Cylinder hone for Total Seal gapless second ring?

L

linker48x

Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
65
Country flag
what grit of cylinder hone have you used for a Norton Commando 850 ringset including a Total Seal gapless second ring? JCC pistons, iron rings.
 
I did a piston swap this winter with no rebore. I just put in new pistons and new rings. I checked the bore with a borescope and it was a consistent diameter, straight, and round so I bought a ball hone just to refresh the crosshatch pattern. I used a 240 grit ball hone lubed with 10w-30. I lubed the pistons to install them then wiped all the excess oil off the pistons with a clean rag before I put the head on. I don't think I got even a puff of smoke at the first start up and certainly none during subsequent break in rides. The #240 grit hone seems to have worked ok

I used a 76 mm hone for my +.040" over-bore cylinders which is 74mm for the +.040" 750 size. Your 850 bore will need at least a 77mm hone for a stock 850 cylinder.
 
Is this on a new rebore, or just new rings on an existing bore?

I read an SAE research article which advised against honing for just replacing the rings, and although I can't find it right now, the logic made sense; cross-hatching to remove machining ridges from a fresh bore is necessary, standard practice, whereas honing a used bore just added wear to the bore and increased oil consumption.
There's a few other articles online which seem to back this up.
 
B+Bogus said:
Is this on a new rebore, or just new rings on an existing bore?

I read an SAE research article which advised against honing for just replacing the rings, and although I can't find it right now, the logic made sense; cross-hatching to remove machining ridges from a fresh bore is necessary, standard practice, whereas honing a used bore just added wear to the bore and increased oil consumption.
There's a few other articles online which seem to back this up.
Click to expand...
I’ve not read any of the articles… but have followed that practice, many times! I’ve never bought into the idea of honing a perfectly good bore just coz you’re fitting new rings personally.
 
On my '76 CB750K6, the previous owner(s) had struggled to get it running off the choke. Everything was sooty with fuel. Also, the carb floats had been set too high. Fuel had got into the cylinders. As a consequence, the cylinder walls were beautifully polished. When a local engineering firm measured it, the bores were still in spec. Not what I was expecting at all on a 41,000 mile engine on its original bore.

Long story short, I decided to give it a go, had it honed and put standard rings in. I keep the oil level at 1/2 way on the dipstick. I've done 4,500 miles since and probably added less than 1/3 litre (under a pint) of oil, including some minor oil leaks (at tappet covers and the generator cover, now fixed, I think).

Not doubting the best practice advice, I've possibly been lucky, but I found the standard rings gapped nicely out of the box, so they were able to wear a good contact.
 
Hi, i haven’t responded in a while. I’d hoped someone who had installed Total Seal gapless rings in a Norton would share their experience with honing grits.

To answer one question asked above, the reason I didn’t do what Total Seal suggested was they actually suggested two different hone grits—320 in directions in the box and 360 on the phone, and those both sounded too fine for this ancient air cooled iron cylinder with fairly loose tolerances of roundness, parallel and perpendicularity—those hone numbers sounded more like what you would use in a modern well engineered water cooled engine. I asked around a bit and found that a very well known Britbike engine builder uses 220 stones for these gapless rings. While that’s a lot different than either 320 or 360, I trust the source so I’m going to try that. I may regret it later, who knows? But I like the source and his experience.
 
I think you'll find that the new type of rings use finer finishes because they are lower tension rings , and everyone thinks I'll make this sucker bed in and they coarse hone it , but they don't like it , in saying that , I think the ball hone finish doesnt look too bad .
 
I put total seal gapless rings in my Norton a few years ago. Because of some bad leaks, caused by broken and loosening crankcase studs, I had to take the engine appart after about 5000 miles. I decided to re use the rings, since they were like new. I de glazed the barrel to re establish the cross hatch (it wasn't entirely gone even near the top of the bore) I used a cheap hone with fine stones in my electric drill (probably about 320 grit). The engine runs great. It used about a quart of oil going all the way to Quincy, California and back from British Columbia (2000 miles) I did a leak down test and there was no measurable leakage at all!

It's only the second ring that has the gapless design, I think it works well. I am pretty sure that with standard rings there would have been a measurable amount of leak down. I have total seal rings in my Vincent, not the gapless type, but I think the top ring is moly sprayed or something. Those work really well also, the Vincent uses less oil than the Norton. In my BSA Goldstar I have total seal rings standard cast iron. They work really well also. The BSA isn't a bike that is going to see high mileage so the quick break in is better for this bike. Sometimes I have used the special paste that total seal supplies for ring break in. I like it. It looks a lot like never seize.
 
Here are the instructions I send out with gapless rings:

"Molly faced or cast iron top ring 280 to 320 grit, Chrome faced top ring 220 to 280, Approx 22 to 24 deg cross hatch pattern off horizontal.
 
Thanks for the info, Jim and Tricatcent. I’ve used Total Seal gapless in my AHRMA roadrace Triumph and wanted to use them here too, and I appreciate your sharing your info.
 
tricatcent said:
I put total seal gapless rings in my Norton a few years ago. Because of some bad leaks, caused by broken and loosening crankcase studs, I had to take the engine appart after about 5000 miles. I decided to re use the rings, since they were like new. I de glazed the barrel to re establish the cross hatch (it wasn't entirely gone even near the top of the bore) I used a cheap hone with fine stones in my electric drill (probably about 320 grit). The engine runs great. It used about a quart of oil going all the way to Quincy, California and back from British Columbia (2000 miles) I did a leak down test and there was no measurable leakage at all!

It's only the second ring that has the gapless design, I think it works well. I am pretty sure that with standard rings there would have been a measurable amount of leak down. I have total seal rings in my Vincent, not the gapless type, but I think the top ring is moly sprayed or something. Those work really well also, the Vincent uses less oil than the Norton. In my BSA Goldstar I have total seal rings standard cast iron. They work really well also. The BSA isn't a bike that is going to see high mileage so the quick break in is better for this bike. Sometimes I have used the special paste that total seal supplies for ring break in. I like it. It looks a lot like never seize.
Click to expand...
I like attention to detail but - 'loosening and broken crankcase studs' ? - You have to be joking - you rode it in that condition ?
 

Similar threads

jseng1
Total seal rings
Replies
1
Views
623
sportsroof
S
E
  • Locked
Total seal ring
Replies
1
Views
877
comnoz
comnoz
E
  • Locked
Total seal rings
Replies
9
Views
2,605
Bruce MacGregor
B
Back
Top