Crank Scraper received and installed
12-06-2005, 09:31 PM
#31
Originally Posted by marc@DEVEK
I solved an oiling issue in a 928 with a windage try of different design....took out the tray, and all workedwell.
Originally Posted by marc@DEVEK
Supporting the crank on a stand and losening and tightening the main girdle nuts is not a good idea, neither is "running" in a scraper with teflon and having peices of teflon inside the engine.
12-07-2005, 12:46 AM
#32
Drifting
Kevin,
Could you elaborate on Mark's concerns about the teflon? Have you done any testing yourself to determine if heat will be an issue? Last thing: Can it be installed with the engine in the car?
Carl,
When do you expect to be testing your engine?
-Mark
Could you elaborate on Mark's concerns about the teflon? Have you done any testing yourself to determine if heat will be an issue? Last thing: Can it be installed with the engine in the car?
Carl,
When do you expect to be testing your engine?
-Mark
12-07-2005, 01:29 AM
#33
Under the Lift
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Kevin:
It's good to see a man that loves his work and goes WAY out of his way to make sure the customers are happy. You definitely do not charge enough for your products. Wait until after I order and receive mine, then raise the price at least 100%.
It's good to see a man that loves his work and goes WAY out of his way to make sure the customers are happy. You definitely do not charge enough for your products. Wait until after I order and receive mine, then raise the price at least 100%.
12-07-2005, 11:31 AM
#35
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: middle of nowhere, USA
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most of the windage trays I have been around were screen like expanded metal which served basically to give the cloud of oil something to condense upon and sat in a curve just below the crankshaft. One piece often mounted to the oil pan structure itself, or were bolted to extended main studs with its own fasteners after the mains, not sharing the nuts used to hold the mains themselves on.
One of my biggest concerns about this system would be the solid windage tray slowing the return of oil to the sump, though it would appear the channeling of the upper end return oil has addressed much of that. Perhaps some more perforation to allow further drain back. It does not have to be solid to disrupt the cloud of oil droplets circling the crank.
How heavy is the metal this system is constructed of? Is it going to be vulnerable to vibration and stress cracking? It also looks like a lot of individual pieces creating a lot of opportunity for something to eventually come apart. On a race engine that will be apart with much more frequency than a street engine this is probably ok, but if your building a street car and hope not to have it all back apart for a long long time I have some longevity concerns about the material and the high number of fasteners and individual components all staying together for the life of the motor.
How are we affecting the torque values of out main studs adding this other item? Then what happens to those torque values when subjected to the different expansion and contraction rates of the two different materials? I would much rather mount to the pan rail and fight sealing issues than compromise the fasteners securing my bottom end. Perhaps longer studs and them bolt the parts on with their own nuts after the mains are torqued would be a better solution.
I would have to agree with Marc on the Teflon, I absolutely would not allow it to touch the crank much less "wear in" leaving fine shavings of teflon in the oil system. Maybe if you wanted to run the teflon at a closer gap than the metal so if something went wrong and the crank did get into the scrapers it would be more forgiving, but certainly not constant intentional contact. Those teflon shavings would get everywhere and plug the pickup screen at the very least. I would even want to thoroughly inspect all the poly locking nuts used to be sure there isnt debris from that poly left to enter the system. The drag on the carnk robbing horespower alone is in contradiction to our purpose here.
Please dont misunderstand me, I am quite enthusiastic about the product and am not trying to run it down. I just have a few concerns especially about something going inside my motor where it cant be monoitored.
One of my biggest concerns about this system would be the solid windage tray slowing the return of oil to the sump, though it would appear the channeling of the upper end return oil has addressed much of that. Perhaps some more perforation to allow further drain back. It does not have to be solid to disrupt the cloud of oil droplets circling the crank.
How heavy is the metal this system is constructed of? Is it going to be vulnerable to vibration and stress cracking? It also looks like a lot of individual pieces creating a lot of opportunity for something to eventually come apart. On a race engine that will be apart with much more frequency than a street engine this is probably ok, but if your building a street car and hope not to have it all back apart for a long long time I have some longevity concerns about the material and the high number of fasteners and individual components all staying together for the life of the motor.
How are we affecting the torque values of out main studs adding this other item? Then what happens to those torque values when subjected to the different expansion and contraction rates of the two different materials? I would much rather mount to the pan rail and fight sealing issues than compromise the fasteners securing my bottom end. Perhaps longer studs and them bolt the parts on with their own nuts after the mains are torqued would be a better solution.
I would have to agree with Marc on the Teflon, I absolutely would not allow it to touch the crank much less "wear in" leaving fine shavings of teflon in the oil system. Maybe if you wanted to run the teflon at a closer gap than the metal so if something went wrong and the crank did get into the scrapers it would be more forgiving, but certainly not constant intentional contact. Those teflon shavings would get everywhere and plug the pickup screen at the very least. I would even want to thoroughly inspect all the poly locking nuts used to be sure there isnt debris from that poly left to enter the system. The drag on the carnk robbing horespower alone is in contradiction to our purpose here.
