wet sump engine oil control, a thread.

[ericjon262]

I think it will be negligible either way really, I don't think my solution would really have better de-aeration, and I think the return to the pan one way vs the other will be pretty negligible as well. I think removing oil from the crank will be good regardless.

yeah, you're probably right, the difference between the two ideas probably isn't worth worrying about.

I do think you should try and get some extra pan volume though, I think that's worth it IMO and I think that will do more to help with oiling than anything else, and I am sure you can find space.

additional pan volume would be nice, however, there are a few factors working against me, as mentioned earlier, I really don't want to make the car harder to work on, to expand the pan forwards, will make begin moving the pan in the way of the oil filter, and make starter removal and replacement difficult,

Expanding rearwards gets the sump closer to the axle shaft, while not a maintenance and repair issue, if the car breaks an axle, the probability of damaging the oil pan becomes higher. which I'm also not wild about.

Going deeper gets the pan below the subframe, which I absolutely will not do,

there's trans/flywheel interference going to the driver's side, and then there's mount interference going to the passenger side.

I'm not opposed to exploring the idea, it's just difficult due to the packaging constraints imposed by the vehicle.

on the one hand, increasing volume will reduce pressure with the same oil volume, and with additional oil volume, residence time will be increased and de-aeration improved as long as the windage tray and crank scraper are effective. On the other hand, making the sump larger front to back increases the need for pan baffling to prevent oil from sloshing away from the pickup. I've been giving a ton of consideration to baffling, and the benefits are also the downsides, a baffle restricts the slosh of the oil in the pan, but a poorly designed baffle can also prevent oil from flowing to the pickup. I feel like this problem is made worse with a flatter, wider pan, than a taller, narrower pan.

trap doors could do a good job of baffling the sump, along with minimizing restriction of oil flow to the pickup, but that can also get really tricky to fit in the pan in a reasonable manner.

I've actually been considering the idea of a secondary "windage tray" that would sit at the surface of the oil, that way for the oil to slosh away from the pickup, it also has to go through that tray as well. something with a large enough perimeter clearance, that the oil flows past without issue, that said, I need to put a dipstick in the block and see how far below the windage tray the factory fill level would sit, it might be very close already.

[zok15]

I think extending the pan to the rear is the way to go, I really do not think breaking an axle is going to cause issues, they generally break at the splines on the trans side, I have never seen one break in the middle. If you are really concerned about it, you could easily make a little steel shield for it, but I really do not see it being an issue. If you break an axle in half and it is whipping around, you are going to have major problems. I would certainly add a trap door to the pan extension, I think this would be easy.

I would be careful about over-baffling and over-windage-tray-ing, you can easily make it harder for oil to get back into the pan quickly, it is a big issue with the stock WRX oil pan and why I swapped to an STI one. The ultimate IMO is a 4 trap door baffle around the pickup, this always allows oil in from whatever direction it is coming from and will not let oil out in whatever direction you are pulling Gs. You could easily make this for cheap, and putting a little roof on this with a hole and slot for the pickup to sit in will accomplish what you are trying to do with a secondary windage tray without making it harder for oil to return to the pan. Generally I see these 4 trap door baffle systems clocked at 45* relative to the motor, vs one facing forwards, one backwards, two to the sides.

[zok15]

Decent article, it is from Moroso. Nothing too heavy. Discusses positives and negatives of different oil pump styles. Also give a crank scraper to crank recommended clearance of 0.045".

https://www.chevyhardcore.com/tech-stor ... s-engines/

[ericjon262]

I think extending the pan to the rear is the way to go, I really do not think breaking an axle is going to cause issues, they generally break at the splines on the trans side, I have never seen one break in the middle. If you are really concerned about it, you could easily make a little steel shield for it, but I really do not see it being an issue. If you break an axle in half and it is whipping around, you are going to have major problems. I would certainly add a trap door to the pan extension, I think this would be easy.

That is a fair point on the axle breakage, I would be inclined to agree that they don't typically break in the middle, but I'm also concerned that I won't actually be able to reap the benefits of the larger pan volume.

I would be careful about over-baffling and over-windage-tray-ing, you can easily make it harder for oil to get back into the pan quickly, it is a big issue with the stock WRX oil pan and why I swapped to an STI one. The ultimate IMO is a 4 trap door baffle around the pickup, this always allows oil in from whatever direction it is coming from and will not let oil out in whatever direction you are pulling Gs. You could easily make this for cheap, and putting a little roof on this with a hole and slot for the pickup to sit in will accomplish what you are trying to do with a secondary windage tray without making it harder for oil to return to the pan. Generally I see these 4 trap door baffle systems clocked at 45* relative to the motor, vs one facing forwards, one backwards, two to the sides.

I think I kinda touched on your first point in one of my above posts, which is actually part of my reason for not wanting to widen the pan to accommodate more volume. I believe that increasing the volume of the pan, helps reduce pressure, and improve oil drain back, but, if the pan is filled to the same level, the pressure benefit is reduced, almost to the point of a stock pan. but if the pan fill level is reduced, then the oil can slosh further away from the pickup, and the pan is almost required to be more thoroughly baffled to ensure the oil will remain near the pickup.

I'm thinking a horizontal, perforated baffle would go a long way to keeping oil in the sump, without limiting drainback, I could cut it on the plasma cutter with holes in the front and back being smaller, and holes over the pickup and in the middle being larger. it's amazing how simple a dry sump can become compared to wet sump with consideration to baffling. I really wish I had time(money?) to devote to one.

Decent article, it is from Moroso. Nothing too heavy. Discusses positives and negatives of different oil pump styles. Also give a crank scraper to crank recommended clearance of 0.045".

https://www.chevyhardcore.com/tech-stor ... s-engines/

interesting read, I've seen recommendations between .030 and .060 for the scraper, some scrapers are actually interference parts, but also are PTFE and not steel.

[The Dark Side of Will]

Oil capacity reduces oil temperature because the same heat is going into more oil and there's more opportunity to shed the heat.
Oil capacity also slows the rate at which oil chemistry changes due to exposure to blow-by gasses, which makes the car look better to the EPA.

Speaking of which, blow-by is a big source of crank case pressure. Reducing blow-by reduces the need to deal with crankcase pressure and the resulting oil aeration. Gapless top rings *should* be an excellent way of doing this, but OEM-caliber research on them is thin.

What Shaun doesn't consider is that some cars go around turns very fast on race tires and get exposed to >1g lateral acceleration... the oil system has to be able to keep up with that use case.

Check out the Improved Racing baffle sets for LS engines for inspiration on what kind of baffling ends up being highly effective.

[Shaun41178(2)]

Fieros aren't going around corners at sustained 1g Will. This discussion is a total waste of time when it comes to fiero owners and how you drive these 80s shit boxes.

Dry sumps aren't necessary in our applications. But you goofballs build it and install it. It's your time and money.

[The Dark Side of Will]

Most Fieros don't.
AutoX cars on race rubber definitely do. If he's on slicks, Rei definitely does.

[Shaun41178(2)]

Reis engines don't last long enough to need dry sumps either.

[neophile_17]

I am not clear whether the primary goal of this thread is to minimize parasitic drag (maximize power) or improve reliability. I do have a data point that may be interesting if the concern is the latter.

We've been endurance racing 3400 engines for a dozen years and have had no oil control issues using the stock windage tray. Our first motor did 100K street miles and 200 race hours. We didn't winterize it well enough and the block cracked. The lower end bearings were fine. I used to send out the oil for analysis each year but I don't even bother any more. Running an 11 hour day in 90º weather on a road course is torture test enough for me to call it good as is. We are rule constrained to 200TW tires so slicks may may be different but you'd have to show me.

Sam

[The Dark Side of Will]

Where do you send the oil?

That's good to hear. GM is good about many of those subtle engineering aspects. They tested the Northstar sump up to 45 degrees in any direction, for example.

[neophile_17]

Where do you send the oil?

I use Blackstone Labs: https://www.blackstone-labs.com/

There may be better out there but that's who I started out with and I haven't been disappointed so far. I have a couple kits hanging around so if I get paranoid I send a sample out. Come to think of it I may send out a sample next time I do an oil change on the wife's new DD- 0W16 makes me very nervous.

[ericjon262]

I am not clear whether the primary goal of this thread is to minimize parasitic drag (maximize power) or improve reliability. I do have a data point that may be interesting if the concern is the latter.

We've been endurance racing 3400 engines for a dozen years and have had no oil control issues using the stock windage tray. Our first motor did 100K street miles and 200 race hours. We didn't winterize it well enough and the block cracked. The lower end bearings were fine. I used to send out the oil for analysis each year but I don't even bother any more. Running an 11 hour day in 90º weather on a road course is torture test enough for me to call it good as is. We are rule constrained to 200TW tires so slicks may may be different but you'd have to show me.

Sam

Primary goal? yes.

in the case of the engine I'm currently putting together, the eagle H beam rods hit the stock windage tray, so I needed an alternative. do you datalog oil pressure when you race? I have it inputted into my MS3, so I can watch pressure all the time if I want. I'd be interested in hearing how it trends in cornering, if at all. do you run an accusump or similar accumulator?

it's funny you should mention not having problems, the guy I gave my old intake to said he had oiling issues in his 88 Fiero with an LX9, he runs an accusump because of it.

[neophile_17]

do you datalog oil pressure when you race? I have it inputted into my MS3, so I can watch pressure all the time if I want. I'd be interested in hearing how it trends in cornering, if at all. do you run an accusump or similar accumulator?

We are running OBD1 with no Accusump and have been since ~2010. We ran for 5+ years on decreasingly accurate/broken gauges but had no problems. After the first 3400 was replaced things took a turn for the worse, (ended up being a couple factors with the 'new' oil cooler that had pin hole leak being the primary cause). When the trouble started, gauges became a priority so we now have good visibility for the driver but having found the issue, we didn't get so far as data logging. If I can see the oil pressure gauge in the Go-Pro view I'll report back.

If memory serves the LX9 was the first 60º V6 to receive a single piston squirter. I wonder if this feature is affecting either the reading or the oil system pressure. This would be good to know as the LZ* series has 3 squirters covering all 6 pistons.

[Series8217]

My oil pressure drops during long left sweepers. 200tw tires, front splitter and a smallish rear wing. I overfill the pan on my LQ1 by about a quart. Oil pan is stock. Stock windage tray.

I didn't know it was happening until I reviewed some in-car video. Android tablet datalogger showing about 1.1G.

[SappySE107]

.

[ericjon262]

My oil pressure drops during long left sweepers. 200tw tires, front splitter and a smallish rear wing. I overfill the pan on my LQ1 by about a quart. Oil pan is stock. Stock windage tray.

I didn't know it was happening until I reviewed some in-car video. Android tablet datalogger showing about 1.1G.

I wonder if moving the pickup more to the right in the pan would help with that? it would be pretty easy to implement in my situation, although I'm not sure how often I'll pull 1+G's for extended durations.

Is this setup something that other motors have used? Im just wondering how much of a good thing isn't a good thing when it comes to covering the entire rotating assembly.

Circle track racing requires an extra quart to keep the bottom end happy as well. Not sure what the LZ engine is going to do just yet but I am very interested in crank scrapers for the LX9 and LZ engines. An improved 3400 design wouldn't be bad either. It will probably take a modified oil pan to add trap doors but this is the level of detail I want to get into after we test the easier stuff for power. Oil control can be worth quite a bit in power depending on how bad the stock setup is. I think we are starting pretty good on everything that already has a windage tray.

for what it's worth, this isn't far off from stock as far as coverage is concerned, and because it's a screen, and not a solid sheet with a few small holes, it is probably less coverage. this style of windage screen isn't uncommon for performance V8 oil pans. I hope to get some work done on it this week, but life's been very busy...