Turbo Dodge Forums banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
322 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
well took apart the 2.4L after 5 years of abuse looks really good but i would like to replace the rings what would you use if you planned on running up to 30psi/I called totalseal today to get the same rings i had but they dont recommend the ones i have (had) for over 20 psi.im lost mite have to get new pistons now they are 3.450 bore 1.5/1.5/3mm rings.the tech guy said they dont make good rings for that piston.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
322 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
no the tech at total seal the tech at ross said they have moly rings in stock for $86 but he said they are not for boost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,532 Posts
What did you end up doing?
I am debating reringing my motor. I had total seal chrome rings BUT i was stupid and bought them with gapless tops (I think just a normal ductile naipier 2nd ring..never paid attention) which I think are just not a very good ring. The guy seemed to think they were good for 30+psi boost but he told me not to break the rings in on boost, not even 5 psi, which makes me wary.

I run a .030 gap on my top rings and .050" on my 2nd rings on a 3.683" bore.

I dont really want to rering because I will need to get a new block because the piston to cylinder clearances were already huge because I run venolias (like .010"). I think I will run a LOT smaller clearances when I get the rebuild done.

I havent talked with my shop or total seal yet cause I havent committed to reringing yet :p I am just hoping the gapless rings didnt tear up my ringlands.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,086 Posts
id definately stay away from gapless rings- everybody ive talked to on here and other boards has had nothing but problems with em on boosted engines.

theres nothing wrong with chrome rings- they will last longer and handle more abuse than a cast iron ring, just have to be more careful breaking them in. last set i used i tortured that poor engine for over 150,000 miles and never had problems with em.

cast iron rings are easy to beak in and easy to get the proper finish on the bore for good break in- just use a ball hone in a drill and spin away- works great most of the time

chrome rings take a little more care during break in, and require a finer finish than cast rings- no ball hone is gonna work. they need (i believe) a 400 grit hone to seat properly

moly ring are the most durable and longest lasting, but are very tempermental with cylinder finish and break in. they require a 400 grit or finer hone, followed by a plateau hone, and need to have the bore finish checked with an RA meter - a little device that kinda works like a record needle, actually reads the finish and displays it on a printout, kinda looks like an ekg printout.
break in is simple- fire the engine up they seat almost instantly. but if they dont seat right away, they never will- have to pull the engine apart and start over.

dont use low tension rings on any performance engine- they work great for long lasting non boosted economy engines, but they will not seal very well under high boost or high compression.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,341 Posts
I use Total seals in EVERY engine I Build.I've never had a problem.The leakdown tests are great after thousands of miles.I've never boosted over 20lbs though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,784 Posts
There are several people on here that use gapless rings without issue. Some of them VERY fast(as in 10's fast). Honestly, I truly beleive that a lot of the people that have issues with gapless has more to do with user error than a crappy product or design...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,784 Posts
There is still a "gap" on gapless rings. The ends overlap in kind of a ramp design. In order to make sure that the rings don't expand too much and pop the ring land off, ect, you still have to make sure there is enough expansion room to keep the ring from binding.

From what I understand this is where many people mess up....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,532 Posts
There are several people on here that use gapless rings without issue. Some of them VERY fast(as in 10's fast). Honestly, I truly beleive that a lot of the people that have issues with gapless has more to do with user error than a crappy product or design...
My ring problem only has to do with the oil failure I experienced BUT since I run huge clearances with venolias, the little sealer ring doesnt have as much space to sit on the ringland under combustion pressure so i think it can damage my ringlands.

They are 300 dollar rings and they just are not worth it.

I dont know of any turbododgers running 10's on a gapless top ring though. Gapless 2nd ring on a boosted motor would just be complete idiocy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,784 Posts
If I'm not mistaken, Warren Stramer's car has gapless rings in it. As a matter of fact:

I use Total seal gapless, that 2% leakdown claim is true. and the oil burning issue is FALSE. Just follow Total Seal instructions exactly (bore finish, hone type, and lube procedure, etc.) Ive used them on NA engines with good results also. Warren
I beleive the car has run 10's with them.....*shrugs*

That quote, and much more infor can be found here:
http://www.turbododge.com/forums/f4/f20/75769-total-seal-rings.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,532 Posts
Well he is certainly leaving some power on the table then because gapless 2nd rings will unseat the top rings, and that will force the 2nd rings to do all the heat transfer from the piston to cylinders. Meaning the 2nd rings and everything else take a beating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,784 Posts
Wow...you DO realize what car you are talking about don't you? The thing runs 10's all day(consistantly). It is immaculatly engineered, and with 2% or less leak down, I honestly can't see how or where he's leaving power on the table! If it were going to have an issue, it would have had it by now I would think!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,532 Posts
Wow...you DO realize what car you are talking about don't you? The thing runs 10's all day(consistantly). It is immaculatly engineered, and with 2% or less leak down, I honestly can't see how or where he's leaving power on the table! If it were going to have an issue, it would have had it by now I would think!
Did you read my post? Do you know the multifaceted function of rings?

