Page 2 of 2

Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 7:52 am
by m_mcgranahan
Hi Ken,

Boy from the looks of your pic on this post, it looks like someone used Larry the Cable Guy's dna and cloned some dogs from it! laugh.gif What a world, red neck dogs!


Sorry totally off topic :-)


QUOTE (kdeal @ Apr 1 2008, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I wish we were all gapless.......

[attachment=6062:arkansas...rd_dogs2.jpg]

Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:38 pm
by ozarkdaler
QUOTE (kdeal @ Apr 1 2008, 05:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I wish we were all gapless.......

[attachment=6062:arkansas...rd_dogs2.jpg]



That is a funny picture

Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:52 pm
by jinx44
Many of the automotive boards I am on have had indepth discussion about the gapless rings. The general consensus is the idea behind them is good, but there are many problems. Ring tension is one of them. Since the ring is half as thick as normal, it can not exert the tension needed.

You won't find any top engine builder using them.

Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:28 pm
by claas900
I didn't think the tension really mattered that much? I always thought it was compression the pushed the rings out?

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:25 am
by thedeatons
Perhaps both, with the gas ported piston being used in the engine Timbo is talking about that would provide even more pressure directly on the inside of the rings.

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:26 am
by wistech
I've been doing more research and it looks like these rings have been around for 60 years. There was a lot of problems when people started using them in the second groove and they got a bad rap which is still with them. Many of the racers recommend them for engines that have a blow-by issue to keep pressures down in the crankcase and when using alcohol to keep from contaminating the oil. As far as the " TOP Builder" comment I found many who swear by them and just as many who swear at them. LOL What it's looking like is there is very little actual test data to confirm the use of these things. We are only talking about a gain of a few percent so any error at all in the build could mask the results. As far as results I for one have only the 432 which has put out seemingly impossible power. It beat the very high compresion CP450 with the same exhaust and fuel. I built and ported both engines so I know everything else was the same. By all previous data the 432 should have been around 1 to 2 hp less even if they both had the same compression.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:01 am
by T-Rex
I would say bad, I used them in both of my first Raptor builds and gained nothing but a empty wallet....

Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:01 pm
by wistech
Just installed my 3rd set . This one smoked for about 2 minutes now there is none. Hard to tell by seat of the pants . Its a 448 with gen 2 porting but it does start good and haul the mail . This one pulled just over 50hp a few years back so maybe we can get it on the dyno for a retune and see if it has any more. I can definatly tell its from the early days of porting . It doesnt have the insane top end of the new stuff.

Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 7:10 pm
by polyesterpig
Just pulled a stock 432 piston / aluminum sleeve with proseal gapless rings apart and they were not lined up. I have 2 gapless ring motors that run fine. Just make sure you lightly hone your cylinder and use 30 weight for break-in.