I have my 470 down for inspection and a few new parts. I have no windage tray in it, no crank scraper. The block is girdled stock pan that has had material added for clearence. Scavenger oil system. Whats the opinion out there on this? Thanks Rick
Chris How have you been? Hopefully the weather has been kind to you. That would be great. Will that fit a stock pan clearenced for stroke? What do you have for bigger pans laying around? Thanks Rick
Things are good here how about you guys? I like the weather here for the most part because out west it rains a lot and when it snows out there its wet. Summers are hot and long and dry snow here. That won't work with a stock pan but its a nice set-up, there is also a crank scraper under the screen. I have new doubled girdled, half fill, TA Rods, Ross Flat tops, SRE Oil pan etc etc that as your name on it
Chris I just popped for new flat tops gas ported and small ring package, new cam and springs last week from AMP. All custom stuff (uffda). Just was kind of looking for a pan and such. Glad your getting along better there. Rick
Rick, I found in testing on a 550 HP BBB, the windage tray similar to what is shown here is worth about 6-8 HP but more importantly, we saw an increase of 10psi in the oil pressure. Don't worry about putting a scraper in, I spent one whole dyno session testing windage trays, oil pans and scrapers, and we didn't find any HP or increase in oil pressure with the scraper. I quit using them years ago. JW
Jim I was more looking at windage trays. My pan is a stock that has been clearenced for the extra stroke. So I'm sure like Chris said there probably not much that will fit anyway. Why the increase in oil pressure? Is that because of the areation of the oil is cut back or minumized? 6-8 HP is not alot of gain. I found out this summer that I had been putting to much oil in the motor. Some where I thought I was told that it took 7 quarts. I installed a vaccuum pump and it continually pulled alot of oil after every pass. After talking with the former owner and Mike P. found out that maximum should have been 6 quarts. Quit pumping oil and the car ran its fastest passes and starting repeating. Imagine that. Thanks Rick
This is the under side of the screen. It seems a lot of people are going with louvers over screen. This set-up is on one of AM&P's Engine Masters entry. Mike must of found something there. But this was awhile ago.
I build both louvered ones and screen ones for Mike/AMP when I do his oil pans. Chris I believe your first picture is of my 523 when Mike was assembling it. He built that screen as it mounts to the girdle. The ones I build mount in the pan. It's very difficult to fit one in a stock frame configuration without frame modifications. A chassis car is a lot easier to fit...just lower the oil pan bottom and make everything clear. There have been many debates over which style is superior, louvered or screen. I say it's too close to call. Each application is just a little different and it should be looked at with an objective eye.... then apply common sense. Either way they work and are needed for any type of race application. Steve
Do you know if the set up in the pic of your engine will work with the pan you built Kerry and I. Boy that should make you dig deep to remember those pans:laugh: I don't think it will because I have both girdles and a stock cross member. If you have a girdled engine what is the deepest you have built to fit a stock frame? Measurement from either the pan rails or the girdle if possible? I am not sure if Kerry's will work in a stock frame. Thank you for your help Steve!
Chris, without going back out to the shop and actually measuring, I can tell you that I always try to maintain a maximum of 4.25" depth (usually shooting for 4.188"), on the front sump of the pan. (That measurement would be from the pan rail surface of the block to the lowest point of the pan. If using a block girdle you must subtract 1" from that measurement). That should clear the cross member on a stock engine location application. There are definitely differences in clearance's from car to car, but what I did years ago was to measure a lot of BB GS's and came up with a "nominal" dimension that would work in pretty much all cases. ( I actually measured GS's at the Nationals one year to come up with that number. I had some shims made up of a few different thicknesses and I would crawl under the cars and use the shims to get a clearance measurement. (From oil pan to cross member). Once I had a bunch of measurements I found the extremes and came out with an average that would work.) That logic would tell you that some cars may have as much as 5" of clearance while others had only 4.5" or so. I can't say for sure if the pans I built (that you have) would clear that setup or not, but I always find a way to make them fit in the pan, even if they are flat against the bottom of the pan where the most interference would be, (rod bolts). I send out a lot of them that are not flat or radiused on the bottom, but look more like a mountain range. Anything there that stops the oil flying around and contains it is better than a smooth flat surface, as long as there is a free path for the oil to take back to the sump while under the screen. Another thing to worry about is the tie rod. That actually has less clearance than the cross member. I've heard of people heating up the tie rod and making more clearance, but that would always leave some bad thoughts in the back of my head, especially while racing!! On my next engine adventure in the GSX, I plan to lower the cross member for more room, but I still haven't figured out what I'm going to do about the tie rod. Steve
You're right Steve that center drag link is always an issue on the A bodies. Ours would literally scrape on the pan sometimes before we put a rack on the car. Only down side to the rack is getting the bump steer right.
Steve What about a pan for a tube car where front cross member is not a problem. What would you do for something like that? Would you do longer sump instead of deeper to get more capacity?? Thanks Rick
Hi Rick, A full sump chassis pan is a different story. When there are no restrictions there are many options. I've built many in the past with a full sump, but I've discovered that you can maintain better oil control with a stepped sump rather than all the trap doors and such. Too much info to type here. Call me if interested and we can talk. Steve
I know I'm late seeing this thread but thanks Jim Weise for the info on the scraper. I have killed many hour on them and had about decided what you had proved. My current engine was built in a 2 week time frame to get back in a points race and I did not put a scraper on it or hone it with plates, it may have been a sin but the engine went faster than it should have and has ran 8 seasons on the same rings and bearings. I felt bad about some of the short-cuts I took on it but I guess I was lucky. It has won me 2 NMCA Championships and some big races. JIm N.
