Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

yes you will need to plumb a return into the sump i just happen to weld a extra fitting on the sump just incase i needed it in the future just so happened the future wasnt so far down the road lol

Cool. I had a fitting welded to mine last time it was out which I am using for the rear head vent/drain that I can tee into. Looks like the plan. This should save me a lot of work and will actually be a good thing to be able to to tweak the oil pressure easily. I wonder why more people are not this type of setup or are even aware of this solution? Anyway, thanks for sharing the info

hmm not sure you will be able to tee it in as the rear head oil drain is gravity feed to return and the oil pressure relief is pressure feed return you might find the oil running up the the oil drain from the head a little as there is a fair bit of oil running through the relief valve specialy when in the highter rev's but its all trial and error

Cool. I had a fitting welded to mine last time it was out which I am using for the rear head vent/drain that I can tee into. Looks like the plan. This should save me a lot of work and will actually be a good thing to be able to to tweak the oil pressure easily. I wonder why more people are not this type of setup or are even aware of this solution? Anyway, thanks for sharing the info

hasnt it been covered in this thread earlier that the oil drain is more of a vent? not a drain, therefor forcing oil into a line that isnt full of oil would cause issues? cancelling out the whole reason behind putting in the head vent/drain anyway?

hmm not sure you will be able to tee it in as the rear head oil drain is gravity feed to return and the oil pressure relief is pressure feed return you might find the oil running up the the oil drain from the head a little as there is a fair bit of oil running through the relief valve specialy when in the highter rev's but its all trial and error

My first idea was to use a Y style connection for the up to 40psi of oil pressure/flow and so that it would be pointing "downhill" as such, rather than teeing in at a 45deg angle. Then after a couple of refreshing beers I thought another option might be to use a steel -10 weld-on fitting and fit that to the sump plug hole that's on the side of my custom sump setup.......like you said, trial and error. Good news is that UPS tell me my Peterson regulator is turning up today....excellent.

  • 2 months later...

I have read this entire thread as the oil pressure issue is what I'm looking for a solid solution for. At some point there was a fairly clear outcome (basically the oil drain from the back of the head into the sump) but by the end, and after some off track wanderings, I'm still not sure.

So ... I have 2 very simple questions that only require a yes or no answer ... since my RB25/30 is assembled and in the car with all ancilliaries fitted.

Q1. Can I do the plumbback mod from the welsh plug to the sump without pulling my engine out as there doesn't seem to be working access to the rear of the head?

Q2. If i'm pulling the engine out and money is no object (obviously it's a factor but for the sake of getting a clear answer) am I better off going for a dry sump conversion?

if you read in this thread it tells you what the rear drain/vent does.

it also tells you you dont need to do it.

cam breathers into intermediate tank, intermediate into main catch, drain to sump,(something like that)

Thanks jangles, I have read this thread many times. Although your solution is mentioned throughout the thread, it has some flaws in it which include not really addressing the issue but instead trying to mitigate the subsequent excess oil result. Obviously without pulling the engine down I have limited options.

I'm pretty sure dry sumping it (although expensive) is a sound solution as it allows the car to be driven on the track without any associated oil issues. Part of the dry sump conversion involves a scavenge tank from the back of head plumbed back into the oil pump so it addresses the excess oil issue without creating any atmospheric component to the oil circuit and assisting with equalized pressure between crankcase and head.

Aithout choosing to go for this option, I believe the other most viable option is to go for an external drain from the welsh plug to the passenger side (RHD) of the sump, block the PCV and move the rocker baffles back to assist the drain back to return oil to the sump.

Thanks jangles, I have read this thread many times. Although your solution is mentioned throughout the thread, it has some flaws in it which include not really addressing the issue but instead trying to mitigate the subsequent excess oil result. Obviously without pulling the engine down I have limited options.

I'm pretty sure dry sumping it (although expensive) is a sound solution as it allows the car to be driven on the track without any associated oil issues. Part of the dry sump conversion involves a scavenge tank from the back of head plumbed back into the oil pump so it addresses the excess oil issue without creating any atmospheric component to the oil circuit and assisting with equalized pressure between crankcase and head.

