273 302 318 340 build

-
Quick question. If i understand the book correctly, the rod cap i took pic of is for #2 correct? Large chamfer to rear of engine?
I installed #1 with large chamfer to front of engine. So both large chamfer are "outboard" and grooves point in?
Thanks
Steve

20171211_141240.jpg
 
I can't say I pay attention to the chamfers... The grooves (in one side of the cap mating surface) points up, towards the cylinder bores. And the piston eyebrows should be up... towards the lifter valley and intake.
 
Actually all even numbered rod caps should be the same as this one, correct?
4spdragtop said:
Quick question. If i understand the book correctly, the rod cap i took pic of is for #2 correct? Large chamfer to rear of engine?
I installed #1 with large chamfer to front of engine. So both large chamfer are "outboard" and grooves point in?
Thanks
Steve

View attachment 1715119954
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The same as number 2.. yes. BTW, I presume the larger chamfers ended up facing towards the outsides of the journals....where the fillets of the journals are.
See here:
 
Yep thanks for confirmation, chamfers out! Didnt check side to side clearances on rod as plastigage would have smeared.
Thanks again.
nm9stheham said:
The same as number 2.. yes. BTW, I presume the larger chamfers ended up facing towards the outsides of the journals....where the fillets of the journals are.
See here:
Click to expand...
 
You can use a feeler gauge for side clearance. (Plastigage would not work... too thin...) I used to fret a lot over that clearance but have been less concerned since putting in some SCAT rods in my son's 340, where the big ends of the rods are narrower than stock and the side clearances end up around .020" + or -.
 
So discovered a couple issues. #5 rod cap bearing after plastigaged showed a chunk of something. I thought it was clean enuf obviously not. I tried getting it outta the bearing shell, no luck. Rod journal has a very slight nick/mark. I can feel it with fingernail run backwards across it. It doesn't "catch" my nail though. I wiped everything before assembly..dunno how I missed it dammit.
Issue #2 side to side clearance on pistons 7 and 8 is 0.0016"
Spec is 0.006" to 0.014"
Pics attached. Mark on journal is beside pencil in pic.
0.0016" feeler gauge in pic too.
Oh new bearing on order. $12 not too bad.
Should I be concerned of the journal "mark"? A light 1000 scuff? Crank has been polished.
On a good note all rods plastigaged within spec.
#1 0.0018
#2 0.0016
#3 0.0013
#4 0.0016
#5 0.0019(being replaced)
#6 0.0020
#7 0.0016
#8 0.0015
Thanks!

20171212_144530.jpg


20171212_144621.jpg


20171212_145508.jpg


20171212_145517.jpg
 
I'd burnish it a bit with 600 or higher grit wetordri, or some crocus cloth, to get rid of any raised edges and move on. Just pull a strip of fine grit paper taut across the area and polish.

I would not worry overly much on that side clearance.

Good to find that bit of crap NOW!
 
You could take the other half of the old/new bearing you are replacing and lay it on the crank and slide the bearing half around the divot and see if anything shows on the bearing. If not your golden.
 
Ok so checking piston rings while waiting for new rod bearing. I got these new rings from machinist with everything else. He told me they are Perfect Circle (now Mahle??)
Not sure of part #. They came in a Ertel box with part #'s 40787-030 and 2m694-030. Google brings up squat.
I'm unsure of ring location and orientation. From what I have read dots always go up. One set of rings has dot.
2nd set of rings has word "top" on it.
If I install these in grooves as above, then the chamfers both face same way.
I've read they should "oppose" each other?
Thanks

20171214_103026.jpg


20171214_103035.jpg


20171214_103052_001.jpg


20171214_103059_001.jpg


20171214_103134.jpg


20171214_105354.jpg


20171214_110200.jpg
 
"top" is the top ring, the word "top" faces up, the dot on the second ring faces up.
 
Those are both torsional compression rings, and install with the chamfers up. I'd check with the machine shop and make sure you have the correct 2nd ring set, ask if you need a reverse torsional ring in the second groove.
 
Don't ever guess on ring orientation. Find the data. The chamfers create what is called ring twist in the rings action in moving up and down the bores; they angle in their grooves a bit more going one direction than the other. While the chamfers may be in the same or opposing direction in some engines, never assume that is the standard configuration for a particular engine; they can be all different, depending on what the engine engineers wanted to accomplish. The 'Top's and dots face up.

