Any one interested in the oiling mods I did?

[gregcon]

What's interesting to me is that age-old diagram referenced above that shows the crossover tube....we've all seen a million times. But I I hadn't looked at the diagram in years though, so it's interesting to see that "My" idea of feeding some of the mains off the left galley is being done....they feed the #1 off the left. That is significant because it relieves, to a degree, the need to feed all the main off the undersized right galley. So the improvement on #4 (and 2 / 3) is not because oil is slowing down, but because there is simply less burden on their feed. It would even be better if you fed 2 of the mains off the left galley, but that gets tricky due to the need to drill down to the block main web 'long and accurate'. And it would be better still if you could feed the left galley from someplace other than the right galley. Someplace with a big, accessible port coming from the oil pump feed. The joys of cast iron....

A lot has been said about the placement of the crossover...and I do think it is well placed....but it's also hard to overlook the basic fact that when you start looking around the lifter valley, you realize there are only a couple places you could put it regardless of 'smarts'.

 

[yellow rose]

What's interesting to me is that age-old diagram referenced above that shows the crossover tube....we've all seen a million times. But I I hadn't looked at the diagram in years though, so it's interesting to see that "My" idea of feeding some of the mains off the left galley is being done....they feed the #1 off the left. That is significant because it relieves, to a degree, the need to feed all the main off the undersized right galley. So the improvement on #4 (and 3 and 3) is not because oil is slowing down, but because there is simply less burden on their feed. It would even be better if you fed 2 of the mains off the left galley, but that gets tricky due to the need to drill down to the block main web 'long and accurate'. And it would be better still if you could feed the left galley from someplace other than the right galley. Someplace with a big, accessible port coming from the oil pump feed. The joys of cast iron....

A lot has been said about the placement of the crossover...and I do think it is well placed....but it's also hard to overlook the basic fact that when you start looking around the lifter valley, you realize there are only a couple places you could put it regardless of 'smarts'.

All true, but if you have no reason to feed oil to the drivers side lifters...what does it do?

Once you stop all the leaks at the lifters and restrict the oil to the cam bearings you have effectively made the manifold bigger.

That’s why I’m stumped that we are discussing oiling hydraulic lifters and that’s what the crossover is for.

I don’t believe (I would hope) that no one would argue that controlling oil flow and restricting and/or stopping oil from where it doesn’t need to be increases power by reducing windage. A crank scraper does the same...it keeps oil off the crank and gets it back into the pan.

Im also going to pull my main caps and see what they look like. The rod bearings look like they came out of the box so I’m pretty sure they mains will be fine, but Duane says he was killing the 2 and 4 mains and not the rods. So I just want to get a look and make sure I’m not getting into an issue I haven’t seen before.

 

[gregcon]

The reason you oil up the left side is...manifold...lol.

1) You (me) need to feed the pushrods/rockers. That is a must on a W7+ headed engine.

2) You can feed #1 off of the left side as above. As I said above, a really balanced oil system would feed another main (maybe #3) off the left galley, too. Feeding the #1 off the left really helps unload the right side galley by a big percentage.

3) A while back, an Aussie on this thread posted something I've always done, and agreed with - even on a solid lifter engine, it's a good practice to feed some oil to the lifter bore. High loads, high speeds go well with a little pressure fed oil. Way better than counting on 'drip' oiling alone.

4) The lifers I have are Crane Ultra and they have pin oiling which comes from the pressure in the lifter galley. I positioned my lifter bore oil holes so the oil hole in the lifter body aligns during the time the lifter is on the base circle.


On windage, that is another topic that has been on the back of my mind. We're improving that by reducing cam oiling and lifter bore leakage. Bu I have to wonder...all this extra oil we're sending to the mains, and rods especially, could be more feed for windage issues. I guess it could be argued that the rods and main are gonna leak the same either way and we're just making sure they never lack oil.

 

[gregcon]

When you drill the galley in order to tube it, what size is the drill?

 

[yellow rose]

The reason you oil up the left side is...manifold...lol.

1) You (me) need to feed the pushrods/rockers. That is a must on a W7+ headed engine.

2) You can feed #1 off of the left side as above. As I said above, a really balanced oil system would feed another main (maybe #3) off the left galley, too. Feeding the #1 off the left really helps unload the right side galley by a big percentage.

3) A while back, an Aussie on this thread posted something I've always done, and agreed with - even on a solid lifter engine, it's a good practice to feed some oil to the lifter bore. High loads, high speeds go well with a little pressure fed oil. Way better than counting on 'drip' oiling alone.

4) The lifers I have are Crane Ultra and they have pin oiling which comes from the pressure in the lifter galley. I positioned my lifter bore oil holes so the oil hole in the lifter body aligns during the time the lifter is on the base circle.


On windage, that is another topic that has been on the back of my mind. We're improving that by reducing cam oiling and lifter bore leakage. Bu I have to wonder...all this extra oil we're sending to the mains, and rods especially, could be more feed for windage issues. I guess it could be argued that the rods and main are gonna leak the same either way and we're just making sure they never lack oil.

LOL I with you on the pushrod oiling and needing oil over there. For your block the holes you drilled will certainly feed the rockers and not be much of an issue concerning feeding the bearings.

There aren’t many ways to get oil to the rockers without major surgery. It either had to come through the factory passages or you have to get it there externally.

I tried external oiling the rockers and not only was it a giant PITA, it didn’t help anything.

For the rest of us stuck with the OE system (unlike your block that has no oil to the lifters unless you drill it) either tubing the gallery or bushing the lifter bores is still the best fix to control the oil at the lifters.

In fact, if I was going to use hydraulic lifters (I don’t know why I would, but maybe someone wants them) or you are going to pushrod oil the rockers (which I don’t care for IF you have the option to oil the rockers up from the mains) I would tube BOTH galleries and just drill a very small hole like you did in the tube where it breaks through the lifter bore.

No reason why you can’t tube both sides and control the oil getting to the lifters. You just have to remember to drill through the tube from the number 1 main to get oil up there.

I don’t use a drill to open up the block for the tube. I use a core drill or reamer. I also stopped sizing the hole for a press fit on the tube.

It can’t slide in there like socks on a rooster, but you shouldn’t have to beat the tube in there either. If you have .0005 press to .002ish clearance you’re golden. Once you peen the tube it ain’t going anywhere. If it does, the destruction was catastrophic and no amount of press would help that!

The nominal tube size is 5/8 but the last tube I bought was actually .6265 so a thou and a half over nominal. Most of the tube I’ve used half a thou to a thou over nominal.

So I use a reamer that is .626 and run it. Much easier than pressing that tube in there.

I’m sure you know most tubing isn’t straight, and copper is pretty soft so it’s easy to work with. I’ve seen it done with thin wall stainless and I think @pittsburghracer did it with mild steel tubing here not long ago...maybe he did it with stainless or maybe I’m mixing up some info.

At any rate if you need to tube the block most guys can do it at home.

 

[Shorty Medlock]

Why would I question Chrysler? Well, we've covered all that before but...for one thing, the proof is in the pudding. Their stock design is limited and needs to be improved upon. Second, their decisions were often guided by sound engineering but sound engineering that had an overlay of cost accounting and the demands of mass production. I'm fine with Chrysler's work on stock engines but we're going beyond that. As for their 'race' engineers, I find that every time I open one of their books, it leaves a lot to be desired. Incomplete information. Outdated information. I actually was thinking the other day, 'I should really toss these books out...they're nearly useless and reference a bunch of parts no one has been able to buy for 3 decades, even if you wanted them.'

The biggest crime I find in many instructional texts (not just Chrysler) is the lack of depth they offer. It drives me nuts when they say 'drill this passage to .187' and 'remove this valve' WITHOUT TELLING YOU WHY. When they give no background, it's nearly useless. I'm there to accomplish a goal, not play guessing games.

As to the crossover....again, Larry and everyone else tell you to do it but give very little if any supporting information. So my obligation to believe what they tell me is zero. I find a lot of times someone will recommend a mod and by the time it gets to my ears the reason 'why' has completely changed. I have one book by him and nowhere does he say the crossover is due to velocity needs. Even if it did say so, it's meaningless to me unless he provided some background in how he knows it. Any technical 'fact' needs to come with proof if I'm gonna believe it.

Last...we all know those experts blew up lots of engines, even to the end of their careers. To top if off, they had a large supply of parts, often free. I don't.

That's racing....you hear a bunch of stuff and you have to decide what's good and what's BS. But there's a lot more BS than good.

You have to realize that MOST books are penned by freelance writers not engineers or even engine builders. They simply write what they have read from other sources or what they have been told.

I have a friend who has been making his living writing "how to" and research books without any knowledge of the subject. He simply repeats what he has been told. 50 years as a respected author of automotive books. Former editor of one of America's largest weekly automotive newspapers. And he can barely change his own oil!

So consider the source of all information.

 

[gregcon]

Exactly. Most writer of any ilk are people who really don't know anything about their topic...they skim the surface. How many times have I read a book where the hero drives a car with turbo-blowers and shoots a semi-automatic Colt 45 revolver?

TV is even worse....just look at the tools on TV....if that guy Freiburger were any worse a mechanic he'd be dead.


YR...if you go to 5/8", then you must need to go to a 1/2NPT thread on the back of the block? Or are you drilling from the front? The back plug is 3/8NPT which would get wiped out by a 5/8 drill bit.

 

[gregcon]

Just for information, here is the lifter valley of the R3. Pretty different than the stock block in terms of 'topography'.

Also, the .046" holes in the lifter bores. These are sitting in a .125" recess that is .125" deep....I did that to reduce the depth of iron I had to drill the .046" holes through

, and to provide a small, wider pocket for the lifter hole to match up with.

 

[Phreakish]

I agree because you keep missing the point. Jmho

You do not use the crossover when you tube the block. The crossover is for when you use hydraulic lifters.
The tube is for when you use solids.

I have found that having yr on ignore makes thing better because I don't value anything he sez.

Not missing the point at all. For every person who advocates oil system modifications, there's a different set of explanations and justifications. When they get into the physics of it, I just don't buy the simplified versions and am digging deeper is all. We also discussed the fact that getting oil to the drivers side galley has to do with hydraulics.. So no, that wasn't missed either.

This site is full of a ton of people who repeat fifth hand "my uncle told me" type crap or "buy this book and you can run 9s with a stock shortblock" BS. I left the site for years because of it. @yellow rose may be abrasive, and rarely does he dish the really good technical info, but his ramblings often lead to a ton of really cool information and racing knowledge and he's probably the only reason I really come around to the site frequently. Maybe that makes me nuts, I dunno, but I do like finding more info than "Mopar performance said so, and so it shall be" and chasing tidbits of what he says has lead me to some really neat findings. I also don't blame him for not simply giving up the goods, the same way class racers don't give up cam secrets - they paid for the knowledge, no one else deserves it by virtue.

This topic and the other on crossovers has lead me back to some of my old texts and studies on fluids, and so has been a great discussion I think.

 

[Phreakish]

... it's interesting to see that "My" idea of feeding some of the mains off the left galley is being done....they feed the #1 off the left. That is significant because it relieves, to a degree, the need to feed all the main off the undersized right galley.

The thing is, if the velocity of the oil in the passenger galley needs slowing, then doing this (feeding #1 off the passenger galley and use the crossover, then block #1 main feed) would be even better. Simply rerouting lifter oil from one side to the other, and no other oil demand, doesn't seem like a rerouting of enough volume to matter a whole lot.

It's inconsistencies like this that make me question the validity of the oil velocity claim, because there's seems to be plenty of ways to solve it which are also fairly easy. The best way being to increase the galley size in the first place.

Which of course makes it obvious that if feeding one main from the driver's side helps, then feeding two would be better, and result in a nearly symmetric system. I always prefer symmetry in design anyway, so win-win.

 

[yellow rose]

Exactly. Most writer of any ilk are people who really don't know anything about their topic...they skim the surface. How many times have I read a book where the hero drives a car with turbo-blowers and shoots a semi-automatic Colt 45 revolver?

TV is even worse....just look at the tools on TV....if that guy Freiburger were any worse a mechanic he'd be dead.


YR...if you go to 5/8", then you must need to go to a 1/2NPT thread on the back of the block? Or are you drilling from the front? The back plug is 3/8NPT which would get wiped out by a 5/8 drill bit.

Yup, 1/2 pipe in the back and I ream it out from each end. I just make sure the reamer clears the last lifter bore and then stop and go at it from the other end.

Then cut the tube just long enough so it goes past the lifter bore. I’ve taken some stuff apart where the two tubes met and were smashed together, closing off about 20% of the gallery.

 

[yellow rose]

Just for information, here is the lifter valley of the R3. Pretty different than the stock block in terms of 'topography'.

Also, the .046" holes in the lifter bores. These are sitting in a .125" recess that is .125" deep....I did that to reduce the depth of iron I had to drill the .046" holes throughView attachment 1715563444 View attachment 1715563445 , and to provide a small, wider pocket for the lifter hole to match up with.

You mind taking a picture of the face of the block? I’m interested in that.

TIA

 

[Duane]

My interest in these oil system mods is purely academic. If I wanted to build a high winding engine, I'd go buy a racing block.

That said, I still cannot find anything which supports a bleed to help fluid turn. I'm talking raw physics here.

In manifold design there is definitely a momentum component to the flow which will tend to favor an excess of flow bypassing a branch. However, the bias depends on the fluid flow state. Motor oil is thick enough and moving slow enough as to be considered laminar flow. When flow is laminar, there's almost no momentum contribution and thus almost no bias at the fluid branch and so the division of flow is equal to the difference in the pathway cross sectional area.

Now, it's possible that at high rpm and with a hv pump that the Reynolds number enters the transition zone and flow becomes turbulent. But the thing is, the manifold (lifter galley) is properly designed because all branches T off and no flow "continues" out the front of the block.. And so there should be minimal bias at the branches.

There is some pressure recovery in turbulent flow when it passes a branch, that pressure recovery could be used to help bias more fluid into a second branch after the first. It has nothing to do with "slowing" fluid though "to help it turn". Instead there's a momentary rise in pressure after the first branch (assuming the cross over is to be placed before the #4 feed) which in that local zone would help boost flow into the next branch.

It's hard to describe, but again it's not anything to do with "slowing down to turn", but instead a rearrangement of energy in the flow causing a local pressure rise.

If I was an engineer trying to explain it to a nonengineer I might say "it slows down to turn" though, but that's not what's actually happening... Haha.

In this description are you referring to the stock oiling or the modified. In the stock system, because the oil continues its flow from number 1 main over to the drivers side, you might as well say it is not blocked at the end of the galley.
My interest is purely academic as well and I have read your excellent link about oiling and that article also says that branch circuits contribute to uneven feed to some bearings.
Ironically you have used the word turbulence which is the word that Sanborn use to use to describe the problem as well. Perhaps that is a more accurate description.

 

[Duane]

I have the Szilagyi book also, it's lacking in a lot of detail too. It's one of those things where you have to buy 8 different books and try to piece it all together.

I respect a lot of what Direct Connection/MP and its engineers did ....but I also think they were what they were....a poorly funded, small group of guys who had hit-and-miss success. One thing is for sure....MP and DC always offered the poorest technical detail on its products. Very scarce information.

I have all those books and the new stroker. I do all my own stuff and have no trouble understanding what they are suggesting. Perhaps ask a question on the forum about the parts you don,t understand.
We are all willing to help or clarify. I know I am.

 

[Duane]

You know what works better at slowing fluid velocity? Increased galley diameter. This would make tubing the lifter galley a bad idea if fluid velocity was definitely a concern, and if it was then bushing the lifters makes more sense..

Since they decided that reducing the diameter was the way to go, I question how serious of a concern oil velocity actually is.

Also, the text mentions increased mains clearances which will definitely have more of an effect on the distribution since the increased volume demand will drop the local pressures upstream and then make it tougher to get oil to the drivers side galley.

But if fluid velocity is reaching the upper end of laminar, then placing the crossover where they did makes sense - so if you're going to put it somewhere, the location is well determined.

Again I have to ask if your referencing a stock engine or a modified one. If you are doing the racing mods, you would not be sending oil to the drivers side. As far as I know to tubing kit is the same inside diameter as stock. You are enlarging the galley size and sleeping it back to original.

 

[Duane]

If you can’t see what was in the pan you have no idea how he corrected the oil timing.

I’m also sure that he wasn’t near the 10k, even if they corrected the lifter bank angles.

You can use the best MPH you can find and a rollout of about 102 inches and you’ll see maybe 9500. Maybe.

Plus, unless you were at the track and they pulled the intake off and you actually saw the crossover you can’t be sure what they were doing. And even then, any of that could be for show.

Big daddy put body panels on to cover his 1 inch fuel line and blew all their doors off. So everybody started putting body panels on their diggers, thinking that was the fix.

Trust 10% of what you see.

I never said that Glidden revved the motor to 10,000 rpm, I said that the oil modification had been tested to work up to 10,000 rpm.
Athertons book does not identify oil timing as an issue.

 

[Duane]

I tried the slots. They don’t correct the timing. From the few pictures I can find, Ritter moved his oil feed holes right over to the 12 o’clock position. He didn’t do that because he is stupid or he wanted to spend the money.

IMO he did it because that takes all the gimmicks and trickeration out of the system.

You and I have had this discussion before. I have a 1969 340 block that does not have counter bores in the bearing saddles. Chrysler began adding those counterbores right at 12 o'clock. The counterbores overlap the oil feeds from the galley. I believe that corrects the timing and if you slot the bearings as well, it increases the dwell fill time to the rods as well.

 

[yellow rose]

In this description are you referring to the stock oiling or the modified. In the stock system, because the oil continues its flow from number 1 main over to the drivers side, you might as well say it is not blocked at the end of the galley.
My interest is purely academic as well and I have read your excellent link about oiling and that article also says that branch circuits contribute to uneven feed to some bearings.
Ironically you have used the word turbulence which is the word that Sanborn use to use to describe the problem as well. Perhaps that is a more accurate description.

Interesting. True that the feed for the drivers side lifters comes off the number 1 main, that main only feeds one rod. I still think it should be blocked or at the least very restricted, but you can only block it if you are using solid lifters.

I alway have issues getting my head around turbulence. I can’t imagine how low the velocity of the fluid moving through a tube has to be to get laminar flow, or if that’s even possible to achieve. I’m sure viscosity, surface finish, area and who knows what else changes when turbulence is high enough to stop the fluid from making a 90 degree turn.

One nice thing is that now, with modern oils and their ability to lubricate at very light grades has to help as far as pumping and getting through the spider web of galleries is concerned. I have my pan off and I may just suck it up and add a second pick up. I probably don’t need it, but I went back and read a couple of the books I have, and it made me remember that (this was tested by...Bob Tarozzi IIRC) that just adding a HV pump and NOT increasing the inlet diameter makes the HV pump only produce like a standard volume pump.

Or, I could throw a standard volume pump on there...but that makes me nervous.

 

[Duane]

I tried the slots. They don’t correct the timing. From the few pictures I can find, Ritter moved his oil feed holes right over to the 12 o’clock position. He didn’t do that because he is stupid or he wanted to spend the money.

IMO he did it because that takes all the gimmicks and trickeration out of the system.

Are those feed holes still fed from a passenger side galley?

 

[yellow rose]

I never said that Glidden revved the motor to 10,000 rpm, I said that the oil modification had been tested to work up to 10,000 rpm.
Athertons book does not identify oil timing as an issue.

Yeah, I stumbled across that 10k deal in one of the books I have, and that was solely the author making the claim it would lubricate that high.

So I stand corrected.

 

[yellow rose]

Are those feed holes still fed from a passenger side galley?

Yes, but his blocks have “priority main oiling, which really means the lifters get oiled last, and IIRC the Ritter oils the lifters off it’s own passage.

Wish I could find better pictures of his block. A machinist semi-local to me finished a Ritter deal about 14 months ago. If o had known he was doing it, I’d have made the 3.75 hour trip over there to get my hands on it.

 

[Duane]

LOL. I appreciate that. In all the books I have, not ONE talks about only doing the crossover with hydraulic lifters only.

If that’s the case, tube the block, drill small holes in the tube and restrict the oil to the drivers side with a set screw under the main bearing.

If I decide I want to look it up, I’ll go back through my books and see if they talk about hydraulic lifters and the crossover.

Who can turn enough RPM or get enough oil velocity with hydraulic lifters to cause an issue?


Again, this is what happens when you read all the books but you haven’t done it. At 8500 there is no room for mistakes.

And I seriously doubt that Glidden ever used a crossover tube. He didn’t run hydraulic lifters to the best of my knowledge. If he did, he was god on a cracker because he’d have been the only one doing it.

Yellow rose, that is why I use the term wet lifters bores. In this day and age we have more choices or reasons to send oil to the bores.
You may choose to use hydraulics, although like you said it's kinda pointless, but you could do it, you may want pushrod oiling, or in my case I have lifters that pressurize the roller lifter axles. So I just say wet lifters to make the point that a given builder wants oil in the bore. That's the point.

 

[Duane]

That doesn't mean what I said is wrong. When leaks outrun supply, pressure drops. Upping the pressure means there's a commensurate increase in volume available.

Now, if that increase in volume still can't make up for the leak - then yeah, you still have issues.

We all get that. Your going off topic here. No one has said there is not enough pump or pressure. I have been saying the opposite.
The problem gets worse with more pressure and volume. There is no shortage of it.

 

[gregcon]

"I have all those books and the new stroker. I do all my own stuff and have no trouble understanding what they are suggesting. Perhaps ask a question on the forum about the parts you don,t understand.
We are all willing to help or clarify. I know I am."


My comment refers to the utter lack of information MP provides for most of their parts. Maybe you can help me understand, or at least clarify, why they offer parts without identifying what they are made of, without giving any dimensions, or any ratings. Details the average aftermarket company like Moroso or Com Cams or Lunati or Crower readily provide. They provide those details because the 'hot rodder' with any brains is going to use them to properly select and apply the parts. MP seems to fall back on the 'We're MP and that's all you need to know."

Help me understand that, please, sir.

 

[Duane]

What's interesting to me is that age-old diagram referenced above that shows the crossover tube....we've all seen a million times. But I I hadn't looked at the diagram in years though, so it's interesting to see that "My" idea of feeding some of the mains off the left galley is being done....they feed the #1 off the left. That is significant because it relieves, to a degree, the need to feed all the main off the undersized right galley. So the improvement on #4 (and 2 / 3) is not because oil is slowing down, but because there is simply less burden on their feed. It would even be better if you fed 2 of the mains off the left galley, but that gets tricky due to the need to drill down to the block main web 'long and accurate'. And it would be better still if you could feed the left galley from someplace other than the right galley. Someplace with a big, accessible port coming from the oil pump feed. The joys of cast iron....

A lot has been said about the placement of the crossover...and I do think it is well placed....but it's also hard to overlook the basic fact that when you start looking around the lifter valley, you realize there are only a couple places you could put it regardless of 'smarts'.

And just how would you drill those feed passages in a solid steel block. You would need specialized tooling to do it, and if you got it wrong you will ruin a very expensive block.