Aithout choosing to go for this option, I believe the other most viable option is to go for an external drain from the welsh plug to the passenger side (RHD) of the sump, block the PCV and move the rocker baffles back to assist the drain back to return oil to the sump.

better read again then,

i dont want an arguement, just trying to point out whats happening.

the drain you are talking about is not a drain, its a vent, its about equalizing pressure.

therefore, the way i said is what people are doing without any oiling issues, to vent the sump. hardly any oil in the tanks.

ultimately, if you dont have oil restrictors in the block, then everything is bandaid.

from the head to the sump, or from the sump to an intermediate can to covers is all a vent.

i worked this out while reading this thread.

Edited by jangles

+1

And to fit that vent you're going to have to pull the head off, I wouldn't be drilling/tapping the head while it is on the engine and if you do want to try that, you'll need to pull the engine out anyway.

So if the head is off, might aswell fit some restrictors to the block :)

My understanding is that the "vent" from the back of the head gives the gasses an alternative path instead of trying to push up against the oil flow in the factory returns. The vent AIDS the draining of oil through the factory drains.

As jangles said, whether the "vent" goes to the sump or an intermediate catch can, it effectively does the same thing.

and if you are still filling catch cans etc

fit a VDO oil Scavenger pump to your return from the catch can to the sump and operate it through a missle switch in the cabin, as in some cases a simple line draining back to the sump doesnt flow enough so pump it instead.....

just my opinion coz it worked for me a 2 others have done the same with built engines and heaps of problems and it has solved them (using for drift)

Thanks jangles, I have read this thread many times. Although your solution is mentioned throughout the thread, it has some flaws in it which include not really addressing the issue but instead trying to mitigate the subsequent excess oil result. Obviously without pulling the engine down I have limited options.

I'm pretty sure dry sumping it (although expensive) is a sound solution as it allows the car to be driven on the track without any associated oil issues. Part of the dry sump conversion involves a scavenge tank from the back of head plumbed back into the oil pump so it addresses the excess oil issue without creating any atmospheric component to the oil circuit and assisting with equalized pressure between crankcase and head.

Aithout choosing to go for this option, I believe the other most viable option is to go for an external drain from the welsh plug to the passenger side (RHD) of the sump, block the PCV and move the rocker baffles back to assist the drain back to return oil to the sump.

It addresses the issue as far as i can see as it helps the factory design to do its job. But yes, dry sump is the ultimate solution if you have plenty of folding stuff parked.

  • 3 months later...
  • 4 weeks later...

so i have a 1.5mm restrictor in my rb25det, forged bottom end, gt3076r, nitto oil pump, mines cam baffles in 26 covers, rear drain to sump, vented catch tank, pcv blocked.

should i keep or remove the spring in the nitto pump before i fit it?

its for track duties.

cheers

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

so i have a 1.5mm restrictor in my rb25det, forged bottom end, gt3076r, nitto oil pump, mines cam baffles in 26 covers, rear drain to sump, vented catch tank, pcv blocked.

should i keep or remove the spring in the nitto pump before i fit it?

its for track duties.

cheers

Is it a Neo or non neo head.. 1.5mm will be fine for hydraulic buckets.

Im having a silly problem now after restricting an rb25...Standard pump

The 3 oil restrictors were already 1mm each...

I blocked off the rear one by a tack of weld...middle one was drilled out to 1.5mm but the drill bit only went in 4mm??? VVT one untouched

Strated up all good...Sounds sweet...

But with the knock block on and revs over 3500 there sounds to be a BAD tappet noise...

It gets worse the higher you rev it. Sounds like the lifters are not getting enough oil...Oil pressure in the engine is good...At 3.5k 6bar

Engine sounded all good before The restrictions were done

How far do you have to drill down to into the restrictors to enlarge them to 1.5mm???

I blocked off the back oil way as per RB26 is this wrong???

Is it possible the head is not getting enough oil at high revs causing the lifters to tick??

Thanks...

25 head needs more oil than 26 due to hydraulic lifters. a single 1mm feed (sounds like you havent drilled the 1.5mm all the way through) with a standard oil pump isnt anywhere near enough for a hydraulic head

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...