windage tray

[64PI]

Brent, is there any solid data out there showing the gains from stand pipes in the valley and re directing the oil draining back to the pan? One would think those numbers would vary less from dyno to in chassis. If its just a matter of tapping 6 holes (leaving the back 2 open) and threading in brass stand pipes, why don't you see more guys doing that in attempts to keep oil off the crank?

Fred

[blykins]

Brent, is there any solid data out there showing the gains from stand pipes in the valley and re directing the oil draining back to the pan? One would think those numbers would vary less from dyno to in chassis. If its just a matter of tapping 6 holes (leaving the back 2 open) and threading in brass stand pipes, why don't you see more guys doing that in attempts to keep oil off the crank?

Fred

I have never done a back-to-back on it, so I personally don't have data on it but it's something I wanted to try with my 352 dyno mule, as it's already been drilled/tapped for it. 



I don't think a lot of guys do it because they don't know about it.  It's done by a lot of engine builders on higher end applications. 

[64PI]

Brent, is there any solid data out there showing the gains from stand pipes in the valley and re directing the oil draining back to the pan? One would think those numbers would vary less from dyno to in chassis. If its just a matter of tapping 6 holes (leaving the back 2 open) and threading in brass stand pipes, why don't you see more guys doing that in attempts to keep oil off the crank?

Fred

I have never done a back-to-back on it, so I personally don't have data on it.  I could try that with my 352 dyno mule, as it's already been drilled/tapped for it. 

I don't think a lot of guys do it because they don't know about it.  It's done by a lot of engine builders on higher end applications.

Off the Top of your head do you happen to know what tap size that is?

[blykins]

Brent, is there any solid data out there showing the gains from stand pipes in the valley and re directing the oil draining back to the pan? One would think those numbers would vary less from dyno to in chassis. If its just a matter of tapping 6 holes (leaving the back 2 open) and threading in brass stand pipes, why don't you see more guys doing that in attempts to keep oil off the crank?

Fred

I have never done a back-to-back on it, so I personally don't have data on it.  I could try that with my 352 dyno mule, as it's already been drilled/tapped for it. 

I don't think a lot of guys do it because they don't know about it.  It's done by a lot of engine builders on higher end applications.

Off the Top of your head do you happen to know what tap size that is?

Varies a little bit from block to block, but on this block I used a 1/2" NPT tap. 

[64PI]

Thanks, Brent. That will be an interesting test to run on the dyno.

[shady]

OP asks a very specific question and gets an answer, which leads to yet another shit storm. Sure gonna get quiet around here if another guru clams up.

[cjshaker]

I don't wanna be the bad guy because I'm the odd man out on a 100% consensus, but I call it how I see it.

I also do a lot of reading and have read some posts where some builders have seen horsepower losses because of windage trays.  There's a good bit of data out there saying how some of the trays do nothing to direct the oil, but do a lot to act like a shelf, which whips the oil up even more....kinda like what Ross was talking about up above.  So at the very least, just saying any windage tray will help could steer someone in the wrong direction. 

You're not the "bad guy". You like FEs; that automatically makes you a good guy

It has been discussed, and mentioned by other builders, that the Canton screen tray is best, for some of the very reasons you mention. It lets oil drop though and keeps oil from freely splashing up.

[cjshaker]

OP asks a very specific question and gets an answer, which leads to yet another shit storm. Sure gonna get quiet around here if another guru clams up.

What "shit storm"? I think there has been some legitimate questions and opinions brought up. Is that not allowed?

[My427stang]

He may not like getting poked at, but Brent can take a beating   More importantly, he doesn't BS and has success behind his logic

He and I are great buds off screen and banter about windage trays all the time, (as well as cork end seals, silicone, tins, etc and a wide range of other things LOL)  We each have our techniques and reasons and don't always agree, but I love to hear his side and experience because he doesn't make stuff up or use historic rumor or wives tales.

I like what I do with a windage tray, but I also don't have A-B-A testing proof.  Not sure anyone does at the level we are asking here (screen vs louver vs stock vs none/launch vs dyno, etc).  I will say that pulling a deep pan on a dyno session is the last thing I want to do, second only to maybe pulling one out of a car for back to back timed runs, but either would be cool if someone had the time.  That being said, I do not see how a factory windage tray, without modification can do anything beyond acting like a baffle on launch though, in fact, it's not much different than the shallow end of the pan in terms of the throw of oil from the crank.  That's why I drill a bunch of holes in the stockers.

Now, for the purpose of blocking oil from hitting the crank...when your pan is too small and overfull.... muy bueno (I think LOL) maybe just bueno....but there is likely more power and longevity in using a better pan.  In fact, I won't use a stock pan on anything that makes HP.  I was happy to see when Brent came up with a supplier who would baffle stock style pans.  Still not great at lower capacity, but certainly better.

I have a spare Canton screen, if we can talk Brent into a run after JJ is dialed in, I will give it to him to try on Junky Junk. 

[machoneman]

OP asks a very specific question and gets an answer, which leads to yet another shit storm. Sure gonna get quiet around here if another guru clams up.

What "shit storm"? I think there has been some legitimate questions and opinions brought up. Is that not allowed?

No legitmate questions allowed! Well, maybe a few....hah!

