Fair warning, this will be LONG!
(sorry in advance)
So in the interest of pushing boundaries
, I’d like to see if I can reliably put 73mm pistons in a factory cylinder. The safe bet is to stay at 72mm or smaller in a factory cylinder, but I like a challenge...
For some reference, the pics below are of my vintage RC prepared big bore factory cylinder(at current 70mm bore) with their standard RC sleeves.
The sleeves are 3.000” OD(which I believe were the standard for (70-73mm at RC). FWIW, this leaves roughly .100” wall at 71mm and .080” wall at 72mm.
.080” wall is generally accepted as the minimum wall thickness for acceptable sleeve rigidity(resistance to distortion). Going to 73mm with these sleeves gives roughly .060”, not good. It seems RC got away with 73mm pistons in those sleeves in their special RC cast block cylinders because they were essentially a solid block of aluminum with little more than cosmetic fins. So presumably the great rigidity of the block itself helped helped keep bore stability in check with the extra thin walls of the RC 3.000” OD sleeves.
Now when you run sleeves that thin(+/-.060” at 73mm bore) in a factory block, it becomes a potential problem. Most obvious is the break through of the air gap areas between 1/2 and 3/4 when boring the cylinder to take larger 3.000” OD sleeves. The silicone injected in there(after the new big sleeves are installed) is intended to deal with the newly created oil seepage problem, but does nothing to support the integrity of the block/sleeve itself. So the new unsupported area in that section of the cylinder block doesn’t give even support for the sleeves, so combined with extra thin sleeve wall at .060” and the natural result is piston bores that don’t want to stay round as the sleeves are inclined to distort at least somewhat. This explains why RC in one of their early catalogs specifically tried to discourage customers from using 73mm pistons in factory cylinders with their sleeves(many did it anyway and lived to tell the tale)
After coming up with my attempt at a solution for the 1/2 3/4 gap issue, I discovered that my idea wasn’t so new after all. I came across a post from Mec from Austria from 10 years ago where he has seen the entire 1/2 3/4 gap areas filed with Devcon with good success for big bore road race engines. This does two things, if the gap is filled COMPLETELY(without voids) it both seals the break through areas from oil leaks AND should be sufficiently rigid and machinable that is acts like a solid casting in this area, so it should have a very positive effect on supporting the sleeves. I used Marine Tex BTW, but the results should be comparable.
So, doing some basic math, I figure I need 3.035” OD sleeves to allow a reasonable piston/bore clearance at 73mm to end up with .080” wall or greater. At .080” sleeve wall, and “solving” (hopefully) the biggest weak link with the 1/2 3/4 gap break through areas, is it reasonable to assume I can get away with 73mm bore and be confident that the sleeves will hold their shape(at .080” wall)and stay nice and round for me? I seem to have 1/8” or greater on the rest of the oil return spaces bordering the RC 3.000” OD sleeves, so going to 3.035” OD shouldn’t effect that much.
FWIW, I’m pretty sure Brian(Bear) has been running 73mm pistons in a modified factory based cylinder with something like 13:1 compression, stroker crank, big cam, running methanol with a dyno reported 135 RWHP thrashing around the tracks of Australia in a sidecar racer(about the most punishing use for a sohc4 race engine I can think of) and somehow hasn’t seemed to have had trouble with his bore stability. Granted, methanol has a great natural cooling effect so that may help some by keeping cylinder/sleeve temps down.
If anyone managed to stay awake through all that and has enough energy left to offer some insight or thoughts, I’m all ears.
George