Which rings are better, the Grant or Hastings? I started to fit a set of Grants that were labeled .030 over, and the oil ring was good, had to fit a little to get a .004 fit. The 1st and 2nd rings had an .018 gap right out of the box. Checked my bores, and they were 3.280. Anybody have problems with ring sizes as stated on the box? Got to replace them, so wanted to use the best. Also will be selling this set, should be good for a standard to .010 over bore
Am I the only one who has had a problem with rings?
I am in the market for a set of stock rings.
If I get some from the catalogs or whatever I would want to get Hastings my self but brand loyalty seems to be politicaly incorrect and fruitless nowadays.
.004 end gap is awfully tight in my book. .018 end gap for compression doesn't seem too bad for end gap. In operation you do not want the end gap ever become zero.
You need to get the rings that fit the pistons. Egge pistons have a narrower ring than the others.
I have had no problem with Grant rings myself.
I usually shoot for .003" per inch in piston diameter for the ring gap. I ordered a set of Hastings from Langs, I'll give them a try....
Egge uses Grant rings as their supplier of piston rings.
Just got my engine back last Thusday. New Egge pistons and Grant rings. Top ring had .010" gap. Second ring had .022" gap. Oil ring was overlapping. Not happy at all.
Will call my machinist tomorrow.
Makes me a little scared of Grant rings.
if it was my engine I think I would be very unhappy with whoever installed the rings especially the oil ring. I am assuming it was a job for $$ & not volunteer work
Edward R. Levy
When I had to buy a couple of rings a few years back, I went to Grant Hq here in Socalif. The VP who helped me was Taiwanese, and their rings were made in Taiwan. You must be paying a lot for shipping, Colin.
Can't remember why I went there. Maybe I had a gap problem, too.
Yes it was a paying job. Big dollars in my opinion. Had everything done except assembly. I didn't check the ring gap until I had trouble fitting a piston into the bore. I'm sure it's just a packaging error. Still not happy, as I was hoping to have it assembled this weekend.
The good weather is here in Australia, so I'm missing out on some great driving time. I'll just have to ride the murderbikes:-)
I'll say we're paying a lot. The Snyders catalogue lists Grant rings @ $44.00 U.S. which is about $66.00 Aus. I paid about $120.00 Aus or about $80.00 U.S.
Hopefully I'll have it sorted out tomorrow.
The ONLY time you should assemble an engine without checking the ring gap on every ring is when you really want to pull the engine and do it right the second time. Modern gas burns much hotter than in the past- .016 minimum gap on the top two rings is a very good idea.
When it comes to any part in which size is critical remember: "trust by verify". It does not matter who made the part, if you want it to fit right, check its size irregardless of what it says on the box. JP
In hindsight I should've checked the gaps. When I picked up all the bits I asked the machinist if I needed to do anything. His answer was to "just assemble it". I think I better check all clearances.
Use Kant-Skore rings.
Did I miss something? Chuck said his bores were 3.280.......isn't that smaller than standard?
Score one for Bob Robb...
I always check and adjust the gap when installing rings. That's why they make ring grinders....you can tailor each end gap perfectly and quickly.
The Grant rep told me all their rings should be ready to go right out of the box, but I still check them all. I find a couple sets out of every ten or so that generally need a little material removed. Piston rings are dead soft cast iron and the ends file real easy.
Back in my aircooled Porsche/VW days I was spoiled by the piston/cylinder set with rings already installed and gapped. It required sliding the piston down just far enough for the pin to clear the base of the cyl, then install the rod. Never had anything seize on those.
Somewhere in the shop is a ring shaver. Neat little gadjet.
Quality seems to vary in batches. 1st set of rings I installed stopped the spark plugs fouling, but was still going through about one litre of oil per 100km.
About 10,000km later I changed the rings again. Result now was about one litre of oil per 1,000km! And that's in an engine with the original bore.
Both sets of rings were standard size Grant.
When a ring company makes rings they have no idea what your bore is. Is it freshly bored to .020 or is this the 2nd or 3rd time you are reringing that engine since it was bored? If there is some wear on the cylinder the rings have to be made to fit too tight in a fresh bore so they will be smaller than one that has worn out a set or two of rings already.
If the factory set the ring gap we could not rering a well used engine and have correct ring gap unless we rebored every time.
I would prefer the Hastings Rings if I had a choice. I use a lot of Grant rings though. If the bore was not very good and worn some I would rather use Grant, They will seat much faster.
Regardless of who makes the ring set , if the oil rings are one piece I throw them away and use three piece arranged with two scrapers and an expander , they do their job from startup and take account of variations in the bore , regardless of the shape of the cylinder - ( within obvious limits of course ).
Victor in Brisbane, Australia
I am doing an engine now, using Hastings rings on aluminum pistons. My box said .004" ring gap per EVERY 1" of piston diameter. Mine worked out to about .015 as the bore diameter was not 4". Did you see your rings box? Could you check with the manufacturer on a website? .004" as a total sounds mighty tight! When those rings get hot, there won't be much expansion room! Might cause a scoring?