Best method for seating the rings

[ted]

Originally Posted by Anthony

While we're talking about rings, what do you guys think about total seal gapless rings? both top and second gapless sets?

Would you choose total seal gapless top, or Childs Z-gap set?

I'm an advocate of the gapless rings in a racing environment especially from the ring life standpoint. I ran a 427 HiRiser with 14.1:1 cr for over twelve years on the same set of C&A gapless rings and while the heads ultimately wore out, the leakdown was still at the desired 2% or less on those cylinders that the heads were not failing on.

On a new engine, engine output can initially be expected to be the same regardless of the ring design if the rings are seated properly and cylinder leakage kept the same. But over time, conventionally gapped rings will ultimately increase the ring end gap over 0.003" for each 0.001" of wear in the bore and this is where the gapless ring design will shine. Over the long haul, the gapless rings will maintain a better ring seal and hence, less cylinder leakage.

As far as ring design between the C&A and the Total Seal brands, I lean heavily towards the Childs & Albert Z gap. Partly in ease of installation and the other in not having to deal with a two piece design that can be contrary at times to install. For a normally aspirated drag racing engine, I prefer a gapless second ring in the convential location but in blown applications I lean towards a gapless top ring with that particular ring spaced further down from the top of the piston.

Ted Eaton.
Eaton Balancing.