Two of my old race engine shops (no deep skirted FE's) did recommend a crank scraper if not a windage tray. They claimed  minimal but repeatable gains in the higher rpm ranges in SBC's, BBC's and SBF's. IIRC, it was in the neighborhood of 3-4 HP on 450 HP (or so) engines. I never asked on their very high HP SBF's run in Comp Eliminator what the gains were, but then again I doubt they ever ran them on a dyno back-to-back, so to speak.

Interesting to see even on a static dyno the HP gains, if any, with say a scraper, then a solid windage tray then a screen-type windage tray. Easy for me to say as it's not my engine, time or dyno! One does find that with a 'base' solid engine combo, gaining even a few more measly HP with various mods does get expensive and sometimes futile. But even small gains do add up.   

[Barry_R]

I have done oil pan swaps and windage tray additions on the dyno back when I was really trying to learn stuff on EMC builds.  I came to a few conclusions on dyno which may - or may not - translate to track or street performance.  Take from this what you will.  A pan with a couple big windows in the side would be fun to watch and learn from.

On stock depth oil pans you will see oil pressure "wiggle or drop at high RPM without a tray and with the normal amount of oil in the pan.  Adding a half quart of oil usually calms this down.  The addition of a tray seems to push this symptom out by a couple hundred RPM.  I used to think it was just running out of oil, but lately I've considered that the oil spray from the crank might actually be pushing the oil away from the bottom of the pan really, really hard.

I never saw any power gain from a windage tray on an FE - ever.  I tried a few times.  But the screen tray did seem to help stabilize oil pressure, and did not hurt power.  I suspect (just guessing with the data I had) that the screen gave the flying oil something of a soft surface to bounce off of and may have helped release some of the entrained air in the system.

I prefer the screen trays because they seem to help a bit on oil control (see above).  They physically fit most of my stroker combinations.  If there is any interference they are easily bent and modified without a bunch of cutting and welding - saves time.

The deeper sump pans seem to do better than stock depth and are worth a little bit of power - maybe 5?
The larger the pan volume the more power you gain and the higher the RPM before any pressure issues appear - at least to beyond 7000 RPM.
A really big open pan was worth more than any sump type pan - again by memory maybe 10 or 15ish better.
The best oil pan for power is probably a 55 gallon drum.  Not sure who originally said that (not me) but they were correct.

The rear sump "T" pans required for rack & pinion conversions are terrible from a performance perspective.  They waste a quart of oil trapped in that mini-sump up front around the oil pump.  They are really close to the crankshaft through the center of the engine where all the windage seems to get funneled.  I always end up needing to run way more oil that they advertise - maybe 9 quarts in a claimed 7 quart pan - in order to retain a stable oil pressure on dyno.  And they are always down at least 10 HP from comparable builds with a normal pan.

If Blair wanted to he could probably further elaborate on pan development for Stock and Super Stock stuff that might be useful information.

[blykins]

The rear sump "T" pans required for rack & pinion conversions are terrible from a performance perspective.  They waste a quart of oil trapped in that mini-sump up front around the oil pump.  They are really close to the crankshaft through the center of the engine where all the windage seems to get funneled.  I always end up needing to run way more oil that they advertise - maybe 9 quarts in a claimed 7 quart pan - in order to retain a stable oil pressure on dyno.  And they are always down at least 10 HP from comparable builds with a normal pan.

Same here.  I think they do ok in the vehicle though.  I've used a lot of the Canton rear T sump pans and I've had to add an extra quart on the dyno as well. 

For the rear sump pickup truck stuff, I use the Milodon rear sump pan.  It's really deep.  Got one in a pulling truck and the oil pressure gauge doesn't even think about wiggling during the entire pull.  (No tray...haha)

[fryedaddy]

im no builder so im not going to put my 2 cents worth in. but i remember back in the late 70s-early 80s.the big hipe was put a windage tray in for the cheapest horsepower.some articles claimed as much as 30 free horsepower,so i bought one in 1982 and i have used it ever since.i might have wasted my money on it.i dont know.but im not going to argue that it helps.what about road racing where your slinging oil from side to side.i have done more illegal road racing than drag racing.theres a place near me in the country called beech creek road.its about 10 miles or so long.we would race from one end to the other.a few turns and some nice straightaways.ahh the good old days!

[gt350hr]

 Back in the '60s and early '70s Art Chrisman ran the Autolite dyno facility next to Bill Stroppe's place ( Holman Moody Stroppe). His favorite dyno pan was 18''s deep and full length . He had them for all types of Ford engines and insisted on using the regardless of what the vehicle actually used. IF required he would change to the original use pan after pulling with "his" pan. The idea was to get the oil FAR away from the crankshaft as possible. These simplistic pans were usually worth 10 hp over the "actual use" pan. OBVIOUSLY they weren't practical but they equaled the testing.
    Ford's deep sump pans ( built for the Thunderbolts initially) sold over the counter were designed to be used without a the windage tray because of the scrapers that were used on the pan. IMHO the "louvers" in the factory tray are too restrictive and should be opened up by bending. The Ford tray is more of an "oil separator" on a stock pan as has already been said.
   Randy

[BigBlueIron]

OP asks a very specific question and gets an answer, which leads to yet another shit storm. Sure gonna get quiet around here if another guru clams up.

I enjoy hearing the differing even conflicting opinions and experiences gives me something to ponder  .  This relatively "simple" question has opened up some good discussion, sometimes that can lead to some keyboard thrashing but most everyone here is open minded enough to except another opinion even if they don't agree with it. It leads to critical thinking and that's a good thing.