Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*New\,\s+improved\s+$\?$\s+\"ring$s$\s+around\s+the\s+piston\"\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*New\,\s+improved\s+$\?$\s+\"ring$s$\s+around\s+the\s+piston\"\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. New, improved (?) "ring(s) around the piston" (score: 1): Author: Andrew Mace <amace@unix2.nysed.gov>; Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 13:47:14 -0900 (PDT); I called them (Phoenix, AZ; 602-678-4977). They do indeed convert the "second" ring of a piston ring set to a two-piece ring. [Of course, now it makes sense -- someone was going to do this on my moto; /html/triumphs/1995-08/msg00101.html (9,192 bytes)
2. New, improved (?) "ring(s) around the piston" (score: 1): Author: paisley@boulder.nist.gov (Scott W. Paisley); Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 13:30:25 -0600; This seems like a good idea! I assume that 2% blowby is with normal rings... What kind a performance (any blowby at all?) do you get with the gapless piston rings? Furthermore, is it recommended to u; /html/triumphs/1995-08/msg00102.html (8,219 bytes)
3. Re: New, improved (?) "ring(s) around the piston" (score: 1): Author: Andrew Mace <amace@unix2.nysed.gov>; Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 16:09:37 -0900 (PDT); Scotty, et. al.: The 2% number is what the Total Seal folks quoted me over the phone (as well as what Chris told me) for their ring. They do only the second compression ring; one assumes you'd contin; /html/triumphs/1995-08/msg00103.html (9,372 bytes)
4. Re: New, improved (?) "ring(s) around the piston" (score: 1): Author: cak@dimebank.com (Chris Kantarjiev); Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 13:45:02 -0700; No,the 2% figure for leakdown is with the gapless rings. The ad I saw and may be misremembering said something like 5-7% leakdown for a new engine with conventional rings, which will jump to 10-15% a; /html/triumphs/1995-08/msg00105.html (7,409 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]