oil restricting

Wolfplace · Post by **Wolfplace** » Fri Sep 25, 2009 12:06 pm

PFC1 wrote:Have any of the three of you built a Big block Ford with an A460 block, wet sump, that turns over 9000 for 20 second intervals?

Bret

=
No I have not, thank you for sharing what application you were referring too

So I guess the next question would be what engine is the original question pertaining to

If it happens to be an A460 I will defer to your recommendations as I have not been there
If it is a BB or SB Chevrolet I do not use or recommend restrictors

Post by **CamKing** » Fri Sep 25, 2009 12:40 pm

Here's the original question:

Should oil be restricted to pressure fed lifters???

He's talking about introducing 16 holes that are bleeding oil/pressure from the lifter galley.
Depending on the manufacturer, these holes are between .016"-.026" diameter.

Do the math. What's the total area of those 16 holes, and what happens when you add that area to the area of the holes feeding the pushrods, and put a restrictor with less area in front of them?

Never, Ever, run oil restrictors.
If you gotta go multi-stage dry sump, then do it.
Fix the problem, don't band-aid it.

PFC1 · Post by **PFC1** » Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:54 pm

All the engines I've ever built or assembled have had pressure fed lifters. Now does he mean pressure fed rollers?

Post by **CamKing** » Fri Sep 25, 2009 3:00 pm

PFC1 wrote:All the engines I've ever built or assembled have had pressure fed lifters. Now does he mean pressure fed rollers?

I was assuming he was talking about lifters with the EDM'd oiling hole.

Lem Evans · Post by **Lem Evans** » Fri Sep 25, 2009 7:43 pm

Could be that some/most of the oil that is going to the EDM hole may have otherwise been "puked" above/below the lifter bore otherwise .
What Bret has offered is knowledge...not opinion , slide rule bullcrap or typical internet w/o context info . The orginal question had little/no context .

Beretta · Post by **Beretta** » Fri Sep 25, 2009 7:50 pm

Yes I was talking about the edm'd oil hole to feel the bearing...Thanks for the reply's......

While on this subject I am also using a lifter with a .850 wheel..Is a cam ground any different???

PFC1 · Post by **PFC1** » Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:27 pm

You should tell them what size roller you're using when ordering a cam because the lobes should be designed accordingly.

Bret

falcongeorge · Post by **falcongeorge** » Fri Sep 25, 2009 10:53 pm

PFC1 wrote:I guess not.

I qualified my statement with "under certain circumstanses" The original author of this thread did not question what motor the restrictors were to be used for.

Where as others have made blanket statements such as "Never, Ever, run oil restrictors."

I guess if I were only an "engine assembler" and not a builder then I'd take such blanket advice, just install solid plugs where the block is tapped for restrictors and then I'd have no oil to the top. On an A460 block with many brands of solid roller lifters just one .0625 restrictor will feed the entire valve train (both sides) through all rockers when priming within a matter of minutes with cold oil. And actually the Ford in my opinion has a better designed drain down system stock(and no mine is not stock) than do the BBCs. On a BBC with solid rollers I have primed for as long as 20-30 minutes constantly rolling motor over to get oil through all rockers with NO restrictors. So tell me I should't install restrictors where the A460 block is tapped for them.

Here is my personal motor at 9000 or more two different pulls. The first is with just 1-.125 restrictor for top end, made two passes and lost rod bearings. Too much oil to top! Second pull is typical seasons worth of pulls with just 1-.0625 restrictor, and after a dozen dyno pulls and almost a full season bearings look good and the Lunati (PAC)75848 springs made it within the last three pulls of the season. Using a HAROLD BROOKSHIRE designed cam with .898 lift on the intake. No wear on cam either. Won both!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jv2_px9K6r4

http://s211.photobucket.com/albums/bb30 ... cumbia.flv

I really don't post on this forum very often because many here are much more qualified to answer questions, although I really like to come here and read and "learn". But, when I think I might have something to offer I will. I just don't understand why some assume they have such a high pedigree that they feel the need to make personal putdowns or insults.

Bret

Well Brett, I'm not so sure about the "not qualified" part. From what I have seen on this thread, you are better qualified to speak than quite a few that have piped up already. Of course I have built FE's, clevelands and 385s before, so I dont subscibe to the theory that what works in a chevy works in EVERYTHING else...

Post by **CamKing** » Sat Sep 26, 2009 1:27 pm

Lem Evans wrote:Could be that some/most of the oil that is going to the EDM hole may have otherwise been "puked" above/below the lifter bore otherwise .

What you call "puked" is what keeps the lifter from sticking in the lifter bore. You need oil pressure to keep oil between the lifter and the lifter bore. The EDM holes increase the rate that the pressure is being bled off. You don't want to restrict the volume to the lifters too.

