[AT] Mustang

[Spencer Yost]

Hey George,

Since the engine was stuck (mouse piss in cylinder two) I did use new pistons because I had to break piston #2 to get it out.  I just went ahead and bought a whole set rather than just one piston.   The grooves were fine.  New valves and valve guides too.

As to the taper, you may be right.   After giving it some thought today while working on my truck (couldn't work on the tractor today) I was thinking that the combination of factors like a slightly worn bore, slightly larger than normal ring gaps.

One other thought:   I couldn't get oil pressure initially because there was a rust hole in the oil line to the gauge and I was losing oil(the oil was of sight and ran onto gravel where I couldn't see it).  I spun up the engine A LOT before I realized this.  It could be that I loaded up the cylinders and combustion chambers with oil which then prevented the rings from seating right away.

Spencer

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 4/18/2004 at 10:48 AM George Willer wrote:

>Spencer,
>
>Here comes a bit of heresy...
>
>I recently fixed up a couple Cub engines that were near the upper wear
>limits.  To help somewhat with the end gap problem, I used +.020 rings and
>filed them individually to the correct minimum end gap.  Both engines ran
>well without smoke after the assembly oil was gone.
>
>Both engines were found with badly stuck rings.  As you know, the sides of
>the ring grooves are a very important part of the sealing.  They were
>cleaned very carefully.  I've been curious what would have happened if the
>original rings and grooves were carefully cleaned so the rings could do
>their job and the engine re-assembled without even honing?  I'm sure it
>would have made a huge improvement.
>
>A bore worn with a slight taper would keep the rings moving slightly in the
>grooves and make them less likely to stick... so the wear isn't necessarily
>all bad.  What do you think?
>
>George Willer
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Spencer Yost" <Spencer.Yost at piedmontsystems.com>
>To: <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
>Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 10:02 AM
>Subject: Re[2]: [AT] Mustang
>
>
>> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>> Larry Voris wrote:
>>
>> >Spenser:
>> >    Did you put oil on the new rings when you installed
>> >them.  There is one company that I buy rings from says,
>> >to install the rings dry and they will seat on the first
>> >few times up and down in the holes. Granted the compression
>>
>> I do oil the grooves and the rings(and the bores too).   These were
>Hastings rings and they indicate that the grooves and rings should be
>oiled.
>However you do have to oil the piston and the compressor when installing
>the
>pistons so I am sure plenty of oil gets on the rings just as a by-product
>of
>that process even if I didn't oil the rings directly.  Having said that, I
>can see where at least not over-doing the oil at assembly may help in the
>initial seating.  I like to hear some other comments on this.
>>
>> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>>
>> On 4/18/2004 at 5:47 AM bwhdon wrote:
>>
>> >Ive rebuilt quite a few engines and always oiled every thing up real
>good
>> >before starting, turned the engine over with out ignition to prime the
>oil
>> >pump and all bearings etc and never experianced an engine burning oil as
>> >long as 15 minutes on start up. Might have been a stuck ring or valve
>seal
>>
>> I failed to mention that the flat-head Continentals don't have valve
>seals.   Stuck ring is possible since it was about 3-4 weeks between
>assembly and start-up.
>>
>> I do prime the engine before start-up and had strong flow and pressure
>out
>of the oil pressure gauge line at the dash before I started it.
>>
>> One thing I failed to mention - I did not re-bore that engine.  This
>engine had cylinder wear within specs.  I just honed it and moved forward.
>I had never done that before either.  Maybe that was a factor?
>>
>> By the way, here are the parameters and specs:  My notes say the max wear
>was .004"(average of .002"-.003") and min. of .002".  Max bore variance was
>.002"(range of measurements was unmeasurable to .002")   The Continental
>manual say those limits are .007 and .004 respectively.  Oil pressure was
>great and no oil leaks.   Oil ring gaps were a bit loose (understandably)
>but within specs.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the input.  I'd love to hear some more...
>>
>> Spencer
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AT mailing list
>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>AT mailing list
>http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at