[camachinist]

I use a C/A ZGF top ring and a Total Seal second ring on the race car.....both are plasma moly...
I cheated a bit since my piston has a 1/16" top and second ring groove...

IMO, if the shop isn't familiar with the surface deformation required to seat these rings, either don't use the shop or don't use the rings...
There is a specific stone set and a specific pressure and dwell required on the CK10 to finish the wall surface to seat these rings...I leave these settings to the gentleman who does the machining on my blocks...he does most of the racing engines in our area...

I recommend plasma moly rings if you can get the cylinder walls prepared correctly....

There's nothing wrong with plain cast rings on a stock rebuilt engine...personally, I've always avoided chrome rings because sometimes they never seat....

Tell me a little more about the rest of the combination and the prospective use...

Pat
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1570936&a=11937754&p=42910787.jpg

 

[Dees67]

Sure. The motor started out as a C-code 289. It's been bored 0.060 over (had bad ridges) and honed
by the machine shop I mentioned at the top. I'm having the stock heads worked up by PowerHeads, and
I'm installing Keith Black KB115 (flat-top) pistons on Federal Mogul remanned rods. The CR should come
in somewhere close to 10.0:1 with about 54cc combustion chambers.

The usage is going to be strictly street (and I don't mean the racing class), with an RPM range of
0-5500.

How does plasma-moly compare to chromemoly? My guy says my cylinder walls should be good to
go for chromemoly, but does that mean they're ok for plasma-moly too? I definitely don't want to have
my new motor burning blowby oil for 5000 miles while I wait for the rings to seat. By the same token,
I don't want to put in cheesy rings and find my self rebuilding the rebuild 60k miles from now, y'know?

I like the Total Seal because of their 2-piece secondary compression ring which makes a lot of sense
to me (sort of like a poor man's zero gap ring).

If I'm better off with iron rings, whose would you recommend?

Rich
'67 C-code 'vert (Dees67)
'69 GT FB (project car)
Check out my band: Brickyard Blues

 

[Art]

A 500 grit finish will be pretty smooth. A chrome ring requires a 280 grit finish, a plasma moly ring requires a 400 grit finish...

Required tools for operating a Vintage Mustang:
1. Duct Tape
2. J.B. Weld
3. B.F.H. (Big Fat Hammer)
4. VINTAGE MUSTANG FORUMS II
(Power is cheap, reliability costs money!)

 

[Dees67]

So it sounds like what I should do is call Total Seal and see if I can get a ductile iron set with
a gapless secondary ring and standard tension oil ring set.

Rich
'67 C-code 'vert (Dees67)
'69 GT FB (project car)
Check out my band: Brickyard Blues

 

[Art]

You'll be OK with the Plasma-Moly, (or the standard iron rings). I like the plasma moly file fit Speed-Pro rings, all I've ever used. They say always keep a clean breather element when using Moly rings, they don't like dirt.

Required tools for operating a Vintage Mustang:
1. Duct Tape
2. J.B. Weld
3. B.F.H. (Big Fat Hammer)
4. VINTAGE MUSTANG FORUMS II
(Power is cheap, reliability costs money!)

 

[roadracer]

I'm with Pat.

I use the Childs & Albert Zero Gap rings too.

http://home.netcom.com/~jonescha/Photos/DCP_0355_178x109.jpg
"If you're under control you're not going fast enough"
Parnelli Jones
Try my website

 

[Dees67]

Are the C&A zero gap rings suitable for a long-life street application? Are they better than the
Total Seal gapless or just different?

Rich
'67 C-code 'vert (Dees67)
'69 GT FB (project car)
Check out my band: Brickyard Blues

 

[red66]

my two favorite engine guys (one's a mustang guy, the other/s an engine builder) recommended I go with cast iron. They both said that they will take heat away from the cyl walls much better than and cr/moly ring ever could. I'd like to see the heat transference and capacity specs compared to iron.

My last rebuild (12 months ago) i put in chrome moly, and I believe, may have contributed to the overheat at idle problem.

Juat my .02.

http://66cherry.stangnet.com
Member NTMC
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1611748&a=12299913&p=44922660.jpg

66 vert, 5.0L custom roller motor
99 Expedition
90 Caravan

 

[camachinist]

For your application, with the conditions noted in my previous post, I'd recommend a plasma moly top ring (non-zero gap) and a plain iron second ring....a 3/16" oil ring with chrome rails gets the nod...

Since this is a .060" engine, I'd also recommend that the block be honed with deck plates and a fastener similar to the ones you'll be using and, if possible, with 120-140F water circulating through the block...

The reason I suggest this is because you are at the outer limit of what is considered safe for a 289 overbore and dimensional changes due to fastener stress and water jacket temp do have a bearing on the roundness of the cylinder bore...

Not necessary but recommended...*G*

Pat
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1570936&a=11937754&p=42910787.jpg

 

[Dees67]

It may be too late for that. The block's already been bored and honed. Would rehoning with
torque plates make any difference now? Should I be looking for a replacement block?

Let's assume I go ahead and build up this block. If I were to experience any out-of-roundness
after I finish assembling the motor, how would I know?

Rich
'67 C-code 'vert (Dees67)
'69 GT FB (project car)
Check out my band: Brickyard Blues

 

[camachinist]

Understand....horses are out of the barn...*G*

For a street stocker, I'd say go with what you've got unless another block is easily obtained....how much money do you have in this block currently?

Easiest way to check for deformation is to bolt deck plates on and measure cylinder in different directions and at different heights with a dial bore guage or inside micrometer or outside micrometer and snap guage...

If you do decide to go with this block, I'd be curious to see the leakdown readings at 100 mi, 500mi and 1000mi....

That will be you're best indicator once the engine is together as to the condition of the cylinder seal...

If you want to check that stuff, when you get to that point, post and we'll outline the procedure...or your machinist can tell you...
Remember, that's leakdown, not compression...

I don't wish to worry you unnecessarily....maybe a bit of an over-reaction on my part due to my racing background....I hope the opinions of others in this thread have given you some alternatives to consider and put your mind at ease...

Pat
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1570936&a=11937754&p=42910787.jpg

 

[Dees67]

Well, I'm worried now *G*...

I'm about $400 into the block now. I would be willing to go another $100 in the name of
anal retentiveness and have a cleanup pass done with torque plates, if that will help.

But this is not a race motor. As long as I don't have visibly blue smoke pouring out
and a point or two loss in compression ratio, and as long as I don't have to reuild
the engine in 20000 miles, I'm fairly comfortable. If you're telling me that I might lose
that last 5% at the corner of the price/performance curve, I won't worry anymore. But
if the motor might end up worse than before I tore it down, then I should have it re-honed.

Which reminds me - if the walls do go out of round under torque, will honing be able to clean
them up? They can't be bored any further, so do I really have any options here?

P.S. Thanks for taking the time to follow up on this with me.


Rich
'67 C-code 'vert (Dees67)
'69 GT FB (project car)
Check out my band: Brickyard Blues

 

[camachinist]

yeah, just wait till I turn the nightmare switch on....hehehe

You're likely talking a few % in leakdown numbers....not a biggie for street use...I don't think oiling would be a problem, likely more a slight power loss....*IF* the bores end up slightly out of round...

The guy who honed the block can likely scare up a set of torque plates and at least check the dimensions....if all is well, then I'm just blowing hot air...*G*....
Don't kill the chickens before they're hatched....

Pat
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1570936&a=11937754&p=42910787.jpg