

| Subject: | Re: total seal ring end gap on 95mm pistons? |
| From: | John Rodgers |
| Date: | Sun, 3 Aug 2003 21:43:12 -0500 |
Damon, you didn't mention what engine you are working on - Aircooled or WBX. Very curious about the use of the 95mm cylinder barrels, and why. I know that the 101.4 mm is the same as 4 inch ---- meaning Chevy small block pistons are possible. Just curious. Regards, John Rodgers 88 GL Driver Damon Campbell wrote: >Hello list, > >I'm currently gapping the rings on the engine i am >building, and am using the non-traditional combination >of total seal rings (the second ring is gapless) and >the 95mm pistons. > >First thing i notice is that the ring end gaps >specified by bently are significantly larger than that >of total seal: > >upper: .035" (bentley)/ .020" (T.S.) >middle: .035" (bentley)/ .013" (T.S.) >oil scraper: .037" (bentley)/ .015 min. (T.S.) > >Now so far, the uppers and oil scrapers seem fine per >T.S. spec, but the middles, without any filing, are >coming out to about 0.019". These are the somewhat >funky gapless ones - how strict is this number (seems >pretty strict), and what should i do about it? Also, >why the difference between bentley and T.S.? > >My final question is that i'm having a really hard >time determining which way the bevel on the top ring >goes - what is the secret method to doing this? > >Thanks for any help, >-Damon > >===== >'84 Westy (Sparky) >'65 Kharma Ghia (Dharma) > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software >http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > >
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »