windage tray

[Geoff2]

Pontiac used a wrap around windage tray on their performance V8 engines, starting in 1965.

[ptuomov]

And always equally unsatisfactory.

Color me skeptical when a company advertises a product with third hand “dyno” “data” where hp, torque, and rpm are inconsistent. Am I being too cynical?

That they were pleased with the performance of the product as were many other companies that copied our designs.

That company advertises the scraper system with a "dyno" "data" that isn't from 928 and doesn't satisfy the hp = lbf-ft * rpm / 5250. Everyone is welcome to draw their own conclusions.

Yes.

Well, that does confirm the veracity of what I said. They are reposting the dyno data for the SRT4 kit that I put up over 14 years ago.

This is now the third time you have brought it up. Twice in recent Speed-Talk posts and previously many years ago on the Rennlist. My public response has always been the same:

Some visitors have commented that the hp and torque figures in the charts below apparently do not conform to the formula

HP = [TQ X RPM]/5252

There are at least two commonly used hp and torque measurements made by sophisticated dynamometers: inertial and steady state. Often components will show improvements in terms of one versus another. For example, a lightweight flywheel, ceteris paribus (all other things being the same), will likely show an improvement in inertial measurements but not steady state.

The engine that Ed tested was going straight into a race car and like most teams he would not release actual hp and torque charts of the engine. The hp and torque data seen are a combination of results from inertial and steady state measurements; the oil and coolant temperature readings are explicitly from steady state readings. In this way the changes in performance strictly from the addition of the windage tray and scraper assembly can be seen but the proprietary underlying ultimate performance of the engine is still masked from casual inspection.

September 12th, 2005

Ed Peters, retired Chrysler engineer, active racer and owner of Magnum Force Engineering, performed back to back dyno tests today on the Ishihara-Johnson standard steel combination scraper, dual-windage tray and baffle setup for the 2.4 Dodge engine (see pictures below). Magnum Force Engineering has a state of the art environmentally controlled dyno room where, among other parameters, ambient air temperature of 71 degrees Fahrenheit was held to within +/- .5 degrees. Experimental conditions in the dyno room and for the engine were normalized for both back to back pulls.

The tests were run on a normally aspirated 2.4 liter P.T. Cruiser engine with a modified engine management system allowing it to exceed the normal factory redline. The balance shafts in this engine were removed and, notably, it was equipped with the factory oil cooler for the SRT4 and P.T. Cruiser Turbo. The engine was equipped with a 195 degree F thermostat. Five quarts of fresh Mobil 1 10W-40 synthetic oil were used during each pull.

Prior to both pulls, the engine oil pan temperature (oil temperature in the reservoir) and coolant temperatures were allowed to stabilize. At each rpm increment in the tables below the temperatures were allowed to again stabilize in order to give an accurate reflection of the steady state operating conditions in the engine at that speed.

At peak rpms, use of the windage tray setup accompanied a 24 degree Fahrenheit drop in oil temperature, an 11 degree drop in coolant temperature and a 7 hp and 13 ftlb boost in power.

Ed Peters remarked that "this setup is the most significant bolt-on change for oil and windage control that he has witnessed since 1986."

In 1986, while at Chrysler, Ed performed joint research with Mobil Oil on windage losses in the 2.2 Shelby Turbo engine. He developed a performance oil pan that regained 9 hp at 6000 rpm when using Mobil 1 oil. Earlier in his career he was involved with the Dodge Daytona / Plymouth Superbird that dominated NASCAR racing for a period of time.

It is important to note that a turbocharged version of the 2.4 engine would have higher windage losses and oil heating due to the increased level of normal blow-by in the crankcase. Therefore even more benefit would be found in the use of a proper windage control system.

[Kevin Johnson]

In German, a crank scraper is known as an öl hobel or oil lathe. It is also a term used to describe a windage tray with this technology built in.

Porsche was granted at least two patents including one for a cross-plane V8 utilizing this technology which was well known in the technical literature (cited in the patents). They were particularly interested in addressing this issue as it took place during the midst of a well-known debacle with an existing cross-plane V8 design, circa 1992, namely the series used in the 928.

Detail_71_Oil_Lathe.gif

...
The rib is placed in the direction of the crankshaft and has the effect of an oil lathe. The oil thrown off by centrifugal force, by way of the rib, arrives in this second groove which also receives oil flowing back from the cylinder heads.
...
The groove 23 is partially covered by a rib 71 which acts as an oil lathe and is orientated against the rotational direction of the crankshaft 12 to follow the approximately figure eight-shaped connecting rod contour. This rib 71 catches the oil thrown off by the crankshaft drive. ...

See also https://patents.google.com/patent/US5092291A/en

[Kevin Johnson]

Pontiac used a wrap around windage tray on their performance V8 engines, starting in 1965.

Yes, Pontiac used the same scraper technology in their tray that Porsche used 27 years later. Just like they used the technology seen in Ford oil pans of the same vintage.

[Kevin Johnson]

And always equally unsatisfactory.

Color me skeptical when a company advertises a product with third hand “dyno” “data” where hp, torque, and rpm are inconsistent. Am I being too cynical?

No, you are simply unfamiliar with the topic.

[ptuomov]

And always equally unsatisfactory.

Color me skeptical when a company advertises a product with third hand “dyno” “data” where hp, torque, and rpm are inconsistent. Am I being too cynical?

No, you are simply unfamiliar with the topic.

That’s one possibility. Another possibility is that customers are being deceived. Everyone can form their own opinions about the relative probabilities of the two options.