likable guy.

He's in it for your health!

Same! Imagine how many dyno pulls he's done...

I know right! At least 12. Maybe even 15!

dä gjorde ja mä

Exactly. Freeing up 2-5 HP here and there adds up. How much HP does a mechanical fan and water pump sap away? Not enough to notice in your grocery getter, but its enough to put you in last place on race day.

Engine Masters did an episode on the fans... 30hp to run the clunky stocker on their engine. Just make an electric setup

Tekvicious well its not "just run electric fan" necessarily, as the amps drawn will use hp through the alternator

yeah, like 1hp.

T1000AX yes. Keep thinking the competition is stupid. While you're making 30hp over your stock 5hp engine, others are making3 and 4000hp

Steve's the man. But I'm also excited to see the new direction Evan is taking things since he took over the mag. He's quiet likeable and fairly switched on too. He knows what the people want to see. Well, he knows what I want to see anyway. Can't speak for others

just by listening to it

That's the plan. Thanks for watching!

YES, +1

GO to motor trend and check out former Editor in Chief from Hotrod, Steve, and Dulcich the Mopar man. They do this all the time!

Nathan Stephenson Already paying for motertrend on demand bud👍

eXViLs because I drive a diesel that needs a bigger turbo

Yeah, I did on my big boost turbo engine too. I'm pretty happy with the result as well

Smokey was right. But it wasn't until much later that metallurgical advancements allowed thinner rings to last in passenger car applications.

Jeremey Allen and less wear and stress on the engine over the long haul...

Jeremey Allen mazda did their side seals thinner on 13 b rotary and achieved better results.same with the apex seals

I also noticed that some rotaries had inner and outer side seals and others had just the one per face per side. I'm wondering what that was about?

FFS, why did I scroll down and let you spoil the result for me?

not to mention, easier revs

Good information for the next build!

Not only that, but with increases in bore, stroke, and RPM, the gain should be more because those are more ring surface, more ring travel per crank revolution, and more ring dragging cycles in less time, respectively. That number of 20 is quite likely in Pro Stock.

I didn't think was gonna make any difference lol

@@bigbothoee8617 LOL just started next build but decision is already made for me. Went with a crate motor this time.

I think you are correct, but that really wasn't the. The plan was to see if there was a measurable power gain.

You should see the way he looks at you when you've oiled down his dyno floor.

1.5mm = .059 1/16" = .0625 If 1/16 is only marginally better, than 1.5mm are as well . . . the difference there is almost non-existent.

We didn't measure blow by but we did check leak down, which came in at 4% for both ring sets.

Excellent. That helps explain the results of using the narrow piston rings.

replace your pcv valve 'cheap' and do a leakdown test to check where you're eating oil

yourfullofsheite I've switched the PCV to a small orifice hole which is hallow, and my leak down % leakage numbers are as follows for 1,3,5,7 and 2,4,6,8. % are 8,4,2,2 and 10,2,9,4 , Note that I'm usually buzzing at 3,000 and higher while cruising in 4th out here on the country roads. I'll be testing out Redline synthetic 10w30 oil when it gets warmer out. I think I may have a high volatility (evaporation) rate in the conventional oils I've been using. What's also weird is that when I drive the car like a woman, it uses oil compared to when I drive it harder, at times it doesn't use any. In the past I've used too thick viscosity oils and read that the low tension rings can't slam into the cylinder walls making a good seal as easy as with a thinner oil. I have no smoke coming from the tail pipes either but my plugs carbon up. I've read that low tension rings on a street engine will consume oil compared to normal tension rings.

Lack of Freiburger energy and Dulcich smarm, but interesting information nonetheless.

Steve Brule was in the video so it was almost good as engine masters :)

It's hard to say really. Might be a test somewhere but as far as just looking at it I'd say the bigger pack would last longer simply because of the spread and thickness of the rings. The 5/64 rings are further apart to help stabilize the piston from rocking in the bore (less skirt wear and damage). Also I would guess that the thicker ring would resist more flexing and stay more square in the bore. I think the smaller ring would more likely dig into the cylinder walls as they wear. I think it would be a valid test simply because most people foremost would like to have longevity and reliability over all out power gains. But if they don't wear that much different and you like to rebuild every so often then it might be worth it.

The rings basically "float" around the piston in use, dragged by pressure on either the top or bottom. Since they float, the centering/stabilizing is minimal. Since they're dragged by the flat surface of the piston, their ability to stay square doesn't really matter. While a thicker ring might have more material, it also has more surface area being worn, and the depth is the same, so the difference in lifetime is negligible. Metal expands as it heats, and rings getting too hot and over-expanding is what causes flexing/warping and other issues. That's why guys with nitrous run bigger gaps in their rings; more room to expand. Less material, less expansion, a natural bonus to thinner rings. Of course, piston/bore matching is vital. Thin rings might run into issues on a very loose fit, but anyone buying a piston for thin rings is sure to measure carefully.

