Good day,

I need to order a set of piston rings for my 440 0.30 over.
Somebody suggested to me the Total Seal rings but the Part# offered by 440 source for the 0.30 over engines (CR 6490-35) seems to be 0.35 over so i don,t know if it will be very much¿?

In the summit page there is another Part# available (CR 6490-30) wich i suppouse that will be 0.30.This one is not "File fit" like the other one

Does know somebody wich would go better?
Are the file fit rings better?

Thanks in advance for the help

I have not used them (yet) but it sounds like a good concept. My chebby dyno man says that they do not make any more power than regular (non total seal) ones on the dyno. The regular (non total seal) file fit (.005" OS) rings decrease the gap .0157 (C=Pi x dia). I go with .004 per inch of bore on top rings and .003" per inch of bore on 2nd rings and KB pistons require .006" (or more depending on the app) top ring gap per inch of bore so the more $$$ file fit rings are not needed & if the 2nd ring falls close to .003 per inch of bore using a non .005 OS set you're good.

I run Total Seal Gapless rings in my 340 Duster. I use the file to fit rings to get the end gap I need. I have had good luck with them & would recommend them.

I'm confused. I thought the total seal rings were totally different from regular rings and that file fit were regular rings that have a .005" OS on the 1st & 2nd rings???

The block is 0.30 over and due the cylinders are ok,the machinist said that it only needs a honing job before to install new rings .
Then will i go better with the file fit rings ?

Thanks for your invaluable help

Always go the file fit route. You're already there. As far as the gapless Total Seal rings, I was taught that "there may be something to it" but dyno testing is inconclusive as to benefits. If you go gapless, only use a gapless top ring. If gasses get past top rings, you don't want them to build up between second and top rings. This will unseat the top rings. Today's typical practice is to run about .010 extra gap on the second rings, compared to top rings, to keep this from happening. I'd also suggest a 16lb oil ring. With a 44* crosshatch angle and an Roughness Average of 16, I have no oil consumption problems on my 408. My second rings are Napier rings too which probably helps. Perfect Circle makes a nice conventional set, should be about $100, that is file fit and has a nice napier second ring, and, I believe, a lower tension oil ring. Most power and friction reduction will be found in the lower tension oil ring expanders.

BTW, the .035 rings are good for .030 to .035 overbore. An old trick was to use, for example, 4" bore oil ring expanders on a 4.030 setup. Everything else ring-wise, of course, was for a 4.030 bore. Only use the expanders.

You'd better go and read what it says on 440Source website again ... the only .035 over rings listed are for 400 ci - NOT 440.

Besides, a .030 ring that is "file fit" will definately need to be filed to fit in that bore - that's why they're called "file fit" !!!

If you look at the p/n for the 400 .035 over ring you will notice it is the same as the 440 .055 set.

Just to be sure, it's always better to just call Total Seal for the part number. I took it that he was using the Total Seal lookup on their site.

Quote:

---

If you go to the Jeg´s page and search that reference,it appears like 0.35 rings.

---

I wouldn't go making any assumptions about a -35 at the end of a part number meaning its .035 over in a 440. The same p/n is only .010 over in a 400! That -35 is likely JUST a part number variant.

The other thing to take note of is the "CR" part number. According to Total Seal, these are "conventional rings" ... meaning they're not "gapless" - hence the need to file fit.

HERE:

#1 http://www.totalseal.com/PartDetails.aspx?From=Bore

#2 http://www.totalseal.com/TechPage.aspx#trGaplessPistRings

The rings that 440Source is selling are NOT gapless rings, they are all standard rings. Look up any one of the "cr" part numbers on Total Seal's website and it clearly states "Conventional Ring" or "Conventional Classic Race".

It just so happens I got a set from them with my stroker kit last week. Hadn't looked at them yet so thought I'd better check them. Sure enough ... just plain ol' rings.

I finally have ordered a CR set from 440 source too.
I not going to build nothing for the track,so i suppouse that they will be enough for a street car.



Thanks again

Hello again,

I ordered the total seal rings and took them to the machinist,but i had a small trouble,they are 1.5 mm(1/16" )thick and my pistons need 2mm so i suppouse that they will need 5/64" thick rings ¿?

I will have to order another set,so i considering to order the Total Circle one,like suggested our mate Intense RT Dan

So pay attention on your pistons grooves if you are going to order new rings.

Total Seal is a brand. Just like Childs and Albert is a brand. Gapless is a design that several manufacturers offer and they can, when the bore is prepped properly, make a difference. Gapless rings still need to be gapped properly. "Gapless" means little way for pressure to escape past. Not a closed circle.

I know I saw a post of your after moper. I read it, went to hit reply, and now it's gone, [Edited by Moparts - Family Friendly Site - Keep it clean]?

Anyway, you've got it. 5/64's with the ring width you got from the spec manual.

Sounds good to me!

Dan,
The machinist called me today and said to me that the top ring had a lot of clearance into the grove,because they are 1.5 mm widht(They are 1/16" but due we are in Spain they talk in mm)
so they would need a 2mm widht ring.

I did a search on the Summit page and found the 5/64" rings wich are pretty similar to 2mm like he said.
Also check the Service Manual,and the specification for the Ring widht is from 0.775" to .0780" wich sounds something like 5/64".

That is why i was thinking that a 5/64 set was going to be what my pistons needed.

I will call to the machinig shop tomorrow and i will ask for the groove widht.
The clearance should be from 0.0015 to 0.003 according to the factory service manual.

Thanks again