Truck Ft oil pan modification

[Sand hauler]

Does anyone have any pics or drawings of the modifications needed for a Ft oil pan to be used for a street/ strip application  in a 75 F100  2wd lb pick up? Baffle &/ or trap door location?

[BattlestarGalactic]

I did mine over 20 yrs ago, so I don't have any information at hand.  I know I didn't make any swinging doors, but a few walls with maybe 1/4" gap at the bottom for flow.  I recall tacking them in, then using water I did a "swish" test to see how it controlled the water.  Seemed okay, no ill effects after all these years.

Not sure if I would worry about using a pan that big today?  I think it's really overkill and a moot point.  At $9/qt for oil, I don't really see a need for that much oil in a hot rod.  It seemed like the thing to do way back, but personally, for a street vehicle I don't see the need today.

My .02

[Sand hauler]

Thank you sir, that helps a lot 

[HarleyJack17]

I thought the FT bread box pan had shown to gain a little horse power on some tests. Due to windage effects and keeping oil forced down and away from the crank. BUT that was in OE design, not modified to fit. 

[winr1]

I dont know anyone who has put an FT pan on a pickup but here are pics and info ...

Read an article about Ed Hamburger ( small block mopar )

He modified pans, filled them with water and put them in the seat next to him and watched what happened as he took off hard

A few articles I read said they hold 8 qts



Ricky.

[427John]

Running that pan in a chassis that readily accepts it,really has no downside granted there is more oil to buy at oil changes,but it is offset by the less frequent required oil changes.Twice as much oil in the same engine equals twice as long before reaching the same levels of contamination.Istalling a wall baffle with a trapdoor at the back of the horizontal baffle would help with slosh if the engine is fairly strong.I have an FT pan in my 72 F250 no modification required.

[Sand hauler]

That was my thinking as well. Just wasn't sure how far back and down to go with the horizontal baffle

[427John]

Your pan doesn't have the original horizontal baffle?Maybe not all of them had them,mine does.

[Sand hauler]

Yes it does, was wondering if I should add to it

[427John]

Well it has the vertical wall at the front so that should prevent some slosh on decel,but that baffle won't stop slosh to the back on hard acceleration so if your engine is strong enough you may need to add some more.

[Sand hauler]

We're targeting a 600 hp build, so yeah I probably should add some to the rear and sides

[TomP]

The swish test. After spinning a bearing on my 427 and reviewing an in car video where the oil pressure dropped to zero right after launch i decided to put the pan to the test. I tried moving the pan back and forth but that didn't prove the loss of pressure or really simulate a 6500rpm launch on slicks. So in grubby clothes and with some rubber boots with a very well padded toe area i sat the pan on the lawn and gave it a mighty kick from the rear. The six quarts of water shot up in the air twenty feet and landed behind me. The pan was almost empty.

 This was after having oil pressure problems with the previous pan where I determined the horizontal baffle that covers the back half of the sump prevents oil from returning to the sump. Acceleration holds the oil in the shallow rear of the pan and combined with the angle the engine sits at and the front of the car rising on acceleration it's an uphill, against gravity journey for the oil to get back. So about 800 feet downtrack the oil pressure starts flickering. It seemed like almost all of the oil returning from the crank, heads and lifter valley and off the windage tray landed on top of that baffle then in the shallow back of the pan. So it was acting as a total loss oil system until the finish line. That would have worked fine for 1/8th mile racing.
 So the fix was moving the sump further rearward close to the tie rod and making more of a slope down into the sump on that shallow rear section and welding in two small horizontal baffles at the back of the sump so  not as much oil can be thrown upward.

[winr1]

Nice test TomP .... hot roddin at its best



Ricky

[427John]

The swish test. After spinning a bearing on my 427 and reviewing an in car video where the oil pressure dropped to zero right after launch i decided to put the pan to the test. I tried moving the pan back and forth but that didn't prove the loss of pressure or really simulate a 6500rpm launch on slicks. So in grubby clothes and with some rubber boots with a very well padded toe area i sat the pan on the lawn and gave it a mighty kick from the rear. The six quarts of water shot up in the air twenty feet and landed behind me. The pan was almost empty.

 This was after having oil pressure problems with the previous pan where I determined the horizontal baffle that covers the back half of the sump prevents oil from returning to the sump. Acceleration holds the oil in the shallow rear of the pan and combined with the angle the engine sits at and the front of the car rising on acceleration it's an uphill, against gravity journey for the oil to get back. So about 800 feet downtrack the oil pressure starts flickering. It seemed like almost all of the oil returning from the crank, heads and lifter valley and off the windage tray landed on top of that baffle then in the shallow back of the pan. So it was acting as a total loss oil system until the finish line. That would have worked fine for 1/8th mile racing.
 So the fix was moving the sump further rearward close to the tie rod and making more of a slope down into the sump on that shallow rear section and welding in two small horizontal baffles at the back of the sump so  not as much oil can be thrown upward.

He shouldn't have a starvation issue with the FT pan since it is a full length sump with the pickup at the rear and it holds 9-10 qts.,but there may be issues with oil sloshing up into the crank or other unwanted areas depending on how much lateral G it is subjected to.The front sump/front pickup design while convenient for chassis fitment isn't exactly ideal for hard launch scenario.

[TomP]

Or hitting the brakes or going down steep hills. I used to have an early Bronco and that rear sump had a slope at the front and when going down really steep hills it would all run to the front away from the pickup. Never killed that 351W but it sure concerned me a few times when i couldn't shut the engine off and lose the power steering and the vaccum for the brakes and had to leave it running with the oil pressure flickering.

 A front sump on a car that does wheelies is an issue. You need enough volume in the sump that you don't run out before drainback can occur.