Total Seal rings add 25-30HP?!?

[GNICETRY]

Was reading an ad in a mag and saw that these rings with the gapless first ring increased HP by 25-30. I know that it was an ad, but how much are these rings worth HP wise?Are they really that much better than stock/regular rings?

 

[6PacktoGo]

They are not one bit better than a good set of Speed Pro file fit rings that are properly gapped. I've never seen ANY verifiable gain in HP or reduction in blow by or leakage on the dyno or in the car, ever, not in 20 years. I've seen more problems with them than I've seen anything else. From my experience they're a gimmick at best, and at worst a crutch for another problem.

 

[WFO]

from my experience,yes they work when set up properly but so do every other file fit ring.i suppose they could pick up 25 hp over a worn out set of stock rings with washed out cylinder walls... .any time you reduce blowby you're going to increase hp...


later,sean

 

[REDS HOT AIR]

Originally posted by 6PacktoGo
They are not one bit better than a good set of Speed Pro file fit rings that are properly gapped. I've never seen ANY verifiable gain in HP or reduction in blow by or leakage on the dyno or in the car, ever, not in 20 years. I've seen more problems with them than I've seen anything else. From my experience they're a gimmick at best, and at worst a crutch for another problem.

you need an engine dyno...a real one not desk top dyno.

total seals are speedpro rings with one notched and a second ring fitted in with it to cover the gap..


the higher the cylinder pressure the more difference you will see in total seals v/s non total seals

 

[Chyke]

I use both an engine dyno and chassis dyno for testing etc. I also have seen no benifit to using total seal rings. I have seen more harm than good with this set-up. Most notably is ring chatter resulting in scratched cylinder walls. But, everyone has a right to learn first hand.

 

[ZNX]

Ditto

Alan,Chyke
I got the same reply from D. Weber on total seal rings
"We have seen no benifit what so ever in fact we have concerns of ring chatter''.

 

[6PacktoGo]

before you open your mouth, find out what and who you are talking about

Originally posted by REDS HOT AIR
you need an engine dyno...a real one not desk top dyno.

total seals are speedpro rings with one notched and a second ring fitted in with it to cover the gap..


the higher the cylinder pressure the more difference you will see in total seals v/s non total seals

Uh Red, for just a little FYI, I have and have had for 20 YEARS, a Kahn 1000 HP 9000 RPM waterbrake dyno, now fully computerized and continually calibrated. I've been doing this for around 20 years, I build racing engines on a regular basis, and I do have some idea what I'm talking about. I did a back to back test on the ring question several years ago, and found ZERO DIFFERENCE. YOU don't believe me? How about this, I DON"T CARE. You might consider doing a little investigating before you make baseless statments about something you know nothing about (as in whether or not I own a dyno). I DO own a dyno, DO YOU?

 

[Otto J]

this is what i have been TOLD by a reputable builder, it cant hurt to use a gapless ring on the second ring,but dont use them on the upper ring,reason being that when detonated there is extreme heat that gets between the 2 rings and actual;ly twist the first ring because it cannot relieve itself,causing it to hurt the cylinder walls
Otto

 

[REDS HOT AIR]

Re: before you open your mouth, find out what and who you are talking about

Originally posted by 6PacktoGo
I DO own a dyno, DO YOU?

nope dont own one but have an uncle with one that runs super stock and full access to another one that i have been around many nights testing.

im thinking since this is a TURBO buick board that he was/is talking about in a low rpm boosted motor in which i have seen gains with my own eyes ..

on n/a sb and bb cheby motors you are correct in saying no change but you will find ring flutter in the higher rpm range 7500+ normally that our lil buick motors will never reach.

i have witnesed gains in torque on heavy nitroused motors as well..

sorry if you dont agree .. just stateing what i have witnessed and we wont even get into leak down rates after heavy abuse


peace...RED

 

[CraigT]

Originally posted by KLHAMMETT
this is what i have been TOLD by a reputable builder, it cant hurt to use a gapless ring on the second ring,but dont use them on the upper ring,reason being that when detonated there is extreme heat that gets between the 2 rings and actual;ly twist the first ring because it cannot relieve itself,causing it to hurt the cylinder walls
Otto

My engine builder talked to the Sealed Power reps at a convention or something this past summer. They were told that 11-13 hp was gained on our motors when the rings were put on the top. I had them on the second rings and now I have them on the top rings. One thing that I did notice was the very high vacuum readings that I would get under certain conditions on my old motor. My new one is not running yet. At cold idle speed when the engine had been run a few hours before, I would see 25 inches plus on the gauge. This is what I know.

