FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: Faron on October 13, 2020, 03:14:09 PM
-
Does anyone make ring spacers for the old TRW flat top 390 Pistons that would allow a better ring package , if so who, and how much , the 5/64, 3/32, 3/16 combo is a bit dated , I have nice .040 Pistons I want to use but that ring package limits me
-
Check out Total Seal, what you are looking for are, practically, required equipment for NHRA Stock Eliminator engines due to the fact that NHRA Stock rules require factory ring groove width while permitting any ring thickness the builder has enough nerve to try.
-
I priced a set for 1/16, 3/16 about 400 for rings and spacers.
-
Faron ,
Hastings make a "groove lock spacer" that is .030 thick. This is commonly used along with a 1.2mm ring in a "normal" 5/64ths groove. The trouble is in finding a 1.2 MM top ring in 4.090
-
Faron ,
Hastings make a "groove lock spacer" that is .030 thick. This is commonly used along with a 1.2mm ring in a "normal" 5/64ths groove. The trouble is in finding a 1.2 MM top ring in 4.090
And you need a 3/32 too, not sure what they do for that, my gut tells me that Total Seal has it for the racers, but I have never researched the 5/64, 3/32 spacers
-
Ross ,
The second uses the same spacer with a 1/16th ring. At that point it's better to buy a new set of pistons with the correct smaller grooves. Spacers are subject to inertia and that presents other issues.
Randy
-
Ross ,
The second uses the same spacer with a 1/16th ring. At that point it's better to buy a new set of pistons with the correct smaller grooves. Spacers are subject to inertia and that presents other issues.
Randy
Well if you only got to a 1/16 ring, not really getting all the benefits either.
However, agree completely, if not class racing, not worth the squeeze for spaces, best to buy a set of Racetecs :) That's why I priced...not bought LOL
-
Agreed
-
I HATE ring groove spacers of all kinds. In some cases like the stock eliminator stuff they are the only viable option. But piston manufacturers and ring manufacturers have gone to huge effort getting surface finishes, geometry and accuracy light years better than it used to be. Then spacers go in there adding a whole bunch of weight, variability, many are poorly made and fit like "socks on a rooster"... (only old Sealer Power guys will know where that quote comes from...)
-
I don’t particularly like the idea either but was going to try a set to say I did. Was glad when I saw the price lol
-
I agree Barry. Spacers are not a good thing. Stock eliminator racers were using a "loop hole" for the T/S gapless ring usage. The ring groove had to be "as produced" but by adding the .030 spacer , it allowed a MUCH lower drag 1.2 MM top ring to be used in the same groove. REALLY enterprising individuals then added grooves to the spacer to create "gas ports" for the ring. They were not legal in the piston , but there was no mention of ring modifications being illegal. Some cried foul but that quickly ended when the "two piece" gapless ring had been legal for years. "Technically" two pieces , but FAR less drag .
Current rules open up the ring groove sizing , but kep the "spec" for how far down the top ring is and still prohibit gas ported "pistons".