| Author |
Message |
|
want-a-be
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:19 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:45 pm
Posts: 248
|
|
Posted this on another site I lurk in...thought I'd pose the question here as well. I have changed it a bit from where I originally posted it.
A friend of mine likes to run the gapless rings from total seal. Has for years. This year he decided to go with the gapless on the top ring instead of the second. While he had their tech on the phone asking a few question I had him ask about running gapless for both top and second ring. His answer was what I expected, but I wanted to hear it any way. "Compression getting trapped between the top and second ring upsetting ring seal." So he had to decide on one or the other.
This got me to thinking. Why not add 2 to 4, (maybe more?), gas ports to the second ring land and run gapless in both upper ring lands? It is my opinion that the added volume between the ring lands would be plenty of room for any excess compression that "might" be trapped between the rings. If excess compression is there and the gas ports are there it could mean a little better second ring seal also.
Any opinions would be greatly appreciated. I'm sure if an idiot like myself has thought this up some one much smarter with better resources has thought it up and tested it as well.
Don
|
|
  |
|
 |
|
Adger Smith
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:21 am |
|
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 10:39 pm
Posts: 55
|
|
I'm not too sure about your placemenet of the gas ports to a second ring. Were you trying to "Load" the ring back spacing or vent the small amount of trapped gas that leaks past the top ring back to the combustion chamber? HUMMM ??
If the top ring is sealed correctly I think the second ring should be very light tension and only aid in oil control. I've run several very high compression Comp engines with only a top .043 ring and had great sealing.
Adger Smith
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ken0069
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:23 am |
|
 |
| Site Admin |
 |
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11633
Location: Coming At Ya!
|
Adger Smith wrote: I've run several very high compression Comp engines with only a top .043 ring and had great sealing.
Adger Smith gearhead1011 did that same thing for years in his old Phord engine in his Probe but I don't remember what the CR was. I've heard of others doing that successfully as well. _________________ Big Boyz Toyz! Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shrinker
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 4:22 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 4:12 pm
Posts: 1215
Location: Adelaide Australia
|
|
If a customer presented me with an engine with the rings as either 2 gapless or a gas port on the second ring I would tell them to go home and pull it apart because there would be no way I would tune that engine. Trapping a HC between two rings then pressurizing it is the best way to deztroy the piston from detonation in the lands.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gearhead1011
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:07 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 4:11 pm
Posts: 2749
Location: Shepherdsville, KY
|
Ken0069 wrote: Adger Smith wrote: I've run several very high compression Comp engines with only a top .043 ring and had great sealing.
Adger Smith gearhead1011 did that same thing for years in his old Phord engine in his Probe but I don't remember what the CR was. I've heard of others doing that successfully as well. It was just barely over 14:1. _________________ Chuck Woloch Chuck's Automotive Full line Computech dealer chucksautomotive@yahoo.com
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wrightway
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:55 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 9:24 pm
Posts: 15
Location: lawton, MI
|
gearhead1011 wrote: Ken0069 wrote: Adger Smith wrote: I've run several very high compression Comp engines with only a top .043 ring and had great sealing.
Adger Smith gearhead1011 did that same thing for years in his old Phord engine in his Probe but I don't remember what the CR was. I've heard of others doing that successfully as well. It was just barely over 14:1. Wow I have never heard of that being done. Not that plan on trying it but what kind of gains did you guys see? _________________ Joe Wright 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gearhead1011
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:06 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 4:11 pm
Posts: 2749
Location: Shepherdsville, KY
|
wrightway wrote: Wow I have never heard of that being done. Not that plan on trying it but what kind of gains did you guys see? I didn't have the option of running a 2nd ring because there wasn't a groove for it so on that combination I couldn't say if there was any gain. When they made that set of pistons I was told there wasn't room for it. _________________ Chuck Woloch Chuck's Automotive Full line Computech dealer chucksautomotive@yahoo.com
|
|
| |
|
|
|
want-a-be
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:24 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:45 pm
Posts: 248
|
shrinker wrote: If a customer presented me with an engine with the rings as either 2 gapless or a gas port on the second ring I would tell them to go home and pull it apart because there would be no way I would tune that engine. Trapping a HC between two rings then pressurizing it is the best way to deztroy the piston from detonation in the lands. shrinker,...you have totally misread what I'm asking here. Don
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shrinker
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:08 am |
|
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 4:12 pm
Posts: 1215
Location: Adelaide Australia
|
want-a-be wrote:
shrinker,...you have totally misread what I'm asking here.
Don
No I havent missread you, you asked about having both rings as gapless and with a gas port option into the area between the rings. Doing that with gas porting sends the pressure of combustion into the space between the rings causing detonation. It sends HC's into the space where it cant exhaust them then pressurizes them so it detonates the engine.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
want-a-be
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 7:39 am |
|
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:45 pm
Posts: 248
|
shrinker wrote:
No I havent missread you, you asked about having both rings as gapless and with a gas port option into the area between the rings. Doing that with gas porting sends the pressure of combustion into the space between the rings causing detonation. It sends HC's into the space where it cant exhaust them then pressurizes them so it detonates the engine.
Gas porting ring lands does not send pressure between the the ring lands. Leaking past the top ring is where the pressure build up between the rings comes from, in my opinion.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shrinker
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:45 am |
|
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 4:12 pm
Posts: 1215
Location: Adelaide Australia
|
|
Your idea is to send pressure to the second ring as well as the first. The pressure will go to the area between the rings. The pressure is extreme it will leak from the back side of the second ring across the top face of the ring to the zone between the rings. It will cause detonation.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
want-a-be
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:05 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:45 pm
Posts: 248
|
|
What I'm wandering is, if the pressure that may or may not be there would benefit from the extra area to expand in, and not upset the rings.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shrinker
|
Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:05 am |
|
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 4:12 pm
Posts: 1215
Location: Adelaide Australia
|
|
Your idea is risking an engine failure for something that isnt necessary.
One proper sealing ring is all you need.
Gas porting the top ring is sending the gasport flow that leaks across the top of the ring back to the chamber so its safe, doing it to the second ring cant achieve that so its not safe.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