There are many people that do risky things and get away with it. especially in drag racing. That doesn't make it the smart thing to do.
If you're feeling lucky and want to take risks, go to Vegas.
If you want to build race engines, focus on taking as much risk out of the equation as possible.

falcongeorge · Post by **falcongeorge** » Sat Sep 26, 2009 2:17 pm

I guess the neophyte 460 builder who follows "Cam Kings" advice can feel assured that, as he is watching the clean-up crew sweep up the shards of block & connecting rod from the track surface, that the valve springs, should he be able to find them, will be in excellent condition, ready to re-use in the next engine he builds...

Post by **CamKing** » Sat Sep 26, 2009 6:43 pm

falcongeorge wrote:I guess the neophyte 460 builder who follows "Cam Kings" advice can feel assured that, as he is watching the clean-up crew sweep up the shards of block & connecting rod from the track surface, that the valve springs, should he be able to find them, will be in excellent condition, ready to re-use in the next engine he builds...

You mean my advice to put in a multi-stage dry sump system if that's what it takes?

Fix the problem, don't just band-aid it.
If this is too hard to understand, find another hobby.

falcongeorge · Post by **falcongeorge** » Sat Sep 26, 2009 7:05 pm

Since the "King" has decreed it, I guess I should pack it in.

PFC1 · Post by **PFC1** » Sat Sep 26, 2009 9:33 pm

CamKing wrote:
falcongeorge wrote:I guess the neophyte 460 builder who follows "Cam Kings" advice can feel assured that, as he is watching the clean-up crew sweep up the shards of block & connecting rod from the track surface, that the valve springs, should he be able to find them, will be in excellent condition, ready to re-use in the next engine he builds...

You mean my advice to put in a multi-stage dry sump system if that's what it takes?

Fix the problem, don't just band-aid it.
If this is too hard to understand, find another hobby.

While I could afford a dry-sump with my current build, what's the point? If you read my previous posts you'd see that I am not having any issues with the way I have build/assemble these motors with restrictors as they are designed. They are extremely competitive. No issues. If you have adequate lubrication to all parts and are showing very little wear for given applications. What is the point of using extra horsepower to needlessly cycle oil through the motor with a big expensive dry sump. Seems to me that dry sumps could be percieved as bandaids in there own right.

As for telling people to "find another hobby". That right there is a foolish statement from someone who sells performance parts. Most people do have a limited budget. Perhaps you do not, I don't know. I think the majority of performance/race machines are owned and driven by people who really should not spend the money on such hobbies because the money could be spent better elsewhere. At least its always been that way in my part of the country. Probably could be said for many Pros when they were starting out too.

If your philosophy were used most of us would be out of work as far as performance is concerned.

You should back up and give some reasoning to the guy who asked about lobe profiles with regard to roller wheel diameter. That way you'll know what your talking about instead of "assuming" you know what your talking about on the A460 blocks.

Bret

machine shop tom · Post by **machine shop tom** » Sat Sep 26, 2009 9:51 pm

falcongeorge wrote: Well Brett, I'm not so sure about the "not qualified" part. From what I have seen on this thread, you are better qualified to speak than quite a few that have piped up already. Of course I have built FE's, clevelands and 385s before, so I dont subscibe to the theory that what works in a chevy works in EVERYTHING else...

Reading and learning......

Reading and learning......

Not an expert at much, but I am good at reading and learning.

tom

falcongeorge · Post by **falcongeorge** » Sat Sep 26, 2009 10:14 pm

Clearly Mike figures just about everybody in this country who is building FE's Clevelands or 385s should get out, as virtually all of them are restricting the upper end oiling, and virtually none of them have an extra 4-5K to waste on a dry-sump just so they aren't violating the "Kings" rules on how it should be done. Well, this sport has always had its share of "characters".

I have a different way to tell an engine builder from an engine assembler. An engine builder can look at an engine, figure out its weaknesses, and figure out how to work around them. An engine assembler throws high $$ parts at the problem (like 3 stage dry sumps for instance) & hopes it goes away.

I think Mike made a blanket statement without really thinking it through. Now he finds himself in a position where he is defending that statement with little concern for how foolish the original statement was. I know there have been times when I have opened my big mouth and said something that wasnt exactly what I meant to say, but rather than trying to defend that statement, I would just back away and go ooops! Strikes me that Mike doesnt like to think of himself as capable of putting his foot in his mouth.

Over the years, I have developed a pretty good bullshit detector. Its a pretty safe bet that whenever I see a statement that begins with the word "never", theres a big steaming pile in close proximity.