Oil Drainback Problems with Rover V8?

[BlownMGB-V8]

With roller rockers, pushrod oiling is a pretty good option, provided the rockers are designed to channel splash oil into the needle bearings. If they are not, a depression of some sort in the top and a hole draining into the bearing area should do the trick.

When using bushed rockers the amount of oil delivered depends on bushing clearances so obviously tight clearances mean better oil control. But, I've seen worn out engines that did just fine because the bushings had worn on the bottoms to the shape of the shaft, which had also worn, leaving as much as a 1/16" gap at the top. This still worked because the oil feed holes were at the bottom and spring and lifter tension kept the bushing pressed against the shaft, mostly blocking off the feed hole. Odd as it sounds, something like this can actually leak less oil than a brand new shaft and rockers. But it'd be less than ideal for a high speed motor because of the change in geometry from wear.

Restriction of rocker shaft oiling has in the past been a very common method used to keep oil in the bottom end. Early on it was recognized that oiling at high speeds was markedly more than what was needed and that there were benefits to restricting the flow. The usual method was as Todd described for his roller rockers, but it should be understood that the risk of this method is poor distribution from front to rear. Of course on a road coarse this may not be a problem.

Pushrod oiling also has been used successfully with shaft mounted rockers of the more conventional type, but often this was done by using pressed steel unbushed rockers where the rocker itself forms an oil reservoir that collects splash oil from the pushrod. You see these in the 350 SBB for instance, and it is a system that works very well. You might be able to adapt 350 rocker shafts to your engine, although the spacing would need to change some. The center pushrods on the 350 are moved over about 3/8" and the intermediate ones a bit less. The outer ones are unchanged. So it may be possible to juggle things around enough to match up properly. The stands should block off the oiling ports in the heads, and then hollow pushrods and correct lifters to finish the job. May not make a lot of sense on the test motor though.

JB

[roverman]

"Maybe" we should ask the guy who built the motor, for his solution ? I'm going to risk some more objecture here ,and go on record to say, needle roller rockers are best suited for a mech. roller cammed, 3.5L Rover, to be a serious contender in GT 2. My Huffaker GT1 car used Volvo adjustables,(I think they were allowed at the time), non roller, and while strong, they produced a LOT of scrub on the valve tips ! These would run up to 8k rpm., but at the price of quick wearing valve tips.Requred changing "chain" after every race ! Of course  now,I would  use a gear or belt drive, on the cam. Good Luck, roverman.

[crashbash]

Art
What gear drive is availible?

[Bill Young]

Art, Bill Davidson built the engine and it's basically a stock Rover long block at this point. It was just a budget piece to get the car on the track so we could sort out the chassis without putting hours on a real "race" type motor. We'll keep this mule engine in the car for this year I suspect and finish all the sorting of problems such as the  oil problem we're addressing now as well as some handling issues Jessie reported, then we'll build a more highly modified engine for the car. That engine will require a lot more thought and engineering. As Phillip reported in another thread we have to run a restrictor plate under the carb and that will have a lot to do with determining just how much cam and head work we should run. Having the intake valves open longer won't help much if you can't fill the cylinders because of the restrictor plate. Finding the right combination in that area will take some tiral and error I suspect and we don't have the resources like the big boys in NASCAR do to try different combinations for their restrictor plate motors.

[roverman]

Milodon did make them,(Buick V6 with odd-fire nose). I had (2) roller cam blanks made with (3) bolt mounting, to use sbc belt or gear. Cam/crank centerlines are closer on B.O.P.'s, idler bar will need a mod. Cheers, roverman.

[MGBV8]

You will need some sort of deflector or baffle at the fuel pump flange as the timing chain will be firing oil right at it.

Maybe.  Not sure there is much oil in that area. One of the mods I see in all the books is to drill holes in the block to better oil the timing chain.

Jim Blackwood suggested this mod for my badly blowing 215 last Summer. By coming out, then up with the hose  any oil should drain back. Or, run it to the catch can, then back to the oil pan (as mentioned).

[roverman]

Not having run a Rover on a dyno with a "clear" valley cover, I suspect oil is actually try to fling/levitate up/out of the valley drain slots. Why?, crankcase pressure and throw-off from the cam, lifters and rotating assembly.Of course this impedes drainback from everything, above this area. I like the idea of welding/closing these slots,(stronger), and draining valley at each end, yes,rear would need a port added. IMHO, roverman.

[Jerminator96]

So where would be the ideal places to scavenge oil from on these motors, specifically the 4.0l varient?

