Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

OK, so here it is.

16 Thou top ring and 20 thou bottom ring would be considered 'spot on' for street application.

18 Thou top ring and 24 thou bottom will be for race application.

Your bottom ring should be 4-6 thou larger than your top. The two motors I built recently I went 18 thou for the top ring and then 22 and 24 thou for the second, the motor that I went 24 thou on the second is notably free'er than the one with a 22 thou bottom ring and also appears to have slightly better blow-by. However the motor with 18 and 22 is as much more aggressive in feel as the other is free'er, and happier to make power. The 2 thou difference in bottom ring accounts for 10psi static compression in comparable motors.

Most advice I received from machine shops told me to go 15 thou top and bottom, with the occasional shop telling me to go for a larger top ring. CP themselves recommended the 4-6 thou increase to the second ring and this was confirmed with ONE respectable shop.. I ended up following their advice and making the top ring a little larger than recommended, but following the 4-6 rule for the bottom.

In your case, and if I were building it for myself, I would happy go 18-22 again.

Don't do the top larger. Its old V8 theory and I reckon you will end up with pathetic blow by issues :)

Having first hand experienced the difference of two motors with larger bottom rings I can tell you a little more gap on the bottom improved blow by. That engine has pathetic ventilation and zero blow by issues. Factory and in no need of repair it pushed oil passed the GT30's seals because of poor ventilation, same motor and turbo now faultless. Black magic.

Bore x 0.0045" is rule of thumb which will equal .00158", call it 16.. I think 18 is going to be better with your choice of 4 or 6 thou extra on the bottom.

  • Like 1
  • 1 month later...

Ok finally everything has been machined, Washed and measured! Picked up the Ikea kit this morning!

Ikea Kit:

post-23119-0-89260100-1387777489_thumb.jpg

Block:

post-23119-0-09230100-1387777478_thumb.jpg

I just need to gap the rings down and it's ready to Assemble! Thanks to Mendham Engineering!

They are bottomed out "hand tight"

If entering a water jacket use ARP thread sealant.

Run a thread cutter through all bolt holes to clean threads before instalation.

About ring end gaps, follow the ring manufacturers instructions.

As an example JE Pro Seal recommend the following...

Street Moderate Turbo/Nitrous top ring .0050" per inch of bore, second ring .0055" per inch of bore.

Higher boost, say 20-25 psi top ring .0060" per inch of bore, second ring same.

Get into the 35+ PSI game and is .0070" per inch of bore, second ring the same.

Key pont is a little too much ring end gap is OK, to little will break your rings and score the bores.

On lower boost levels a larger second ring end gap is benaficial, the abilty to bleed off any gas that passes the first ring is important as its the pressure differatial that seals the top ring, opening the second ring a little more is the key.

On higher boost levels this is neglatable, however i tend to give the lower rings and extra .004" for guaranteed seal.

Bottom them out and hand tighten slightly with an Allen key. It's a confusing topic for sure.

I originally thought hand tighten was to wind them in by hand until they bottom out, but after many discussions I came to the above conclusion.

ARP paper work is as i posted, you can drive them in with a allen key as most have a allen key head but leave the end pressue at hand tight, therefore dont lean into the allen key......just let them softly bottom out, hence hand tight.

Piston ring end gap and piston material expansion is 2 diffrent things.

Rings expand on their own in the bore, they float in the piston regardless of its expansion.

Point being the more heat, the more the rings will expand, so therefore the more boost/nitros/hp you run, the more ring end gap you need.

A good way to explain it is ring manufacturers supply their own ring end gaps regardless of what pisons you run, piston manufacturers supply a piston to bore clearance regardless of the rings you run.

Each have their own expansion rate and clearance depending on the material they are made out of and what your desired outcome is.

Follow the ring manufacturers and piston manufacturers instruction for clearances and running situation, most clearly explain NA, Boost, Nitrous etc clearances per inch of bore.

Edited by GTRPSI

Just putting the crank in and it seems one of the studs may be defective and is 2-3mm longer than the other short studs.

Does anyone know where I could source single arp studs?

Edited by murrayis

Are you sure you cleaned all the crap out of the hole? Make sure you do as GTRPSI mentioned and run a tap through the thread, then clean them out with carb cleaner, just to make sure there is no oil or crap in the hole or the stud will hydraulically lock before bottoming in the thread.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Had I known the diff between R32 and R33 suspension I would have R33 suspension. That ship has sailed so I'm doing my best to replicate a drop spindle without spending $4k on a Billet one.
    • OEM suspension starts to bind as soon as the car gets away from stock height. I locked in the caster and camber before cutting off the kingpin. I then let the upright down in a natural (unbound) state before re-attaching it. Now it moves freely in bump and droop relative to the new ride height. My plan is to add GKTech arms before the car is finished so I can dial camber and caster further. It will be fine. This isn't rocket science. Caster looks good, camber is good, upper arm doesn't cause crazy gain and it is now closer to the stock angle and bump steer checks out. Send it.
    • Pay careful attention to the kinematics of that upper arm. The bloody things don't work properly even on a normal stock height R32. Nissan really screwed the pooch on that one. The fixes have included changing the hole locations on the bracket to change the angle of the inner pivot (which was fairly successful but usually makes it impossible to install or remove the arm without unbolting the bracket from the tower, which sucks) and various swivelling upper arm designs. ALL the swivelling upper arm designs that look like a capital I (with serifs) suck. All of them. Some of them are in fact terribly unsafe. Even the best one of them (the old UAS design) shat itself in short order on my car. The only upper arm that works as advertised and is pretty safe is the GKTech one. But it is high maintenance on a street car. I'm guessing that a 600HP car as (stupidly, IMO) low as you are going is not going to be a regular driver. So the maintenance issues on suspension parts are probably not going to be a problem. But you really must make sure that however your fairly drastically modded suspension ends up, that the upper arms swing through an arc that wants to keep the inner and outer bolts parallel. If the outer end travels through an arc that makes that end's bolt want to skew away from parallel with the inner bolt, you will build up enormous binding and compressing forces in the bushes, chew them out and hate life. The suspension compliance can actually be dominated by the bush binding, not the spring rate! It may be the case that even something like the GKTech arm won't work if your suspension kinematics become too weird, courtesy of all the cut and shut going on. Although you at least say there's no binding now, so maybe you're OK. Seeing as you're in the build phase, you could consider using R33/4 type upper arms (either that actual arm, OEM or aftermarket) or any similar wishbone designed to suit your available space, so alleviate the silliness of the R32 design. Then you can locate your inner pivots to provide the correct kinematics (camber gain on compression, etc).
    • The frontend wouldn't go low enough because the coilover was max low and the upper control arm would collapse into itself and potentially bottom out in the strut tower. I made a brace and cut off the kingpin and then moved the upright down 1.25" and welded. i still have to finish but this gives an idea. Now I can have a normal 3.25" of shock travel and things aren't binding. I'm also dropping the lower arm and tie rod 1.25".
    • Motor and body mockup. Wheel fitment and ride height not set. Last pic shows front ride height after modifying the front uprights to make a 1.25" drop spindle.
×
×
  • Create New...