Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Hobbies & Interests
Gearheads
SBC Primer
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="swampratt" data-source="post: 3101342" data-attributes="member: 15054"><p>I hear ya on the EPA but I put a lot of blame on the big 3 also ..always looking for ways to reduce friction and improve MPG.</p><p>They must meet MPG guidelines set out by the EPA.. or is it some other entity that sets guidelines.</p><p></p><p>Anyway those thin ring packs and short skirt pistons do not control oil consumption near as well as the old school 5/64 rings and long skirt pistons.</p><p>Yea tighter clearances in piston to wall because if you rock that short skirt piston too much you will crack it.</p><p>Possibly break the ears off..seen it many times.</p><p></p><p>Yep tight clearances require thinner oil.. but a downfall to thinner oil many times is cling ability.</p><p>You are basically starting it a little drier but it picks up and circulates quicker.</p><p></p><p>Do this you must then do that.</p><p>Yep LSPI has been an issue for some time..very interesting on what was discovered with high speed video.</p><p><a href="https://www.motor.com/magazine-summary/resolving-low-speed-pre-ignition/" target="_blank">https://www.motor.com/magazine-summary/resolving-low-speed-pre-ignition/</a></p><p></p><p>When i port heads My chambers were always smoothed and any sharp edges in combustion space was removed.</p><p>My runners were roughed up as much as I could make them all the way to the carb pad.</p><p></p><p>I wanted the air and fuel to tumble and get as atomized as possible before it got into the combustion chamber.</p><p>I always tried to keep oil consumption as low as possible also.</p><p>You know my 400,000 miles on my 1969 350 uses less oil than the 1995 Geo i sold.</p><p>Ya think they screwed the pooch somewhere.</p><p></p><p>There are oils that burn off much easier than others something to pay attention to is the Noack rating.</p><p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noack_volatility_test" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noack_volatility_test</a></p><p></p><p>But that can be misleading like all numbers sometimes can.</p><p>There are some oils that have low Noack and perform like oils with high Noack readings. burn off just as easy.</p><p></p><p>I feel it is left to us guinea pigs to test for our self sometimes.</p><p></p><p>Smooth chambers are possibly not best way to go anymore.. there has been some very neat finishes that worked very well.</p><p>dimples in chamber and in runners keeps air turbulent.</p><p><a href="https://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34837&sid=8d8ff29c6b29fbdfbc72facd654de78b" target="_blank">https://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34837&sid=8d8ff29c6b29fbdfbc72facd654de78b</a></p><p></p><p>You may need to log in to see the posts and pics.</p><p>Good sight for sure though.</p><p>Not as good as it was 10+ years ago but still worthy.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="swampratt, post: 3101342, member: 15054"] I hear ya on the EPA but I put a lot of blame on the big 3 also ..always looking for ways to reduce friction and improve MPG. They must meet MPG guidelines set out by the EPA.. or is it some other entity that sets guidelines. Anyway those thin ring packs and short skirt pistons do not control oil consumption near as well as the old school 5/64 rings and long skirt pistons. Yea tighter clearances in piston to wall because if you rock that short skirt piston too much you will crack it. Possibly break the ears off..seen it many times. Yep tight clearances require thinner oil.. but a downfall to thinner oil many times is cling ability. You are basically starting it a little drier but it picks up and circulates quicker. Do this you must then do that. Yep LSPI has been an issue for some time..very interesting on what was discovered with high speed video. [URL]https://www.motor.com/magazine-summary/resolving-low-speed-pre-ignition/[/URL] When i port heads My chambers were always smoothed and any sharp edges in combustion space was removed. My runners were roughed up as much as I could make them all the way to the carb pad. I wanted the air and fuel to tumble and get as atomized as possible before it got into the combustion chamber. I always tried to keep oil consumption as low as possible also. You know my 400,000 miles on my 1969 350 uses less oil than the 1995 Geo i sold. Ya think they screwed the pooch somewhere. There are oils that burn off much easier than others something to pay attention to is the Noack rating. [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noack_volatility_test[/URL] But that can be misleading like all numbers sometimes can. There are some oils that have low Noack and perform like oils with high Noack readings. burn off just as easy. I feel it is left to us guinea pigs to test for our self sometimes. Smooth chambers are possibly not best way to go anymore.. there has been some very neat finishes that worked very well. dimples in chamber and in runners keeps air turbulent. [URL]https://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34837&sid=8d8ff29c6b29fbdfbc72facd654de78b[/URL] You may need to log in to see the posts and pics. Good sight for sure though. Not as good as it was 10+ years ago but still worthy. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
Hobbies & Interests
Gearheads
SBC Primer
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
