough engine!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
slantzilla
Board Sponsor & Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2002
Posts: 9377
Location: Park Forest, Illinoisy
|
|
Post subject:
(Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:58 am)
|
|
|
|
| kielbasa wrote: |
that means each ring is only .001 larger then what the rule of thumb numbers are.
my question is, is there, if any, significant differences in .001 larger then desired #'s |
No.
_________________
Proud supporter of Mike Jeffrey Racing Engines since 1999.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Dart270
Board Sponsor & Moderator
Joined: 21 Oct 2002
Posts: 9609
Location: Blacksburg, VA
|
|
Post subject:
(Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:20 am)
|
|
|
|
I have used FSM numbers on my stock piston motors. IIRC, my '64 Dart engine (built in 1993 originally, in that car 1996 - 2010) was at the upper limit (0.025" end gaps??). Engine made good power (240-260 HP) for the parts in it!
Lou
_________________
Return of the 64 Dart. Hang on...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