Please dont misunderstand me, I am quite enthusiastic about the product and am not trying to run it down. I just have a few concerns especially about something going inside my motor where it cant be monoitored.
12-07-2005, 11:45 AM
#36
928 Collector
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I bet a windage tray that formed a mesh around the crank, or even went up vertically on the passenger's side of the engine to capture atomised oil - would work very well. It would solve atomisation and head splash IMHO. It cannot solve the 2/6 starvation. We need to look elsewhere for that. Once you stop trying to solve multiple problems with one design, it begins to become clear.
12-07-2005, 12:20 PM
#37
Developer
Thread Starter
This is the kind of windage tray that EB338 is talking about. This one is typical American V8.
Lots of ground clearance, deep oil pan, lot of room below the crank at BDC. None of which we have in our application. And this is a windage tray and not a crank scraper.
To respond to EB338 - I was also concerned that the nylon in the M8 plastic nylock nuts would go soft at temp, so I removed every one and applied Loctite Red before I reinstalled and torqued them. They will not be coming loose.
The material used was 12 ga mild steel - in my opinion, a very good material for this application. The way it is installed, it was gusseted such that it will not be flexing. And mild steel has a high tolerance for flexing before it wark-hardens and fails. I do not see this as an issue.
I, too, was uncomfortable with the zero-clearance teflon option offered, and did not buy it.
The windage tray is not soild - it is open (yet channeled) at bottom center along the entire length of the oil pan not over the sump, and closed only over the sump itself.
The welds were excellent - maybe a tad small in places, but very good. The M8 studs imbedded in steel were done expertly. I'd have to say Very Strong - they took more torque than I expected for a fastener of that size.
Again - no affiliation. Just reporting... I do not sell this product at this time. (I do have an agreement to offer it in our performance catalogs with the maker after I have some engine hours on it if it all checks out).
Lots of ground clearance, deep oil pan, lot of room below the crank at BDC. None of which we have in our application. And this is a windage tray and not a crank scraper.
To respond to EB338 - I was also concerned that the nylon in the M8 plastic nylock nuts would go soft at temp, so I removed every one and applied Loctite Red before I reinstalled and torqued them. They will not be coming loose.
The material used was 12 ga mild steel - in my opinion, a very good material for this application. The way it is installed, it was gusseted such that it will not be flexing. And mild steel has a high tolerance for flexing before it wark-hardens and fails. I do not see this as an issue.
I, too, was uncomfortable with the zero-clearance teflon option offered, and did not buy it.
The windage tray is not soild - it is open (yet channeled) at bottom center along the entire length of the oil pan not over the sump, and closed only over the sump itself.
The welds were excellent - maybe a tad small in places, but very good. The M8 studs imbedded in steel were done expertly. I'd have to say Very Strong - they took more torque than I expected for a fastener of that size.
Again - no affiliation. Just reporting... I do not sell this product at this time. (I do have an agreement to offer it in our performance catalogs with the maker after I have some engine hours on it if it all checks out).
12-07-2005, 12:59 PM
#38
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No doubt the 928 needs help here...specifically if you run manifold pressure. The amount of oil these cars lift with boost borders on crazy. I'm always thinking of another way to capture that oil out of the air stream. In my case I run an aircraft system to pull the oil out, then return it to the sump via the turbo oil scavenging system...it works pretty well.
I'm curious to see how well that thing works Carl.
I'm curious to see how well that thing works Carl.
12-07-2005, 01:15 PM
#39
Nobody else came up with this for our car as completely or was going to sell it for this price. The teflon is not supposed to be constantly on the crank. You are supposed to cut it as close as possible so there is very little contact, and then none.
12-07-2005, 01:44 PM
#40
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: middle of nowhere, USA
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A windage tray and crank scraper are not going to reduce the pressure inside the crankcase created by compression stroke leakage around the rings much less when this situation is amplified in a boosted engine. They will in no way improve the problematic rod oiling situation. All a windage tray and scraper is going to do is reduce the amount of oil clinging to the crankshaft counter weights and airborne oil circling the rotating assembly and thus reducing the parasitic horsepower loss created by the drag this cloud of oil puts on the rotating assembly. Also oil consumption caused when this airborne oil rides the crankcase pressure out however it is relieved. These items only real effect beyond that is the potentially increased rate of oil return to the sump by reducing the time some of that oil spends suspended in the air. (right?)
Brendan. Like I said before, I am not trying to run it down, I am very enthusiastic about this product and its price. I am quite sure it will find its way into my projects. I am merely voicing/exploring my concerns about it so it might be improved upon for the benefit of us all or so I can learn how to improve it to relieve my own concerns. I do still feel the Teflon as well as the nylon locking portion of the fasteners creates an unnecessary risk of oil contamination if they experience any wear, break down from thermal extremes or the impact of oil immersion. Crank scrapers of the simple metal design have been successful for years in all types of engines without the need for the teflon. The addition of the teflon will not improve the scrapers function enough to justify the risk of its presence (if it improves its performance at all) not to mention the additional parts and fasteners it adds to the assembly. Just like every connection a hose has to make is an opportunity for a leak, every fastener is an opportunity for something to work lose. My concerns are more about longevity than anything else.
Truthfully, I am not sure why plasma cut edges vs water cut edges are a concern given the very simple function these items perform. If final grinding for clearance is required the finer edges of the water cutting will be lost anyway, and the plasma cut edges can be cleaned up while the grinder is there. I have never thought plasma cut edges were something to complain about in the first place, its not like a cutting torch edge and the mess that creates. Besides, its not like anyone will ever see them once they are in place either.
Brendan. Like I said before, I am not trying to run it down, I am very enthusiastic about this product and its price. I am quite sure it will find its way into my projects. I am merely voicing/exploring my concerns about it so it might be improved upon for the benefit of us all or so I can learn how to improve it to relieve my own concerns. I do still feel the Teflon as well as the nylon locking portion of the fasteners creates an unnecessary risk of oil contamination if they experience any wear, break down from thermal extremes or the impact of oil immersion. Crank scrapers of the simple metal design have been successful for years in all types of engines without the need for the teflon. The addition of the teflon will not improve the scrapers function enough to justify the risk of its presence (if it improves its performance at all) not to mention the additional parts and fasteners it adds to the assembly. Just like every connection a hose has to make is an opportunity for a leak, every fastener is an opportunity for something to work lose. My concerns are more about longevity than anything else.
Truthfully, I am not sure why plasma cut edges vs water cut edges are a concern given the very simple function these items perform. If final grinding for clearance is required the finer edges of the water cutting will be lost anyway, and the plasma cut edges can be cleaned up while the grinder is there. I have never thought plasma cut edges were something to complain about in the first place, its not like a cutting torch edge and the mess that creates. Besides, its not like anyone will ever see them once they are in place either.
12-07-2005, 01:57 PM
#41
My point EB was that with my resources, and budget, and available text, I will use this on every engine build, and will simply deal with the fitment issues and possible changes to hardware (hopefully Kevin can comment on the washers) in my garage. :Cheers:
12-08-2005, 08:52 AM
#42
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: middle of nowhere, USA
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kevin: Thank you for your replies, I truly appreciate the time and effort you have put into addressing mine as well as others questions and concerns.
If it were welded together how would that impact price? How substantial will the welds be? (I know this will sound like a reversal of my previous position but I would rather have the fasteners than spot welds that are too small)
We don't have a whole lot of space inside these engines and stroker cranks can consume much of what we have. My primary interest would be in units for the frequently used 3.75in stroker cranks. Has this been built? At what point do we start to run out of room or get pushed so far our of the way by increased stroke that we reduce the effectiveness of the windage system?
One would not want to polish all of the interior casting. In some areas like it or not the returning engine oil is counted on for as much as 60% of engine cooling. Polishing those surfaces would greatly reduce the ability of the oil to absorb that heat. I know heating the oil sounds like a bad thing but in some areas of V8 engine design it is the only coolant. Polishing critical drain back paths is of benefit but complete polishing of the inside of the casting would have a negative effect on cooling.
If it were welded together how would that impact price? How substantial will the welds be? (I know this will sound like a reversal of my previous position but I would rather have the fasteners than spot welds that are too small)
We don't have a whole lot of space inside these engines and stroker cranks can consume much of what we have. My primary interest would be in units for the frequently used 3.75in stroker cranks. Has this been built? At what point do we start to run out of room or get pushed so far our of the way by increased stroke that we reduce the effectiveness of the windage system?
One would not want to polish all of the interior casting. In some areas like it or not the returning engine oil is counted on for as much as 60% of engine cooling. Polishing those surfaces would greatly reduce the ability of the oil to absorb that heat. I know heating the oil sounds like a bad thing but in some areas of V8 engine design it is the only coolant. Polishing critical drain back paths is of benefit but complete polishing of the inside of the casting would have a negative effect on cooling.
12-08-2005, 03:08 PM
#43
Under the Lift
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Kevin:
Thank you for your remarkably complete answers and patience in addressing all the issues raised. I am very grateful that you have expended so much effort on this extinct line of vehicles. In open road racing some of us are experiencing oil loss and heat issues at sustained high speed, especially in boosted cars, and this looks like it should be at least part of the solution, combined with breather modifications.
Thank you for your remarkably complete answers and patience in addressing all the issues raised. I am very grateful that you have expended so much effort on this extinct line of vehicles. In open road racing some of us are experiencing oil loss and heat issues at sustained high speed, especially in boosted cars, and this looks like it should be at least part of the solution, combined with breather modifications.
12-09-2005, 07:03 PM
#44
Drifting
I just did solid MM's from Carl and oil pan gasket, but I'm seriously thinking about dropping the whole subframe again and installing a scraper with teflon. I don't want to be wasting my expensive Amsoil when I'm out on the track. While I'm at it, I could get easier access to the UCA bolts for my poly bushings and install some solid steering rack bushings. Yeah, that's why I should do it...
12-09-2005, 07:14 PM
#45
You could just pull the engine. Some head work. New headgaskets, maybe a supercharger.