Top ring inside bevel / chamfer

[joespanova]

I just noticed the top ring has a very small and inconsistent "bevel" or "chamfer". These are 1/16 1/16 3/16 typical moly top and plain second rings.In fact , in areas of the ring it really has very little chamfer.
They are JE sportsman rings S100S8-4310-5.Anybody else run into this? This is a 496 Chevy I'm freshening up.


Joe

[CGT]

I have a few sets of JE rings here, steel top ring though. They are all beveled but not inconsistent in any way. I would wanna look into your deal a little deeper if it was me.

[groberts101]

I would never accept rings ground like that. Because if they got the chamfer wrong.. what are the odds that something else may be less than ideal? I would also have to imagine that it would impose some small, even if immeasurable, affect on the radial tension consistency and stress concentration/location as well. Snap some pic's, email them, and ultimately say you aren't comfortable with those issues and I'm sure they will take care of you.

[joespanova]

Well it comes down to this.............wasted time. I can return the rings to Summit since I'm only 15 min. from the store. Speed Pro or any alternate will work very well. I'll check and see what they have in stock , then give JE an ear full on Tues.
Unless someone can inform me that the top bevel plays little role in ring function..........as I've seen some that DONT have a bevel..........?

[David Redszus]

Modern rings make use of a bevel on the top ring. While this is normal, the bevel should be consistent and uniform.

The use of a bevel improves the gas force ring sealing properties of the ring.

[joespanova]

I'm returning them.
Thanks guys !

[hoodeng]

Email JE ,with your description and photo, they would be more than happy to help you ,they have done so for me in the past.
As David has said ,there are compression assisted top rings with inside bevel facing up ,combustion pressure on the bevel assists seal, and as you know the bevel on the second ring [if present] is a reverse torsional twist ring with the inside bevel facing down.
The dots or etchings tell the story.

Cheers.

[Geoff2]

Are you talking about the inside or the outside of the ring? Many top rings that have a Moly inlay have a barrel shaped face that contacts the bore, quite normal.

[engineguyBill]

If there is an ID bevel on the top ring, there should be a PIP mark in the axial surface of the ring which indicates how the rings should be installed on the pistons. Most current top compression rings have a barrel face and no bevel, therefore they can be installed either direction on the piston.

If your top rings do have an ID bevel, the shape and dimensions of the bevels should be consistent for all of the rings. If not, return them as they are defective.

[joespanova]

ok , I'm going to follow up with this. By design these rings are "supposed" to have a well defined "bevel". The rings ALSO have the dots to indicate top of ring. Through a little reasoning , by virtue of the fact that the top rings DO have a dot , and as the illustrations on installation sheet indicate......all rings with dot are associated with a "direction". SO , since there is a "dot" , there is also a bevel. If the ring is barrel faced with NO dots /dot , then direction of installation is either way.
IN THIS CASE , the quality control was apparently , poor.

[ProPower engines]

there has been a few changes in the manufacturing of basic ring packages top rings in the last couple years.
They have made the switch to steel top rings and they are cut from tube rather then the old way to save manufacturing costs. Not all bad but the ring sets used for stock builds like your garden variety sm blk GM stuff not only better material is used for the moly top ring but they are also thinner by a bunch. I have had several customers bring in some stock rings from the local jobbers and they have been up to .100" thinner then the older designs which I believe will allow the ing to rock more in the ring groove up setting the seal.

Back in the day when ring groove spacers were common to fill the grooves behind the rings the grooves have been made shallower in the case of the late GM ring width difference but the common rings seem to be narrower in the radial depth like the GM factory rings. But now they are thinner in that respect in alot of cases.

I contacted Hastings about the change and they claim there is no affective difference between the new narrow design and the old wider design in most cases except the fact that they are a machined steel not parallel ground cast material.
I asked FM about it and they told me they get alot of their rings from hastings and their tech said that they would be fine in most cases.

The narrower 1.5mm/1/16" rings seems to be made the same way for the newer stock stuff but unlike the older piston designs the radial depth is not as concerning.

[Mark O'Neal]

The radials on the metric rings are about .040 smaller than a conventional 1/16 set.

There is a commensurate reduction in radial tension. They eat less power and last a lot longer.

In any case where you're running custom pistons it is best to either provide the radial dimensions or the ring manufacturer and part number.


Like Jim McFarland once said; "The price of progress is trouble."

[Mark O'Neal]

ok , I'm going to follow up with this. By design these rings are "supposed" to have a well defined "bevel". The rings ALSO have the dots to indicate top of ring. Through a little reasoning , by virtue of the fact that the top rings DO have a dot , and as the illustrations on installation sheet indicate......all rings with dot are associated with a "direction". SO , since there is a "dot" , there is also a bevel. If the ring is barrel faced with NO dots /dot , then direction of installation is either way.
IN THIS CASE , the quality control was apparently , poor.

Perhaps. But you'd never know it if you ran them.

[joespanova]

[/quote]
Mark O'Neal
Perhaps. But you'd never know it if you ran them.
[/quote]
well , as you put it........"perhaps" , but I'm not going to take that chance considering all that's required to assemble AND install an engine.
PERHAPS , JE should indicate on the instruction / info sheet that the inconsistency of the top ring bevel is "inconsequential."

BTW , ring groove depth was sufficient to accept a Speed Pro set.........the JE top ring radial at .187ish and SP at .195ish. I doubt the increased back clearance of the JE was supposed to "offset" the reduced inconsistent bevel. I still maintain poor quality control for rings MADE IN USA. You can get lackadaisical people here just as easily as you can anywhere else.

[engineguyBill]

there has been a few changes in the manufacturing of basic ring packages top rings in the last couple years.
They have made the switch to steel top rings and they are cut from tube rather then the old way to save manufacturing costs. Not all bad but the ring sets used for stock builds like your garden variety sm blk GM stuff not only better material is used for the moly top ring but they are also thinner by a bunch. I have had several customers bring in some stock rings from the local jobbers and they have been up to .100" thinner then the older designs which I believe will allow the ing to rock more in the ring groove up setting the seal.

Back in the day when ring groove spacers were common to fill the grooves behind the rings the grooves have been made shallower in the case of the late GM ring width difference but the common rings seem to be narrower in the radial depth like the GM factory rings. But now they are thinner in that respect in alot of cases.

I contacted Hastings about the change and they claim there is no affective difference between the new narrow design and the old wider design in most cases except the fact that they are a machined steel not parallel ground cast material.
I asked FM about it and they told me they get alot of their rings from hastings and their tech said that they would be fine in most cases.

The narrower 1.5mm/1/16" rings seems to be made the same way for the newer stock stuff but unlike the older piston designs the radial depth is not as concerning.

Actually, steel rings are not cut from tube material, but are manufactured as a net "wire" shape and wound into large rolls. The ring "wire" then goes into machines that form the correct diameter and length.
Ring manufacturing has indeed become more complex in the past few years. Current compression rings are manufactured with various radial thicknesses and this must be taken into account and measured carefully during any engine build. Newer engines are utilizing rings with significantly less lateral width and radial thicknesses in an effort to reduce rotating weight/mass. The piston ring world was much simpler in the good old days when most OEM engine designers followed the SAE 'D' wall specification which basically directed that the radial thickness of automotive piston rings was equal to the bore divided by 22. For example, compression rings designed for a 4.000" bore would have a radial thickness of 0.182".