Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

This thread needs some photos for those who dont get to see many dry sump setups or have never seen one.

Sorry the photos are not the greatest quality but they do show the dry sump.

Its a tight layout with a 5 stage system. These are of an RB26 in a GTR

gallery_20349_4609_136868.jpg

gallery_20349_4609_10009.jpg

gallery_20349_4609_101399.jpg

gallery_20349_4609_17966.jpg

gallery_20349_4609_50521.jpg

gallery_20349_4609_41454.jpg

gallery_20349_4609_141821.jpg

gallery_20349_4609_70613.jpg

gallery_20349_4609_31592.jpg

gallery_20349_4609_140270.jpg

And the boot with tank and some of the breathing system.

gallery_20349_4609_183874.jpg

It is a pretty well sorted car, the owner has put alot into it.

The mentality has been, right way or no way from the beginning.

A few things still to change and tidy up, if I was to build another GTR for myself I'd use alot of the same componentry.

cool, ill have a hunt around for some pics.

unrelated to the dry sump topic but still oil related, I'll be giving you a bell re: a extended sump for my Soarer...just gotta check I can get the pan off with the motor in the car and how much room I have

The pressure stage is usually at the rear of the pump, it's a separate section that's sealed from the scavenger stages.

It's normally at the rear so the rear bearing plate can incorporate a pressure relief valve.

The new Peterson range also have a bypass valve that returns the excess pressure into the scavenger stage instead or returning it to the inlet of the pressure stage.

There are for and against for both types but the new petersons seem to work okay.

Mike I'll send you a different number you can get me on now.

  • 1 month later...

Very nice choice.

In the next few weeks I'm hoping to test out one of my "behind closed doors projects"

An integral pump/pan with internal scavenging galleries using a similar Dailey pump that mike is using.

Working on the drive system still which will be via a multi row chain internally from the unused factor pump drive section of the crank.

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

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...