FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: galaxastang on December 02, 2013, 05:49:49 PM
-
Hey guys, thoughts on which works best for 445 stroker build. Clearance? Canton? Thanks
Trying to gather the parts for winter build.
-
I don't believe that the screened pans really work; I think they are a gimmick. I always use a factory Ford or Moroso louvered pan.
-
Is there clearance for the stroker kit, I heard somewhere the moroso doesn't clear?
-
I've used both - and none.
From what I can tell there is zero or near zero difference on the dyno.
There is likely a difference on track as far as oil control is concerned.
I generally use the screen - in part because it easily clears the various strokers and pickups, and is easily bent & tweaked if and when needed.
The older Moroso louvered ones would not clear - but they have been revised after I let them know and I think they fit fine now.
-
You do have to be careful with the Moroso trays on clearance. There are three steel strips, about 1" wide each, that hold the main louvered tray in place, and in many cases I have cut those, bent the tray out a little to clear the reciprocating assembly, and then welded some small tabs back in to make the strips connect again.
-
I lean towards the screened windage trays as the screens themselves are directional. You might double check that the directional screens are actually installed in the right orientation as it would be easy for those to be installed backwards.
-
I have used the old FORD windage tray on 428 builds, as well as screened and louvered Canton trays. On my recent "personal" build, I used a Canton louvered tray. I used a 4.25 SCAT crank and H beam rods with L19 bolts. I did have clearance issues with the rod bolts. I ended up prying the tray up a tad slightly to give it about .060 clearance on the offending bolts. I didn't have to cut and weld or anything. I tore the engine down after a season of racing and there were no "witness marks" on the tray... so I didn't have any issues there. The bearings looked perfect except for the thrust wore a little more than I would have liked...
With the Canton screen tray, I haven't had to mess with them at all to clear the same stroker combo. I've never used the Moroso louvered tray, but had heard it won't work with stroker cranks, just 3.78 and 3.98 stroke cranks.
Here is the Canton louvered tray I used.
http://www.jegs.com/i/Canton+Racing+Products/074/20-938P/10002/-1?CAWELAID=1710886689&catargetid=1784164562&cadevice=c&&cagpspn=pla&gclid=CJHI4KazlLsCFQllfgodcVIALA
-
Just tried a new Moroso tray (I'd like to use them if possible because I am WD with Moroso). Still no dice on clearance - Willie needed to break the spot welds, reform the tray for clearance, then butt weld the tabs. Back to Canton screens I go.
-
I just cut the tabs and weld in some pieces to make them longer, Barry. I've never really had to reform the tray, even with my 4.6" stroker engine. In my opinion its worth the trouble; I just can't believe that the "one way screens" really work to keep oil from splashing back onto the crank, while helping to strip it off.
-
I know What Blair uses on his stuff :-X
-
On a front sump FE, I'd rather spend the extra dough on a good trap-door / baffled pan nowadays. I consider the stock Ford tray a "pan lid" not a tray, and I think a good baffled pan keeps the oil away from the crank.
With that being said, my stock Ford one is still in mine, even with a Canton pan because I figured it wouldn't hurt anyone being there :) and it was left over from the original 427 build
I did drill a few big holes on the drivers side of mine thinking that it might peel off some oil but I am not sure it does anything
-
Generally on items like this there isnt an real world data to decide which is better. I am sure either one them are pretty limited on the HP gains between the two of them. When I did my build we went with a trapped door Cantor pan and a screened tray................at the end of the day what did I really gain..................my guess is 1 to 5 HP at best.
-
I had a discussion with Jack Roush some years ago at which time he opined that there is more power to be found in dealing with oil management than with any other single component in a modern race engine.
KS
-
Thanks guys great info. I'm using the engine for mostly street, with a few trips to the track, so I'm not sure it would be beneficial.
I'm thinking a good baffled pan would be the best route. Put the $75 else wear. Thanks again
-
I suspect Jack was talking about crank scrapers, which makes sense....especially in a 8000+rpm Cup motor.
I always use a stock tray and baffle the pan. I think baffling does more good than anything on a street engine. A tray won't show any improvement on a dyno, but on a drag car I think its a good idea to keep oil from totally flooding the rear seal and getting up into the crank. Even a baffled pan will let some oil flow to the back under constant hard acceleration. I talked to Jim Kuntz once about it and he uses screened ones, but I never asked him the details of why.
IMO, a deep pan with baffles and a tray is always a good idea on any FE, but sometimes road clearance issues negate the use of a deep pan.
-
One thing the screen does is allow the aerated oil to dissipate the air faster.
-
I believe is happening inside a crankcase. A rather tightly confined crankshaft, pistons/rods moving up & down displacing gases/mist. Having seen Smokey's Smoketron in action w/cut-away windows in the sides of a block and strobe lights it all makes a hurricane look tame. Personally I read about Smokeys beliefs when he was regularly doing segments in Circle Track. He stated the only time wet-sump oiling was to remain in race engines was when the rules prevented going with a dry sump. The problems of a wet sump oil is aerated oil (shaving cream does a poor job of lubricating engine parts and providing hydraulic support) . There is also a loss of power by having to shove the reciprocating mass through an oil mist cloud.
You need to understand that inside a crankcase as rev's climb are violent gas movements and oil mist being essentially whipped around with the crank. Think about the art of profiling the crank fillets. Oil is being slung about to the point that gravity is not all that much of a factor but centrifugal forces are.
The reason there are crank scrapers is a significant amount of oil is actually yanked closely around with the crank. I recall Smokey pointing out to those that viewed his Smoketron at the Circle Track Trade Show, the cloud even seemed to go back and forth from end to end of the crankcase. The problem with a woven mesh or expanded metal mesh is they both have very significant percentages of open space. In fact for all intent and purposes mesh/perf is great at straining and acting nearly like no restriction at all, more like a full open passage. Keep in mind kids blowing bubbles with wands and you may get the idea that hundreds of tiny (bubble blowers) perf/mesh on large surface areas with oil mist passing through them at high velocities are not exactly great separators. Smokey said the goal is to get the oil into the bottom of the pan and allow it time to de-aerate before it is picked up and sent to the oil pump. Dry sumps have the luxury of a large tank designed to encourage this oil and air separation by all the tricks in the book before the oil is sent back to the engines internals. Keep in mind that getting an enormous mass of air/oil on the bottom side of windage tray is not going to do much good - idealy you want the underside of the windage tray and oil pan reservoir to be as calm as you can. You shove a shitload of oil mist and gasses down there then somewhere all that oil and gas will be coming back up it's not separating in a windstorm. It acts more like no windage tray at all.
How do you avoid directing the crankcases windstorm downstairs and still get the oil to go to the pan?... . Simple you work with the factors present you know oil/mist will be flung by centrifugal forces, the oil mist will obviously build up the heavy oil in certain areas - logic says that will be after a long surface and against walls. When you look at the factory FE pan you see graters/scrapers that are intended to take the oil and limit the amount of wind. I was proud when I got to see a modern Vette's oil pan, windage tray and baffling. Chevy had a tray that resembled a FEs. While the FE only scrapes oil from one side after passing under the crank Chevy has two sets of scrapers one where the FEs is and another set as the oil/mist comes down off the side of the block near the crank scrapers. Chevy ran "thinner" tray scrapers then the factory FE tray (obviously limiting the gasses directed downstairs) but Chevy also runs twice as many scrapers as the factory FE tray. Less opening height but more of them. Obviously they are aiming for less wind downstairs and trying for more oil w/o wind/gases.
-
To bad we couldn't get someone to whip up a clear plastic pan ;)We could see what goes on in the bottom of the motor at speed.
-
Many tests of how oil stacks up or not under load (acceleration and deceleration) have been done by modern race teams (F-1, NASCAR, SCCA, etc.) and their engine suppliers. Most do not show any pics let alone details of what works which is a shame.
Famed engine builders Reher-Morrison nevertheless have this to say about modern drag racing oiling systems:
http://rehermorrison.com/tech-talk-5-rehers-rules-how-to-keep-your-engine-alive/
By David Reher, Reher-Morrison Racing Engines
“Reliability is more important than horsepower when you have to pay your own engine repair bills.”
You don’t have to be a cardiologist like my fellow back-page columnist Dr. Torstveit to appreciate the importance of blood in the human body. I’ve watched enough episodes of “ER” and “Chicago Hope” to know that even a momentary interruption in the flow of blood to the brain can cause permanent damage.
At the risk of repeating a cliché, I’ll state categorically that oil is the lifeblood of an engine. The consequences of erratic oil delivery in a racing engine can be just as traumatic as the medical emergencies on television shows – but instead of comas and strokes, the likely results are broken connecting rods and catastrophic engine failures.
I estimate that nine out of ten connecting rod failures are not the fault of the connecting rod. Almost invariably, a broken rod is the result of a spun bearing -and the bearing failure is usually the result of an oil system problem. If an autopsy of a blown engine reveals even the hint of a blackened crankshaft rod journal, that’s strong evidence that a spun bearing was responsible, not the connecting rod.
When drag racers think about oiling systems, they usually look for ways to increase power by reducing windage and parasitic losses. That approach may be valid if you’re contending for the Pro Stock championship, but it’s risky business for weekend warriors, bracket racers, and Super eliminator competitors. Reher’s first rule of racing is that reliability is more important than horsepower when you have to pay your own engine repair bills.
I should point out the important distinction between wet-sump and dry-sump oil systems. With a wet-sump system, an engine’s entire oil supply is contained within the oil pan; with a dry-sump system, the oil is stored in an external tank. This simple difference in how the two systems manage their respective oil reservoirs has huge implications for racers.
A wet-sump system has the advantages of simplicity, low cost, and light weight. That’s why virtually every production engine in the world uses wet-sump lubrication. A dry-sump system is more complicated, more expensive, and heavier than a wet-sump – but it offers the important benefit of continuous lubrication under all conditions and the promise of increased power through reduced windage.
When you consider cost and complexity, a wet-sump oil system is the logical choice for most sportsman racers. The biggest mistake a sportsman racer can make, however, is to try to duplicate the performance characteristics of a dry-sump using a wet-sump system. This simply can’t be done without sacrificing reliability.
Many sportsman racers look to Pro Stock for inspiration. In some instances, the technology that is used in Pro Stock is applicable to other classes – but lubrication system design is not one of them.
Pro Stock engines are universally equipped with dry-sump oiling systems. The luxury of an external oil storage tank allows a Pro Stock engine builder to use an oil pan that is the size of a small refrigerator and to install a vacuum pump that sucks the air out of the crankcase like a tornado. Pro Stock racers use lightweight lubricants and restrict the oil flow to the absolute minimum. I couldn’t recommend these tactics in good conscience to any bracket or Super eliminator racer.
Using a large-volume Pro Stock-style oil pan with a full-length sump is an invitation to disaster with a wet-sump oil system. I insist on using an oil pan with a rear sump on every Super Series bracket racing big-block we build at Reher-Morrison Racing Engine – even if the engine will be installed in a dragster with plenty of room between the frame rails for a full-length sump.
Here’s why: When a car accelerates at one “g,” the oil stands up in the rear of the pan at a 45-degree angle. At two “g’s” acceleration, the oil is plastered to the back of the pan at a 66-degree angle. The same thing happens when the car decelerates, except the oil piles up at the front of the pan, and the oil pump pickup sucks air. With a full-length sump, there is little hope of keeping the oil pump pickup covered.
The low-viscosity oil that is commonly used in drag racing engines today has the consistency of kerosene when the engine is at operating temperature. You can see for yourself what happens to the oil in a full-length wet-sump pan by filling it with four quarts of water and rocking the pan forward and backward. Tilt the pan at a 66-degree angle to simulate what happens during a two “g” launch and deceleration. Even baffles and trap doors can’t keep the oil pump pickup submerged under hard acceleration and deceleration.
I strongly advocate using a solid windage tray to shield the oil pump in any wet-sump engine. You may sacrifice a little power with a partial solid tray compared to a full-length screen-type tray, but the oil pressure will be much more consistent if you shelter the oil around the pump pickup. The turbulence inside an engine’s crankcase is unimaginable when its crankshaft assembly is spinning at 7,000 rpm and its eight pistons are pumping up and down in their cylinders 56,000 times per minute. A full or partial solid windage tray isolates the oil surrounding the oil pump pickup from this whirlwind in the crankcase.
I have seen the difference in oil pressure that a solid windage tray mounted above the oil pump can make in a wet-sump racing engine. With some full-length screen-type windage trays we’ve tested on the dyno, the oil pressure fluctuates as the engine accelerates. With a solid windage tray mounted above the oil pump to isolate the sump, the needle on the oil pressure gauge hardly moves.
For similar reasons, I am not a fan of crankcase vacuum pumps on wet-sump engines. Lowering the pressure inside the crankcase with a vacuum pump can increase power because the crankshaft has less drag – just as an airplane can fly faster in the thin air at high altitude than it can in the denser air at low altitude. But from the standpoint of the oil pump, a little positive crankcase pressure is actually desirable because it forces oil into the pickup. Positive crankcase pressure primes the pump and helps to ensure a steady flow of oil into the pickup. When the crankcase pressure is artificially lowered with a vacuum pump, there is less pressure differential to push the oil through the pickup tube.
One of the best investments a sportsman racer can make for a wet-sump engine is an oil accumulator such as an “Accusump.” An oil accumulator is a sealed cylinder that contains a floating piston. Pressurized air on one side of the piston forces a reserve supply of oil into the engine if the flow from the internal oil pump is momentarily interrupted. An accumulator works automatically and requires virtually no maintenance except regular cleaning. Unfortunately, accumulators are seldom seen in drag racing. That’s a pity, because they really work.
You may have an oil system problem and not even know it. Most drivers are too busy during a run to watch the oil pressure gauge. If you’ve plumbed the pressure gauge with small-diameter tubing that dampens the gauge’s response, you might not even see dips in the oil pressure. Try connecting the gauge with 1/4-inch I.D. tubing, and mount the gauge where you can see it throughout the run. You might be shocked to learn what’s really happening inside your engine!
The effects of oil pressure fluctuations are cumulative. If the pressure drops to zero when you stop after a burnout, decelerate after a run, or make the turnout at the end of the track, you have abused the bearings. The oil pressure may return to normal when you restart the engine, but you’ve already inflicted some damage. If you repeat the injury enough times, eventually a bearing is going to fail. And when it does, the damage will be very, very expensive to repair.
The oiling system is not the place for a sportsman racer to look for power. The potential rewards are small – perhaps five or ten horsepower under the best circumstances. On the other hand, the risks are enormous. If a trick-of-the-week oil pan starves the engine for oil, you are going to pay a heavy price. A reliable oil system is the best way to avoid a medical emergency for your motor!
-
Yet, sometimes we do find published dyno tested reports of the affects of oil level, pan type, etc. on a hobby stock car engine:
http://www.circletrack.com/techarticles/ctrp_0603_oil_pan_design_windage_tech/viewall.html