anyone care to make a judgement on whether or not it's okay to rering a stock engine with .25 oversize rings and file them down to basically stock size to run a tighter ring gap for better compression? I've been told this is a good idea on race motors, but for a stocker it will cause irregular wear on the cylinders and will cause problems over time (not a big deal for racing, but a big deal for a street bike)
Since you have a motor that is easy to get spares for, I'd try to find the right size first. I don't think I'd ever run the wrong size rings on the track. They are not super flexible, squeezing in is as bad as spreading out. I've cracked them during installation being very careful. I'd find the right size for the bore, or go up on the bore if it's between sizes.
Since you have a motor that is easy to get spares for, I'd try to find the right size first. I don't think I'd ever run the wrong size rings on the track. They are not super flexible, squeezing in is as bad as spreading out. I've cracked them during installation being very careful. I'd find the right size for the bore, or go up on the bore if it's between sizes.
i was planning on filing to the lower clearance spec per the shop manual, pj's right, the rings I got were probably crap and too loose. I do understand the different expansion rates of the cylinder, piston and rings...
I looked at total seal's design, it's really genius, the article they wrote up on the dyno seems the proof is in the pudding, I'll have to see if they have rings to fit the 350
i was planning on filing to the lower clearance spec per the shop manual, pj's right, the rings I got were probably crap and too loose. I do understand the different expansion rates of the cylinder, piston and rings...
I looked at total seal's design, it's really genius, the article they wrote up on the dyno seems the proof is in the pudding, I'll have to see if they have rings to fit the 350
I've run them currently in two engines and have built several using them. Old engines love them.
Next clue.....
Dial bore gauge and learn how to use it.....
ya really gotta have virtually error free cylnders not only with respect to being a near perfect cylinder.... but also with respect to how it's located with respect to the rod, its journal and those of the crank as well
I've run them currently in two engines and have built several using them. Old engines love them.
Next clue.....
Dial bore gauge and learn how to use it.....
ya really gotta have virtually error free cylnders not only with respect to being a near perfect cylinder.... but also with respect to how it's located with respect to the rod, its journal and those of the crank as well
Because of how my cases were tweaked to get a 60mm bore between the studs, my bore centerline does not pass through the axis of the crank, but is shifted down by nearly 2mm. Does this make my motor a poor candidate for gapless rings?
Because of how my cases were tweaked to get a 60mm bore between the studs, my bore centerline does not pass through the axis of the crank, but is shifted down by nearly 2mm. Does this make my motor a poor candidate for gapless rings?
When I get my hands on the appropriate measuring gear again I'll sketch it up and start a new thread. My bore itself was true when assembled, but other than knowing it's 2mm off center I can't verify for certain the exact alignment of the bore to the crank. When I looked into the rammifications before all I came across was increased wear on one piston skirt, reduced wear on the other, the motor would tend to act like a long rod going up and a short rod going down, not that the amount of offset I'm at would be enough of a change that I could feel AFAIK. Never considered how it'd affect the rings.
When I get my hands on the appropriate measuring gear again I'll sketch it up and start a new thread. My bore itself was true when assembled, but other than knowing it's 2mm off center I can't verify for certain the exact alignment of the bore to the crank. When I looked into the rammifications before all I came across was increased wear on one piston skirt, reduced wear on the other, the motor would tend to act like a long rod going up and a short rod going down, not that the amount of offset I'm at would be enough of a change that I could feel AFAIK. Never considered how it'd affect the rings.
My flatty runs 4 adjustable cylinder oilers, no baffles and does not use the two factory oil pumps.... but one adapted georotor from a later engine.
My first rodeo with those rings was a 1934 vld with cr bumped up from 4.5:1 to 7:1 and squish tightened from from ~3/8" to 0.004"
Triple digit mph..... no problem.
My guess is people who don't like them assumed their error riddled internal geometry was good when it wasn't.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Cafe Racer Forum
418.3K posts
20.4K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to Cafe Racer style race bikes owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about restoration, performance, racing, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!