Gas ported rings

STOCK 1090 · Post by **STOCK 1090** » Sat Oct 22, 2005 12:09 pm

Has anyone done some back to back testing on gas ports vs no gas ports? Are there any formulas for the area behind the ring for a given bore size and ring width? What land to ring clearance should be used?
Any pitfalls I should know about?
Thanks for the help!

SupStk · Post by **SupStk** » Sat Oct 22, 2005 12:37 pm

Stock 1090,
I'm not able to answer all your questions but will supply information that i have. I didn't have a dyno at the time so my testing was by experiment at the track so the results could be skewed. When I was racing a 351C in SS/J, tried lots of ring combos. With normal ring lands (not tight) gas ports made no discernable difference. On ring lands that required lapping the rings to fit, my best results came with 8 gas ports and almost zero back clearance on .043 stainless top rings. These were latteral ports since top ports weren't legal. However the ring I eventually used was a stainless .031 dyke.

STOCK 1090 · Post by **STOCK 1090** » Sat Oct 22, 2005 2:27 pm

Thanks a bunch!

Has anyone tried to gas port a Zero gap top set up?

SupStk · Post by **SupStk** » Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:32 pm

Rich,
No experience on that, was wondering if you took advantage of tight ring grooves, how would a person lap that style of ring? I'm not huge fan of zero gap rings anyway.

SupStk · Post by **SupStk** » Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:56 pm

Rich,
The zero gap rings I'm familar with seem to have an aggressive nature. There seems to be alot of radial tension and drag on the cylinder walls. Given the added wall pressure provided by the gas ports, wonder if it might create more problems than power? I'm curious now... let me know what you come up with.

STOCK 1090 · Post by **STOCK 1090** » Sat Oct 22, 2005 9:03 pm

Supstk
You have a PM.

Rich