Do you honestly think I dont know who I am talking about?

Yes, gapless 2nd rings on a turbo car leaves power on the table.

Its not like 400whp is mechanically impressive on a motor where countless people have already been there and done that.

Shadow makes a lot more power with less fancy parts (stock exhaust manifold).

The way to build motors is to run bigger gaps on the 2nd rings, to prevent pressure building up between the 1st and 2nd ring. 2% leakdown doesnt indicate anything about the behavior of the top ring, which is what is important for sealing the cylinder.

Gapless 2nd rings are a move in the wrong direction of where motor innovation is going. We are in the year 2008. Things are done differently. everything about 2nd ring gaps was based on seeking lower leakdown numbers and had nothing to do with actual engine performance. Now we know that big 2nd ring gaps make power because the top ring seals better. This was really only discovered because people with heavily boosted engines were breaking top rings for no apparent reason, and it was found that standard ring procedures were the cause. It hurts power but it only caused problems enough to be noticeable on heavily boosted motors. People in the past would keep increasing the gap on both rings because it seemed to solve the problem, but it has been realized that what matters is the 2nd ring has enough gap to allow excess pressure to exit so the top ring can seal. That means top ring gaps can get smaller (as long as the ring ends do not butt) and power goes up even more!

Gapless top rings make sense, but in practice they dont enjoy extreme environments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,784 Posts
Yes, I read your post. Yes, I do understand the multifaceted roles that rings play in an engine.

Honestly, I wasn't sure as you seem to be knocking on a set-up that's proven not only to make VERY good power, but be VERY reliable doing it and the work that has gone in to that engine most consider to be impecable.

Well, YOU may not think 400hp is impressive on a SOHC 8V non-crossflow engine, but I sure as hell do! And as far as "countless" people making 400hp...I'm fairly sure there is less than 50 that have made that mark and been able to keep the engine together long enough to tell the story.

Shadow may make more power with less parts, and I'm impressed by his success. However, that does NOT mean that the parts he is using can't be improved apon more. His goal is to prove that it CAN be done with lesser parts, not that it's the best way to do it.

The origionator of this thread was looking for people the repsond with what kinds of rings they are using to get an idea of what options they might have available. You chimed in taking over the thread with your own issue that was completely seperate from what the thread started out as. Then came the bashing of Total Seal rings, and here we sit.

I was mearly responding to the bashing of Total Seal, pointing out to the origional poster that they ARE a viable option. CLEARLY they work well enough to make enough power to go 10's(which is nothing to scoff at, as you so easily seem to do). Your issue with your engine is a completely different subject and it requires a completely different solution. Just becuase something works in one engine, doesn't mean it will for every other engine out there....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,532 Posts
Yes, I read your post. Yes, I do understand the multifaceted roles that rings play in an engine.

Honestly, I wasn't sure as you seem to be knocking on a set-up that's proven not only to make VERY good power, but be VERY reliable doing it and the work that has gone in to that engine most consider to be impecable.

Well, YOU may not think 400hp is impressive on a SOHC 8V non-crossflow engine, but I sure as hell do! And as far as "countless" people making 400hp...I'm fairly sure there is less than 50 that have made that mark and been able to keep the engine together long enough to tell the story.

Shadow may make more power with less parts, and I'm impressed by his success. However, that does NOT mean that the parts he is using can't be improved apon more. His goal is to prove that it CAN be done with lesser parts, not that it's the best way to do it.

The origionator of this thread was looking for people the repsond with what kinds of rings they are using to get an idea of what options they might have available. You chimed in taking over the thread with your own issue that was completely seperate from what the thread started out as. Then came the bashing of Total Seal rings, and here we sit.

I was mearly responding to the bashing of Total Seal, pointing out to the origional poster that they ARE a viable option. CLEARLY they work well enough to make enough power to go 10's(which is nothing to scoff at, as you so easily seem to do). Your issue with your engine is a completely different subject and it requires a completely different solution. Just becuase something works in one engine, doesn't mean it will for every other engine out there....

Maybe you didnt realize that nobody really posted anything in this thread, it had been dead for 2 months, and I wanted to know what he chose to do. I am not looking for help!


Maybe you should know that total seal does not = gapless rings. Those are simply a ring that they sell.


The fact is that power is left on the table when you run gapless 2nd rings in a boosted engine.

If you think not, then I dont know what good your engineering classes are doing you.

400whp and 2% leakdown doesnt prove anything!
We all know gapless rings have low leakdown. We all know 30 psi from a big turbo with big heads and fancy manifold and good tune will make 400whp on an 8valve. Very few people build cars like that. That is the only reason there are few in existence. Aaron did 400+ on pump gas!
Ask him what he puts the 2nd ring gaps to on the 1000+hp engines he builds at heffner!.

Warren could easilly be losing 50whp with his rings. Its not like the car spends much time at the track anyways. It is a fun project car, not a race car.
I promise a switch to a proper turbo ringset would bring power to the table.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top