 

[Otto J]

when people talk to the reps i wonder if they ask them about using them on a turbo motor and what they say about that
Otto

 

[CraigT]

My builder did. They sent my bottom rings back to get the top rings.

 

[Race Jace]

I have used them in my motors since 97 and like them. I have not had any problems. I like them.

 

[Chuck Leeper]

Gappless??

I've used them on N/A SBC w/ alky injection in my rail. We beat this engine HARD and found VERY little leakdown, [as in <5%] after a yr of operation in the 8 to 10,000 rpm range. No complaints... Not used on a turbo engine.. I was one of the lucky folks that had access to Jim Ruggles when he was in business. He said he found no benefit, therefore I used file fits!!
I have gone 1 step further in the ring application saga w/ turbo engines.
I read an article in CHEVY HI PERF on expanding the gaps on top and sec rings. I have contacted SPEED PRO and discussed this w/ an application engineer.[ 248-354-7700] We agreed on the top at .006" per inch of bore. Vs .004" as the "old theory". The second ring is also set at .006"/inch of bore.
Other suggested gaps are:
A. Street N/A .004" top and .005" sec.
B. Drags N/A .0045" top and .0055" sec.
C. N2O street .005" top and .006" sec.
D. N2O drags .007" top and .007" sec.
E. Supercharged/turbo .006" top and .006" sec.
Their cyl traces show SIGNIFICANLTY better top ring sealing. [ As in the top ring unseats] The "crossover" pressure point moves from 95* crank angle to 181*... [PSI under the ring equals the PSI above.]
Basically the article says that they have found 2 benefits from wider gaps.
1. Lower blowby due to top ring not being lifted by pressure trapped between the upper and lower rings.
2. More horsepower at higher rpm.
They also say that some new cars have the second gap increased and have reduced blowby and emissions.

Talk about information overload!! Wish I could remember and apply all the good tech info we have available everyday!!

One additional item.. I am now adding a vac pump to the engine and will see if blowby decreases further.. kinda loose now, but it runs good!!
Talked to a pro stock guy some time ago. The pros use a vac gauge to determine engine condition . If vac drops below a certain point, it's time to freshen up..He also said he can match the vac recording to the cars performance.. they run in parallel!!
Maybe I'll just use another channel on the DATAMITE and see what the crankcase is doing!! Damn! this logger is NEAT!!
The inset in the article also mentioned:
Zero gap sec and total seal rings are contradictions. They also said they had tested zero seconds and found notable performance gains over std rings gapped at .004" top and .003 sec..[ no mention of turbo engine being tested] go figure...

 

[JeffG]

I had talked to my motor builder about going the gapless route too, but he said ring flutter was a problem with them because of pressure build up between the first and second ring. Supposedly, they perform well under a leak down test but do not seal as well as a regular ring set under load. This was before the new generation of Gapless top ring configurations. I assumed they moved to the gapless top ring to address the flutter issue.

 

[Intercooler]

Opinions are like.........

The ring set is a standard file fit ring set with one ring (top or second) having a groove that another a ring that I can tell no difference in it and an oil control ring sits in this groove and is rotated 180º to bridge the gap. This is my first try with the Total-Seal top ring setup but I could tell a big difference in how hard it was to turn this one over with the plugs in it and the last one I did with standard file-fit rings. Some of the people using them on TR's report they don't get the oil-drip out the breathers that is associated with normal rings, more vacuum and cleaner oil. I will let you know soon enough my experiences.

 

[qtr@atyme]

On a fresh engine with the ring end gap set correctly at build up
Im sure you would see little gain on the dyno but abuse a turbo motor for a bunch of passes then check to see what the differance is. Which I dont think many people do.Use total seal rings in almost every engine I build as long as its in the customers budgit. Have noticed at the end of the race season there is less than 8% cyclinder leakage . One of my guys has over 300 passes on his 396 chevy (pretty healthy build up and 250Hp NOS) in a chevelle. Use total seal in my own stg 2 noticed a signifficant in crease in vacuum Enough that you could hear air whistling going through the dipstick tube. Had to put a restricter
in the pcv line (as per directions from total seal) to get it to stop and the car to idle correctly.