Some of the statements in this post got my interest peaked. The statements totally contradict what I’ve seen with my own eyes. Now what? I talked to a friend of mine, John Edwards, the owner of Costa Mesa R&D and the author of SUNNEN’S COMPLETE CYLINDER HEAD AND ENGINE REBUILDING HANDBOOK and we did some testing and here’s what we found.
We used a Mitutoyo SJ – 201 Profilometer to test the smoothness of our test cylinders.
We had one new Nikasil cylinder; one unmolested Nicasil cylinder w/ 104,000 miles and one used Nikasil cylinder sacrificed for this test.
The used cylinder was lightly honed with a 320-grit hone bottle bush hone specified for use with Nikasil.
Unmolested cylinder was cleaned, as was the new cylinder.
The test.
The unmolested cylinder measured 3.0 RA, the new cylinder measured 4.9 RA, and the lightly honed cylinder measured 10.5.
10.5 is way too rough!! Because the rings are soft they will ware out before the cylinder gets smooth. In other applications the crosshatch marks will smooth with ware, and the rings will seat.
Mahle says in their literature that the honed surface of their Nikasil cylinders should be 4.2 to 6.0. Our test proves that they start that smooth.
I have read in some literature that cast iron rings as used in Nicasil cylinder want an RA surface of 18-25.
I guess that works for Fords and Chevys but we’re talking about Porsches here and as much as I love Nascar I will not use Nascar specs to build my Porsche engines. It seems that short-lived engines in motor cycles might benefit from this information.
I read through this thread and one thing seems perfectly clear. People will believe what they want, as they should.
One thing that is true: “The truth is not dependent on your belief”. In other words “it’s true, weather you believe it or not”.
An ostrich can’t see the true because is head is buried in the sand, time to pull your head out. Porsches are not like other cars, and neither are their engines. Look at the pictures and see for yourself.
Here is some information about grit and RA specs.
http://www.babcox.com/editorial/ar/eb110242.htm
If you’re switching from conventional stones to diamond, you’ll generally have to use higher grit to achieve the same Ra (roughness average) when finishing a cylinder. For example, if you have been using #220 grit conventional stones to finish cylinders for chrome rings; the equivalent diamond stones might be a #325 grit. If you have been using #280 grit conventional stones to hone for moly rings; the diamond equivalent might be #550 grit stones. The actual numbers will vary somewhat depending on the brand and grade of the stones.
A cylinder bore must have a certain amount of cross hatch and valley depth to retain oil. However, it must also provide a relatively flat surface area to support the piston rings. Ring manufacturers typically specify a surface finish of at least 28 to 35 Ra for chrome rings, and 16 to 25 Ra for moly faced rings. These numbers can be easily obtained with diamond stones and brushing, say those who use this honing technique.
One rebuilder we spoke to says he uses #325 grit diamond stones to end up with an Ra finish in the 20 to 25 range, which he feels is about right for moly rings. For some applications, though, he uses a #500 grit diamond to achieve a smoother finish in the 15 to 20 Ra range.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1085762130.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1085762141.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1085762157.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1085762172.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1085762194.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1085762209.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1085764857.jpg ]