Given the same material, usage, and design, a thicker piston ring wears longer than a thinner. The main reason is actually because they can transfer more heat and run cooler. The secondary reason is that there is just more material there to wear before things break, loose tension, etc. The thicker rings can also be a little looser in the ring grooves and still seal well. Piston rock is more a side clearance thing, rather than something controlled by the rings. Thin rings are supposed to seal better on a rocking piston because they can flex more. Some of the claimer race motors almost 10 thou piston clearance and seal up just fine with cast pistons and 5/64" rings - 4-5% leakdown. Piston rings do not run perfectly square to the bore (they flex up and down some), and many rings are not manufactured perfectly square. For example, one way to tell if a old school V8 with a standard 5/64" iron ring pack has many miles on it is to look at the 2nd ring. Usually it will start only wearing on either the top or the bottom edge of the ring, and the wear leaves the ring shiny, while the rest of the rings face will be dull. As the miles pile up, and the ring wears more, the shiny wear takes up more and more of the face of the ring until it takes up the entire face. The only way this can happen is if the ring is not square to the bore when the engine is running. Personally, I think super thin rings are overrated when you factor in cost. Those thin rings are not cheap, and neither are the pistons they are used on. I don't know of any off the shelf piston that uses 1.2mm rings for an american V8, so those would be custom. I can think of other places to get more power for the same money. Unless you are running in a class where mods or ci are limited and every single HP is needed, I would pass on super thin rings.

RacerRickxx I agree with everything you've said there. My engine is an RB30 Nissan donk, as I said in my previous reply to another comment. The engine is relatively new to me, I've always been a V8 N/A guy, so the same rules don't apply. I'm on my second build of this engine, but it only had maybe 10000 - 12000 kms on it when I pulled it down last time. So longevity isn't something I've been able to gauge as of yet. They were an off the shelf CP piston, but were fairly new to CP. I reused the pistons when I did the rebuild, as there wasn't much wear on the skirts (maybe 3 - 4 thou on the gauge point of the skirts) and I actually compensated for that when I sent them off to have a coating done to reduce friction on the skirts- they were just plain forged pistons the first time around with no coatings from CP. I've been pretty happy with the way it's turned out. I always like to hear what others have experienced and found in their own set ups. There's a lot of people out there with a lot of knowledge. Although I do this for a living, I'm only 36 and realise I've still got a lot to learn myself. I tend to try new things on my own projects before I spec something out for a customer. If something's going to fail, I would prefer it happen on my own engine rather than to a customers. And lets be honest, tech has evolved in leaps and bounds over the past decade in terms of materials and design. Now it's not uncommon for guys to make 1200+hp at the wheels out of these relatively small Japanese turbo 6 cyl engines like mine. 10 years ago, 500hp at the wheels was pretty impressive for a daily driven engine of this size. That's where the tech has taken us, and it's brilliant

Raymond Collins I had all the clearances done by my mate who runs a machine shop, it was set up on the loose side in terms of piston to bore clearance- but obviously within spec suggested by CP for the application of being a big boost turbo motor. It's funny how big the gaps are on a serious nitrous motor compared to a big boost turbo motor, isn't it? They run quiet a bit more end gap for the nitrous to compensate for the expansion they will see. It's really interesting with some of the new materials being used for piston rings these days. That's more where my interest lies with all of this. I was surprised Total Seal set me a 1.2mm ring pack with an iron Napier style top ring, but a really trick 2nd comp ring. I was a little suspect on that iron ring, but it's held up fine so far. The 2nd ring was really flexible too, it will deff be moving around as the piston goes up and down, but doesn't seem to effect it's seal in any way. As long as the correct RA is machined into the cyl walls, it works really well. It's funny, when I pulled this thing down for a rebuild last time, there were signs that the rings had been slightly butting together and hadn't been opened up enough for the boost I was throwing at it- but it didn't break the ring land, damage the cyl wall or break a ring. So of coarse we opened them up a little more this time around. They give you a range to work within, we tried to stay on the smaller side of the range last time to help with blow- by at low load (cause it's a street/strip car), but it hasn't made too much difference to be honest. It doesn't breathe much harder than it did before, even tho ring end gaps are set on the higher side of that range now.

Production engines last a LOT longer with thinner rings. 300000km engines still with some hone marks in the bores. And THAT would be a valid test, an engine bored with and without torqueplate. On most Fords you see shiny bits where the head bolts have distorted the block. Both 6 cyl and in particular Clevo. Chevs with 5 bolts per cylinder markedly less so. And that is the letdown with the LS,, only 4 bolts per hole just like the opposition.

i was just thinking did they give them time to seat

Was also wondering if any hone was done or needed.