I ask this having just picked up a 5 stage oil pump.  My plan was to run two pickups in the pan, and one on either side of the lifter valley, but maybe I should be pulling from the heads instead?  Maybe just one pickup in the valley and 3 in the pan, bye bye crankcase pressure...

[roverman]

Jeremy, road course or oval ? For my build, I would seal-up the lifter valley and use one scavenge in it. 5 stages is a lot for a Rover. I would limit bleed-off from rockers. My Huffaker GT1 motor has 2 in the pan. I suspect a clear valley cover, on engine dyno, will tell you where, IMHO.Good Luck, roverman.

[Jerminator96]

Road course, and street driven for that matter.  5 stages is a lot, I was looking for a 3 stage but found this one for $300, practically new.  I'm thinking about doing Chevy stud mounted rockers, but either way I was planning on oiling through the pushrods, that should limit oil to the valve covers.

I wish the clear valley cover wasn't so hard to do on these motors, on the LS1 it couldn't be easier, has anyone fabbed up a valley cover independent of the intake gasket?  I was thinking of doing one out of UHMW polyethylene, but I guess I could use acrylic or similar for a few dyno runs.  R&D budget is small for this project, might end up doing the dry sump and find out later if I need to change the scavenge pickups.

[crashbash]

Just a thought
Didn't Group 44 racing have to resolve this problem when they raced TR8s......If any of their alum is on maybe they could comment.      What oil pan should I put on my street/auto cross V8 B?

[roverman]

Jeremy, I would try .06" polycarbonate,(Lexan). "temporary"  on engine test stand-only !  Possible to use extra stages for trans or rear end ? Modify pump to "remove' un-needed stages ? David, I would get pic's of "Phillips" wet sump pan in his RV8 GT 2 .car.  A crank scraper is a good addidion to any motor. I would also use 1/more, Moroso 1.5qt., verticle "bottle" accumulator. Street and Slalom is is easier for oil control. The duration and severity of lateral G's is less. IMHO, roverman.

[Jerminator96]

I will give the Lexan a try.  Using one stage to pump trans fluid through a cooler is a good idea, otherwise I am thinking I will be using 3 stages on the pan and one in the lifter valley.  I'm not sure of you can have a problem with too much crankcase vacuum?  Am I going to suck my combustion gases into the pan?

Kevin Johnson makes a crank scraper for our motors for a good price, including a zero clearance teflon scraper.

[roverman]

Jeremy, each stage produces vacum and pressure, so I think it could "dry sump" the trans, pump through a cooler and into "spray bars", like Bonneville racers use ?
Most modern manual transmissions don't need much over 30 wt. for racing, your results may vary. I think I might "slow" the pump down, to where it produces just enough psi at lower rpm. If your gaskets impload(lol),OR your getting inlet charge into the crankcase, I would check with a "blowby" gage. IMHO, roverman.

[Jerminator96]

Yes the idea will be to size the sprockets to produce the minimum hot idle pressure.  Peak power on this motor will likely be at 6000rpm, so at least I don't have to worry about dealing with an 8k+ rpm range.  I could always route one stage back into the pan, that should cancel out...

I'm not sure if I want to pull apart a T-5 to add spray bars, seems like overkill, but then so is a 5 stage oil pump on a rover...or ITBs for that matter. Lol

Checking for blow-by will be a must, I'm going to be upset if I'm not making at least 300hp with this hunk of junk...

[roverman]

Jeremy, According to Dynomation, using my ported Merlin heads, single plane intake,830 cfm 4bbl, 290" would power peak at approx. 7k rpm.,mech. roller cam. We are soo jacking this thread-sorry Phillip. Cheers, roverman.

[DiDueColpi]

Was watching this and was just going to let it ride out but.........
A 5 stage pump is waaaay too much for this situation.
Each stage costs you power to run so you only want the minimum needed to accomplish your goal.
I don't know what pump you have but most are modular so just remove the excess modules.
I for one would not multiplex the engine pump for the trans and rear end.
#1 it's not needed
 #2 if the sealing between stages is not perfect (which it mostly isn't) you run the risk of cross contaminating the various lubricants.
And #3 Thats a lot of hardware, lines, oil and weight that you don't need to carry around.
Running one stage for the oil cooler also has it's problems. The individual stages when used as pumps are un regulated.
You run the risk of blowing up your oil cooler unless you install a pressure regulator.
Expecting these pumps to control blowby or cause a vaccum in a properly vented engine just ain't gonna happen.
If this were mine I would seriously evaluate whether a dry sump is needed and if it was, limit the pull to the heads and the oil pan. A proper crank scraper and a windage tray will take care of the valley oiling and still give enough oil to keep the cam alive.
All in all remember simpler is better.
The lovely Lynne says thats why she married me.

