russxr67

I,d like to pick the brains of fellow forum members on their thoughts on rings. What is the preffered type of rings that you use? Has anyone had success running zero gap rings or are they a load of hype?. Does anyone have a preffered minimum setback for the first ring placement down the bore.eg .2 from deck surface. And finally who uses conventional ring gaps . It used to be that .004 per 1 inch of bore was commonplace for the top ring and usually a tad tighter on the second. I am aware that some engine builders have moved away from the "'norm'" in this regard. any thoughts?

xdclevo

Good questions. I only have experiance with Sealed Power moly rings. The first build i did i used 22 thou top and bottom and it worked good. No blowby or oilburning at all. This 2nd build i used the same rings, but left the gaps as per box(16 thou) and have raced it hard, even in real hot conditions. Next time i will be going 20tho for a bit of safety just in case.
I would also think it better if you could leave the torqueplate on when checking ring gap. I dont know how much it would differ, but i would like to hear thoughts on that too.

russxr67

If you could get your hands on a torque plate then i would suspect it would be well worth the effort. Having thin bores with relatively high torque specs would probably distort the bore somewhat once the heads are bolted on and alter the end gaps.If one where to go to the trouble of torque plate boring and honing then blueprinting without the torque plates almost seems pointless.You make a good point there xdclevo.As far as rings go ,i too have only used Sealed power rings always with excellent results.

crochunter

Speed Pro Plasma

__________________
http://motorvator.7.forumer.com/

davis

I know a lot of guys running zero-gap rings. Most of them are Mopar guys running hemis and stroker 440s and they swear by them. I don't waste my time with them. They're much more expensive. I'd probably use them if I was a serious racer. I think that there is probably a bit of performance to be had from them. My idea of building performance is based on simplicity.

I don't feel that using a torque plate when fitting rings would be beneficial in an amount that outweighs the hassle. A low-cost alternative to a "home rebuilder" would be to bolt the cylinder head and measure ring gap from the bottom end. Sounds like a lot of effort to me for very questionable return on investment. If you're willing to spend the time, maybe it is worth some peace of mind, but I'm more likely to stick with the basics and not look back.



:davis: