I'd like to see a test where ring wear is tested under several different conditions. 1. no crankcase evacuation. 2. with functioning PCV 3. with vacuum pump or other aids such as collector scavenge fittings.. Because we KNOW that having a PCV valve can double the life of an engine on the street, but it's obviously hard to do 100,000 miles worth of dyno testing, but some document of this really has to be made to show definitively the benefits of proper crankcase ventilation on any kind of engine!
@@TotalSeal I'd rather have the durability of a 16th ring package & improve//upgrade the engine cooling system. I always use "special coated" (16th) Total Seal Piston Rings & I've never seen any significant increase in oil or water temperatures. Regardless, THANKS for posting this interesting video. I LOVE TOTAL SEAL PISTON RINGS. 🙂 Best regards, Ben
thats why we have oil engineers like you, because now the raceteam wants you do build a better oil to have temps come back down at the new performance piston ring package, and sustain at 8,000 rpm for that 500 mile race.
Love the way you teach and explain, I always wondered, can a home rebuilt engine. still use a light tension, thin ring pack, with a regular drill and hone, or does the cylinders need a special honing. Great Video. THANKS
A similar test between high tension vs low tension rings at the same thickness would be rather interesting. There are issues however due to carbon deposits on low tension rings (esp. many modern Toyota engines in fact) and many people when they rebuild them opt to use higher tension rings.
Honda's are terrible in this regard as well. My wife had a 2008 Accord and now has a 2016 CR-V. Both with the 2.4L K-series engine. In the quest to reduce engine friction losses and boost efficiency we now have engines that get sticky rings well before 100,000 miles and start consuming oil. I'm waiting to try the new Valvoline Restore and Protect that is supposed to eat deposits better than other oils.
This is exactly what I wondered. How exactly do you make a high tension vs. low tension rings? Materials differences? I would think that you wouldn't want to compromise the ring material for tribology reasons. Or making them to a different diameter and squeezing them more to put them in the bore?
Haven't seen your videos before now! Just subscribed to the channel. A great demonstration/explanation. Every day's a school day. I'll look forward to seeing your next upload. Cheers
The total contact surface of the ring available to transfer the heat to the block is smaller with the thin ring package. Is that a limiting factor for how much heat can be transferred to the block through the rings? If it is a factor... does this mean more heat is held in the piston using the thinner ring due to less total area to transfer the heat?
Great question. While the piston ring does transfer heat from the piston to the cylinder wall, the oil also absorbs heat from the piston. The key finding from this test was that both water and oil temperature increased with the larger piston ring package. Accordingly, the temperature increase was not due to increased transfer. Instead, it was due to increased friction. The thinner rings are still capable of transferring the necessary amount of heat from the piston in this engine.
The ring contact area to the piston is greater than the bore contact, the ring temperature is closer to the piston temperature. And bore temp is not consistent through the stroke. Thinner rings, due to their lower face friction and volume run cooler.
Hiya Lake Speed, I've been watching a few of your videos lately. On rings etc, You've sold me on the thinner gas ported rings for my new build, mild street, but quality. Where can I find a set of SBC pistons with your rings as a set? Im in Fremantle, so will have to hunt them down from the US. Cheers, Mike
Amsoil 20w-50 racing oil reduces friction around the rings and can drop engine temps by 50 degrees. This is why those who know what Amsoil does love to put this oil in their Harleys. Amsoil even makes oil just for this bike.
I don't know if you'll see this since this is old. But you said something interesting, "cooler running engines make more power". I don't get it. A hotter engine would I think have more thermal expansion of the air, effectively raising compression and therefore power. I think. What am I missing?
The piston rings are also how the piston transfers it's heat to the cylinder wall and cooling jackets. Is one of the reasons that you're seeing higher coolant and oil temps with thicker rings because the piston is transferring more of it's heat to the cylinder walls? Do the pistons run hotter with thinner rings?
Great question. The majority of piston cooling is done by the oil, so the difference in ring thickness doesn’t make a huge difference in heat transfer from the pistons. The evidence of that is the cooler oil temperature with the thinner rings. If the pistons were hotter with the thinner rings (because they were transferring less heat) then the oil temperature would have increased with the thinner rings.
@@TotalSeal I’m sure you’re right, but when you use piston oil squirters the piston temp goes down and the oil temp goes up because heat is being moved from the piston to the oil. I get that in this case we’re dealing with oil heat from combustion which transfers from the piston and through the rings to the wall AND we’re dealing with heat generated from ring+ wall friction and it’s hard to know what heat is coming from where. I just recently saw an engineering diagram showing heat flow from a piston through the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rings to the wall so it triggered my question about whether the reduced area in contract between the rings and wall (with thin rings) meant that pistons with thin rings run hotter. (My theory-question was: “Is the reduction in oil and coolant temps from thinner rings because of BOTH reduced ring to wall friction AND less heat transfer between the piston and the wall through the reduced surface area contact? (Which would mean higher piston temps.)
@@adamarndt7617 it is important to note this engine doesn’t have piston oil squirters. It just uses splash from the crankcase and oil leakage from the rod bearings. We are not saying piston rings don’t conduct heat from the pistons. They most certainly do. However the change in ring thickness doesn’t have a proportional difference in heat transfer, so a 30% thinner ring doesn’t make a piston 30% hotter. We can validate that via the spark timing. If the piston was 30% hotter, then we would have to reduce spark timing advance to keep the engine from experiencing detonation. By using knock sensors and checking spark timing, blow-by and power output, we can confirm the reduced temperature is not the result of trapping heat in the piston.
@@TotalSeal Thanks. Much appreciated. It’s something I’ve wondered about for a while. Can’t believe you guys respond like this over RU-vid comments, but it’s appreciated. Looking forward to seeing what my current Total Seal gapless 1.2mm/1.2/ 3/16” set that Ed specced for me will do and I’ll definitely consider a gas ported set on the next engine build.
🤔 are Pistons restricted to the ring package thickness that can be used? I'm thinking the ring lands determine the ring thickness that can be used. So, if my pistons came with a thicker ring pack, could i use a thinner ring pack on those same pistons? Thanks Total Seal, I've been a fan of your products for a very long time. I just stumbled across your RU-vid channel. 💪🏆
Interesting video, and I agree with the fact that thicker rings do generate more friction, which translates into more heat and less power. However, keep in mind these were brand new rings, not broken in rings that were being tested. I assume they deglazed or lightly honed the cylinders before they installed the new rings. This, combined with the fact that it takes some time/mileage for new rings to fully seat probably accounts for a large portion of the difference in temperature and horsepower loses. A more accurate comparison would be to run that engine a dozen or so times on the dyno to fully seat the new rings, then compare the "before" and "after" temperature and power readings. You would still see some difference with the thicker ring pack, but probably not as dramatic a difference as the initial test run.
Reducing engine temperature is increasing longevity. Another critical components. Let's start with the valve springs. Shall we make a list critical components and how sensitive they are to heat.
I have to wonder, about how the new rings work in old engines. I have heard from mechanics that todays cast iron is harder, more wear resistant than what was used in the 1960's and 70's. I understand that lower tension rings will last longer, even in the softer metal. but what about durability and sealing in an older engine. are the newer ring packages even compatible? I understand that along with new pistons, the block would have to be prepped properly. And likely bored.
What kind & thickness of ring package would you recommend for diesels? Im rebuilding several (6) cummins commonrails 5.9L & 6.7L. Look at 500-800 hp for towing. I was taught the thicker rings would transfer heat from combustion process more effectively to lower piston temps for longer life. Seems they were & are wrong. So can low tension rings handle 60-80 pounds of boost if running a ported top & gapless 2nd? What type & thickness of (your rings) come with the dimpled SOA rebuild kits? Is there any way to switch piston ring thicknesses to a thinner ring package on a brand new gas 355 rebuild? Have 2 in the shop that have already been machined & balanced just needing to be assembled. Neither engine will see much time at 6000rpm since they will probably be going into trucks. Thank you Sir, look forward to learning. So many questions!!!! I have been adding a bottle of zddp to all older flat tappet engines during an oil (std 10-30) change to prolong their life... now I'm worried if it's built up or too thick!? Use driven BR oil for new engines & groved lifter bores... don't use synthetics as a rule, recommend changing at 3-5K.
Why would the steady-state coolant temperature increase? Doesn't the thermostat regulate that? There is some "proportional offset", as typical for a proportional-only controller (engineering stuff), so could rise a bit above setpoint at higher thermal load, but I wouldn't expect a 25 F increase, identical to the increase in unregulated oil temperature. It true, perhaps why some modern engines have an electronic-thermostat, to run right at setpoint (via engine controller feedback) for all thermal loads. Demonstrates why modern engines have much thinner rings and run thinner oils. Some even push the top ring up higher, leaving minimal piston land to support it. TBD how this affects life. I've already read of unexpected failures. I wonder if any have a steel groove cast into the aluminum piston to hold the top ring, as in some older diesel engines (tractors and such), or maybe they'll need to move to that to keep the top ring so high up (minimizes quench pocket for better combustion and lower emissions). How many engines have aftermarket pistons available for thinner rings? Is your engine a SBC, where parts are abundant and cheap. My 3 1960's engines are Mopar, where choices are nil and aftermarket parts pricey.
I question how the friction could increase that much from the compression rings. When you consider that a barrel shaped top ring has such a small contact area with the cylinder wall and a square faced second ring has a small contact area as well. The difference could only be a few thousandths on an inch. I would believe that the oil control rings could increase friction considerably. Can you test 1/16 compression rings with a low friction oil control ring pack?
We did that in that in another test. The friction is related to all three of the rings (compression and oil control). By going to thinner rings, overall tension is reduced. Also, the barrel does wear in during the break-in process, so the overall contact area is greater than you think.
@@TotalSeal thank you for the reply. The reason I ask is because I don't build as many race engines as I used to. Almost every engine I build now is street strip. Mostly street. So oil consumption is a real concern for me. I cannot help but to correlate the oil consumption issue plaguing late engines with low tension oil control rings. I am aware that there are other factors. Correct oil and a good maintenance schedule. So I was just wondering if we could take advantage of the superior compression rings to offset the increased tension of the larger oil ontrol pack.
@@chevysturgill6330 great comment. Oil consumption in late model engines is related to a drop in oil ring tension. From the factory, oil ring tension is about 10 psi, but over time the expander loses tension (like any other spring). As the oil rings lose tension, oil consumption increases. This can be corrected with slightly higher tension oil rings.
New to the channel, great video! Dumb question, could you run the thinner ring on a piston designed for thicker ring package-the gap (4mm? in this example) becomes a quasi gas port or would the rings experience flutter? Thank you.
It would be cool to run each set of rings and have the same oil for each set. Then run each set with it's own oil for a set time limit. Then send the oil off to blackstone labs to get an oil analysis to see how the rings affected the oil longevity.
We did have @SPEEDiagnostix analyze the used oil samples for us, and we found a 52% difference in the amount of wear generated between the two different ring sets. The .7mm rings produced less wear.
Gas port slugs need a cam that doesn't pull a lot of vacuum. I'm sure gas port rings aren't much different. You can suck the rings off the wall with cam choice or phasing.
WHY are your oil temps so hot? I used to see 230F with 25/50 Pennzoil. 30 years ago. Then with Mobil 1 about 210F. And [fresh engine] had to put a softer spring in the dry sump pump pressure relief. Coolant temp around 185-200. And this racing. Even a Cleveland was around 210 oil temp with synthetic. I have nothing else with oil temp guages!! While I agree with ring friction there is so many pistons that still come with 5. 32 rings that was OEM for decades.
Well, I guess it’s time to spend a thousand dollars on a set of pistons! Wonder if a Pistons manufacturer makes a ring shim similar to ring rail bushing at the wrist pin on big stroke engines when one decides to go to the .07 ring package from 1/16” ring package? Lol
For smooth surfaces, friction doesn't change with contact area size. It definitely will for a different tension (implying a different normal force) and coating (coefficient of friction). Plus, "it's complicated"; blow-by differences, flutter, bore shape under pressure, maybe hydrodynamic differences with the oil on the walls. Nice video, measure often as you are already doing!
Wellll, 1/16 rings are 0.0625" wide. 1mm rings are 0.039" wide, and 0.7mm rings are 0.027559" wide. Two 0.7mm rings are less than the width of one 1/16" ring. That is less surface area by a huge amount. The 1.0mm rings are about 2/3 the surface area of the 1/16" rings. Then there is the ring metalurgy which also contributes to radial tension, another contributing factor in friction. The statement that ring width on a smooth surface is imaterial is not correct. We can express opinions, but Mr Dyno has the final say.
Thinking of an ice rink as an example in my mind. Large and small surfaces of equal mass and equal force applied, resulting in both stopping in the same position on that ice rink surface? The only variable there would be surface area. 🤔
Thickness of thick ring is 2.27 times the thin ring. Wear metals in oil for thick rings are 2.2 times as much also. How much of extra wear metals is simply due to difference in thickness/volume of ring against wall? Maybe thin ring wear radially inward at same rate? So, maybe no increase in durability, but no loss, either.
Since the face of neither the thick or thin ring is Iron, the higher Iron level indicates the cylinder bore, which is Iron, wore more with the thicker ring. The thinner ring is TiN coated, and zero Titanium showed up in the used oil.
What's the take away? Instead of figuring that your radiator is clogged you should consider that a glitch in the matrix installed fat rings, and put your car back. What the hell are the odds of that?
The PVD coating is a Physical Vapor Deposition process. Instead of the part being dipped or sprayed, which results in uneven application, PVD coatings are applied in a vacuum chamber, so they are very uniform. PVD coatings are also lower friction and higher hardness, which means they reduce friction and wear.
Thanks for the question. No, the operating temperature should not change over time due to break-in. In our previous testing with this engine combination, the operating temperatures stay constant with age. The thing that would change operating temperature was oil level, oil viscosity and coolant flow.
On a small block chevy V8 you can run the V6 heads and those two cylinders running open-air in the block will give you hella bass just like some Vegas.
Thanks for the question. An 8 cylinder set of thinner, lower tension rings starts at $207.19 and goes up depending on ring material, coatings and design (gas ported, gapless, diamond finish, etc...). For an exact quote, contact our tech department at info@totalseal.com
Well there is no reason to use inferior materials on the thicker higher tension ring. Who would compare rings made from different materials if your go was to compare rings of different thickness/surface area and tension. You just invalidated the entire test you should only change one variable. The rings should have been otherwise identical in design elements, materials and surface coating!
Yes but how would they compare after 150,000 miles in a turbo charged application? Which ring set would have the most blowby and lower compression? How about 300,000 miles? How much more oil consumption will the thinner rings have? There is always pro's and con's to every design element of every machine ever designed or built! Prior to low tension rings I never had issues with excessive oil consumption now it is so common as to be the new normal across almost all major brands! The modern piston and ring designs are notorious for excessive consumption, blowby and knock! Most of us want engines that last.
Ring tension and ring thickness are two different things. You can have higher tension yet thin rings. Oil consumption is not due to thin rings, it is partially due to low oil ring tension. There are ways to make moderate tension oils rings that don’t lose their tension over time. It’s all about designing the package for the goal.
When your engine only runs less than three minutes this stuff really doesn’t matter engines don’t get very hot in 3 minutes or less, and those gas ported top rings for drag racing are crap there for endurance application blow by = loss of horsepower, for drag racing you just want some non ported chromoly rings and no matter what power adder the ring gap is 10 thousands I ran a 500HP NoS kit with a 10 thou ring gap never had any problems all this gaping to 30-60 thou because of power adders is just stupid I dunno how things about racing have gotten so turned around since I was into it, and my engine didn’t blow oil like all those pro-lines the street outlaws idiots run
For drag racing only application, you are right that vertically gas ported pistons are better than a gas ported ring. But for street/strip applications, the gas ported rings don’t clog up like vertical gas ports will.
In addition, i wonder if some of that extra temperature is coming from heat being conducted away from the piston and transferred to the bores/cooling system from the increased surface area of the rings?
No, the extra temperature is all related to increased friction. If the thinner rings trapped more heat in the piston, the oil temperature would have increased because the pistons are also cooled by the oil.
Well, that is the norm for the piston ring industry. The US based engines used standard measurements and the foreign engines used metric, so over time they’ve all become a jumbled mess.
@@TotalSeal with respect imperial is not "standard" especially the bastardized version that the US uses. Yes I can still work in imperial but I don't intend to. I laugh at the latest trend...engine torque in NM but power in HP🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@whitemonkey7932 In the US, yes, imperial is quite often used in engine building. By the way, USA has been on the metric standard for about 100 years. Our current "imperial" measurments are all based on the metric standard. We just have an adittional way to discuss sizing which can be useful depending on application. Clearly you don't know engines or the united states.
Give me a break!!! Just tell us the temperature difference instead of tell us about a fricken oil filter sticker!!!!! Obviously there was a difference. However!! That difference wasn’t enough to support your story! Marketing gimmicks! Transcend the bullshit!
Took 9 minutes to say what should have taken 3. Talk about repeatability you said the same thing five times. Nothing earth shattering most people understand friction creates heat and power loss.
@@TotalSeal that's because if the piston wants to rock in the bore one side of the ring isn't blocking the other side of the ring from making the seal. use a cd stack cylinder as an example
I just gapped my rings, which include a gas ported top ring, and gapless second ring. The TOP ring specifically had what felt like quite excessive tension against the cyinder walls. I am concerned.
@@TotalSeal Thank you, will do. A friend that has built several engines, professionally with your rings, suggested that a break away torque of 15nm wasn't excessive. It sits around 9-10nm to keep it rotating. Mind you that's dry with just light assembly lube.