Cheers
Fred

[Jerminator96]

Fred,

Thanks for chiming in, I post on these forums to get input from guys like you and Art, it is much appreciated.

The only reason I am considering a 5 stage pump is the price I picked this up for, you're right though, I can just get some shorter bolts and turn it into a 3 stage.  Would it be worth it to have two pickups in the pan and one in each head?  I am planning on oiling through the pushrods so I don't anticipate having the same oil control issues.

I will be running a Kevin Johnson Teflon bladed crank scraper and windage tray.  Honestly the main reason for the dry sump is to gain that extra couple of inches of ground clearance so that I can mount my engine lower.  I am shooting for an intake runner length of 12.121" (3rd Harmonic with peak power at 6500) and I would like to keep the TBs themselves under the hood, though I expect the trumpets to protrude...

[BlownMGB-V8]

So you're planning on cutting down your crossmember and lowering the steering rack? The engine angle will change so the axle angle should also, and then what of your bellhousing and flywheel? Cut down flywheel, multi disc clutch and custom starter maybe? The oil pump itself doesn't seem to me to be the primary restriction on lowering the engine. I'm like Fred, I like simple. Adding an external pump and an external reservoir is anything but.

JB

[roverman]

This topic was started to help Phillip's oil control problem. Are we any closer to a solution ? To me, it appears his problem, is lost in committee !  I suspect most serious cars in GT2, are running dry sumps. Why, because they need them ! I've listened to all the negatives of dry sump systems, interestingly-enough, Porsche has been using them on production 911's for 40+ years and production  Vettes for 6+ years ? I don't believe Porshe or GM use these foolishly. Real racing in SCCA is expensive. If you can't afford it, or are unwilling to shop for "deals", there are many cheaper forms of racing. There are bargins on dry sump components and other serious race parts, on ebay, and other onlines and auto swaps, all the time. Sometimes, you have to dig, if you want bargains-it's own reward. Cheers, roverman.

[Bill Young]

Art, I just got home from this year's V8 Meet and haven't had a chance to get together with Phillip yet, but as far as I know no progress has been made on the original problem except for some great suggestions here on the forum. I'm not sure that a dry sump would help us much as the problem seems to be a drain back problem to the sump, so wheither wet or dry if the oil doesn't get back to the sump to recycle then we'd still have oil problems. I don't know what Phillip's budget is, but I suspect that he's much like the rest of us and will have to keep things simple for a while yet in terms of cost. All the guys on the team will get together and decide on what direction to move and I'll keep you guys up to date on what's going on when I have news. Thanks for all your suggestions and experience.

[Jerminator96]

Sorry if these drysump questions are getting off topic, but it is a potential oil control solution, so hopefully it is not too far off...

Jim,

I am using a tubular subframe and relocating the steering rack to give myself some more room, I might even explore some alternate steering rack options to move the steering shaft outside of the subframe if necessary.

I'm not sure how familiar you are with the Miata, but it seems like I have a bit more room than you MGB guys.  I'm using a d&d fabrications bell housing, the kind that is open at the bottom, so clearance there is fine, we'll cross the flywheel and clutch bridge when I get there, but I have a few options.  Actually where I want the motor right now should straighten out the drive-train to be almost level, I don't anticipate many problems with the suspension geometry (no more than what I can expect with a stock car anyway).

I really have the engine where I need it, I'm just trying to regain some ground clearance.  My other option I have explored is building an extra wide and shallow oil pan.  The C5 vettes seemed to do fairly well with them, but that still leaves us with a few quarts of oil in the heads unless we fix the drainback problem or scavenge oil directly from the heads.

Again, I hope I'm not getting too far off topic, my major question is with the viability of a drysump in fixing this oiling problem?

[Bill Young]

Update. We have finished the vent line from the fuel pump block off plate area up to the line leading to the catch tank. Used -12 AN line and fittings. Should vent enough pressure from below the cam area to allow oil drainback but we won't know until we can get it on the track. Right now we're shooting for July 15th if we can get the new 8" Ford rear installed by then. Thanks guys for all the help and ideas to cure this problem for us.

[crashbash]

Phil and Bill
Looking at these photos and if I understand the problem, it looks like you are trying to create a negative pressure on new tube to fuel pump plate to pull oil to the bottom end of engine. Where does this negative pressure get produced in this system?  Hope it takes care of the problem.  If not is an engine vacumn pump an option in your class?

[crashbash]

I don't mean pull oil through the tube but depressurizing the bottom end for better drainback.