2M694 is a Hastings part number. 40787 is a Perfect Circle/Mahle number. So I suspect that this is an overseas set and they put on both numbers for the American market. (Google 'Hastings 2M694' or 'Mahle 40787'.)

The 'M' in the Hastings PN is for Moly faced top ring, and the Mahle PN is for premium rings (usually indicating a Moly faced top ring) What is bothering me is that I have never gotten a Moly faced top ring set where the Moly facing was not obvious on the top ring; it is always a silvery-grey color. I see that on neither ring here. But I don't know everything so I'd go back to the shop and ask about this; I don't think you actually have Moly faced top rings.

Do you have a ring installer? It will help you to keep the top 2 rings straighter in installation.
P.J.H. said:
Those are both torsional compression rings, and install with the chamfers up. I'd check with the machine shop and make sure you have the correct 2nd ring set, ask if you need a reverse torsional ring in the second groove.
Click to expand...
Note that the chamfers are quite different. I would assume for this engine to have a chamfered ring in the 2nd groove. (Ooops there I go assuming! Not good!)
 
More Info: Here is a link to the Mahle catalog:
MAHLE Aftermarket North America | Piston Ring Catalogs

You can find the detailed ring set description on page 328. It lists the individual ring profiles, and you can refer back to the early pages in the catalog to see the profiles. I cannot find the top ring profile that matches either that you show (RF-10YF); one of your rings does look close to the ring profile shown for the 2nd ring (BT-10).

I'd surely go back to the shop and at this point. Actually, for me, I would be thinking of getting the $$ back if I could, and even if I couldn't, just get a known ring set.
 
Rings are manufactured by ertel, owned by hastings. they SHOULD be made in Canada. Nothing wrong with that set, as long as you install the rings with the pip marks up and the top ring in the top groove with the letters "top" up. The OP just wants piece of mind, so I suggested he double check with the machine shop. It's not that complicated.I shouldn't have even mentioned reverse torsional rings, it only muddied the waters, but he wanted to know if the bevel faces the opposite direction in the second groove. It doesn't in this ring pack.
 
No I definitely won' be guessing on orientation. I will call the machinist as mentioned. These were part of the pkg deal so no returning them. I'm confident if there is an issue that the machinist will straighten it out.
Perfectly fine muddying the waters a bit. I'm eager to learn. My hesitation comes from not knowing the exact mfg part# and following their specific install procedures.
As I mentioned the chamfers on both rings are same direction. What I have read is they should oppose. I agree they don' look like mily face rings.
Thanks guys
nm9stheham said:
Don't ever guess on ring orientation. Find the data. The chamfers create what is called ring twist in the rings action in moving up and down the bores; they angle in their grooves a bit more going one direction than the other. While the chamfers may be in the same or opposing direction in some engines, never assume that is the standard configuration for a particular engine; they can be all different, depending on what the engine engineers wanted to accomplish. The 'Top's and dots face up.

2M694 is a Hastings part number. 40787 is a Perfect Circle/Mahle number. So I suspect that this is an overseas set and they put on both numbers for the American market. (Google 'Hastings 2M694' or 'Mahle 40787'.)

The 'M' in the Hastings PN is for Moly faced top ring, and the Mahle PN is for premium rings (usually indicating a Moly faced top ring) What is bothering me is that I have never gotten a Moly faced top ring set where the Moly facing was not obvious on the top ring; it is always a silvery-grey color. I see that on neither ring here. But I don't know everything so I'd go back to the shop and ask about this; I don't think you actually have Moly faced top rings.

Do you have a ring installer? It will help you to keep the top 2 rings straighter in installation.
Note that the chamfers are quite different. I would assume for this engine to have a chamfered ring in the 2nd groove. (Ooops there I go assuming! Not good!)
Click to expand...

nm9stheham said:
More Info: Here is a link to the Mahle catalog:
MAHLE Aftermarket North America | Piston Ring Catalogs

You can find the detailed ring set description on page 328. It lists the individual ring profiles, and you can refer back to the early pages in the catalog to see the profiles. I cannot find the top ring profile that matches either that you show (RF-10YF); one of your rings does look close to the ring profile shown for the 2nd ring (BT-10).

I'd surely go back to the shop and at this point. Actually, for me, I would be thinking of getting the $$ back if I could, and even if I couldn't, just get a known ring set.
Click to expand...

P.J.H. said:
Rings are manufactured by ertel, owned by hastings. they SHOULD be made in Canada. Nothing wrong with that set, as long as you install the rings with the pip marks up and the top ring in the top groove with the letters "top" up. The OP just wants piece of mind, so I suggested he double check with the machine shop. It's not that complicated.I shouldn't have even mentioned reverse torsional rings, it only muddied the waters, but he wanted to know if the bevel faces the opposite direction in the second groove. It doesn't in this ring pack.
Click to expand...
 
4spdragtop said:
As I mentioned the chamfers on both rings are same direction. What I have read is they should oppose. I agree they don' look like mily face rings.
Thanks guys
Click to expand...
I honestly don't know where that info comes from, and I don't know of any basis for it. They should be installed as they are engineered for the particular engine.

Just know that with moly faced top rings, the correct bore and hone job and non-synthetic oil for the initial few hundred miles, it is about 98-99% guaranteed to have good ring seating. They aren't right for some severe apps, but for your use, it is almost an insurance policy. That is why I am mentioning this.... one less thing to worry about at start up.

I am kinda surprised that there were no markings on the rang packs or in the box..

P.J.H. said:
Nothing wrong with that set, as long as you install the rings with the pip marks up and the top ring in the top groove with the letters "top" up. The OP just wants piece of mind, so I suggested he double check with the machine shop. It's not that complicated.
Click to expand...
I honestly can't recall ever seeing rings with the "TOP" printed on them so that may be the case. I just don't KNOW that is the case and I never assume anything with rings. Rings get flipped and swapped from time to time, and the wrong info has come out on FABO before.
 
Thanks guys, I dont want a catastrophe and car is in hibernation, so I am in no hurry to get this done. I spoke to machinist today on the phone. Im going to swing by next week and take the rings in with me.
I read "somewhere" that some rings with chamfers oppose each other. The machinist said they are "Perfect Circle" rings, well they have been swallowed up by Mahle/Clevite. Tough to try and find part# and instructions. Oh I forgot to mention I bought a ring installer, hopefully get gaps checked this week.
Thanks again!
nm9stheham said:
I honestly don't know where that info comes from, and I don't know of any basis for it. They should be installed as they are engineered for the particular engine.

Just know that with moly faced top rings, the correct bore and hone job and non-synthetic oil for the initial few hundred miles, it is about 98-99% guaranteed to have good ring seating. They aren't right for some severe apps, but for your use, it is almost an insurance policy. That is why I am mentioning this.... one less thing to worry about at start up.

I am kinda surprised that there were no markings on the rang packs or in the box..

I honestly can't recall ever seeing rings with the "TOP" printed on them so that may be the case. I just don't KNOW that is the case and I never assume anything with rings. Rings get flipped and swapped from time to time, and the wrong info has come out on FABO before.
Click to expand...
 
Small progress, Got new rod bearing for #6. I lightly "scuffed" the journal with 1000 grit. Then took Roy's advice and used 1/2 of a good bearing shell and rotated it on journal to check for smoothness. No marks on bearing so good to go.
Plastigaged out to 0.0016 so good to go.
I still haven't been to machinist to check on piston rings, but I checked side clearance anyway on top 2 rings. Still gotta check oil rails. Top ring specd out in range 0.0015-0.0035" so good to go on these.
2nd ring side clearance specd out in range 0.001-0.0015" so these are good as well.
Small progress but some, hopefully see the machinist this week to find out some more on these rings.

20171219_182930.jpg


20171219_185826.jpg


20171219_185934.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ok so stopped by machine shop for piston ring advice. So the piston ring with the dot goes dot up and is the top ring.
Next ring marked TOP is actually 2nd ring and gets installed TOP facing up.
Expanders are installed with the joint parallel to pin bore.
What he recommended when installing is to spray rings with WD40 instead of oil.Gets them lined without fear of oil taking up too much "space" in ring groove. He said to oil the piston skirts.
Transmission fluid(high detergent) in cylinder bores.
Next up is checking ring gap.
Lol I mentioned to Al the amount of measuring involved, and he agreed. Tedious yes but needed.
Thanks!
nm9stheham said:
Measure, measure, measure.... it can be tedious, but that's what it takes to do a good job.
Click to expand...
 
Do you know to install the rings with the 4 gaps staggered evenly around the piston's circumference? Was there any discussion on moly facings for these rings?

And while it is hard/impossible to do otherwise with that particular style of ring expander, make sure the ends of the expander don't get overlapped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top