Baffled Mi Sump Vs Gti6 Sump And Extended Pickup?

[welshpug 1,661]

Yes, it stops the crankshaft whipping up the oil. At higher RPM's the oil attaches itself like a big mass to the crank. The sump definitely needs to be separated from the crankshaft area in a wet sump system. There is video on the net somewhere of an engine fitted with a perspex sump.

 

 

Who else is using one? All XU10's since 11/93.

 

 

interesting, wonder if my 405 has one, never remember the oil light ever coming on in that, the oil pressure gauge in my ZX dropped like a stone, once, and only once, and that didn't have a windage tray, but that was a 92 car.

 

 

 

servicebox says the following;

 

1047 17 PANEL - INJECTION XU10J2 SINCE DATE 1994 04 04

- INJECTION XU10J4 (no a/c, no date specified)

- INJECTION XU10J4 SINCE DATE 1993 11 15 (with a/c)

 

 

so my 405 should have one, being non-a/c with a steel sump, baffle on the left hand end and baffle on the pump.

 

 

and for my ZX;

 

1047 17 PANEL - INJECTION XU10J4 SINCE RPO No. 06216 (November 15, 1993)

 

sods law mine was RP 05818, October 13. 1992.

[JeffR 51]

I run Peter's set-up (spacer with windage tray, 8V baffled sump, extended pickup, XU10 pump baffle, sprocket, spring & chain,) but no sprocket cover as it's an XU9 pump + oil cooler on my 1.9 Mi & last track day at Phillip Isl. the oil pressure dropped to 40psi on long sweepers.

 

Certainly a better outcome than 2 previously trashed engines even with a baffled only sump!

 

Maybe, this is the best you can expect from a wet sump set-up.

[mmt 15]

I have had a quick look at the head from my XU9J4 just now and it seems to have a lot of spaces where oil could pool and not get back to the sump easily. When I take the cams and valves out to get the head skimmed I will investigate further. Might be worth getting hold of a scrap head and having a look around and play with the die grinder to see if anything can be taken off to give a clear path back to the drainways through the block. The drainways in the block itself must be sufficient, as already said its almost identical design to the 8vs. The pump and sump are sufficient for the gti6 and S16 so it can be that which means its only the head. The oil must be pushed away from the drain holes under cornering causing the oil to collect in the head and starve the pump of oil.

 

I can see how the dry sump system will vastly improve the problem, but sadly the £700+ is way out of my price range. I am very concerned about the surge problem with my mi16 trackday car im currently rebuilding

 

Steve

 

 

Sounds great if you could do some "hands on" research. It must be possible to make the engine usable in a track day car on sticky tyres.

 

Wondering how much oil can be "laying around" in the head? There must be constant recycling athough it might be too slow draining the head back into the sump the head will not contain all 5 L oil.

[mmt 15]

I run Peter's set-up (spacer with windage tray, 8V baffled sump, extended pickup, XU10 pump baffle, sprocket, spring & chain,) but no sprocket cover as it's an XU9 pump + oil cooler on my 1.9 Mi & last track day at Phillip Isl. the oil pressure dropped to 40psi on long sweepers.

 

Certainly a better outcome than 2 previously trashed engines even with a baffled only sump!

 

Maybe, this is the best you can expect from a wet sump set-up.

 

Sounds as close to a cure as possible

 

What tyres did you use? Mine selfdestruct when I m using sticky slicks.

 

Is 40 psi regarded as too low? What state are your bearings in after dooing that track day(did you check if they are ok)?

[Jrod 7]

8V baffled sump

 

Maybe thats the key, I used a gti6 trapdoor sump.

[JeffR 51]

They were an old set of Advan's AO32R.

 

I haven't checked the bearings from that meeting, although the meeting before I dropped the oil & checked for metallic residue (none) & cut open the filter as well (also nothing). Oil was Motul 300V 15W/50.

 

Not sure if it makes any difference, but I now run Alfa 2.0 litre copper/lead big end bearings.

[welshpug 1,661]

1.6 8v sump is the same as an XU10 steel sump.

[petert 588]

1.6 8v sump is the same as an XU10 steel sump.

 

No, the one Jeff and I are talking about is similar to an alloy XU10 sump, but open. It was fitted to early A/C XU5 and XU9 engines, both Pug and Cit. As I said earlier, it's possible to build the trapdoor wall all the way to the top.

[crf450 0 1 Cars]

I wouldn't imagine it would matter whatever rod/crank/pistons/baffle you use. At the end of the day the mi16 head holds oil massively. Especially round corners. If there is no oil in the sump baffle or no baffle its going bang. Everyone has tried everything with this engine to cure oil surge. At the end of the day without (major) money it'll never be cured. Peugeot I'm sure never intended this engine to go into the 205 with slicks/semi slicks and kart like suspension. Its just a fact of life.

 

Just to clarify things. User "Nick" had an Mi engine that surged bad even on the road, it survived the road ok but on the first few laps of a track day it spun it shells. We stripped the engine and re-built it with 8v rods, gti6 sump and windage tray and as since then Nick has never seen surge although he's not had it back on track but as I say it did surged bad on the road before.

I've made load of baffles, fitted windage trays, made extended pick-ups (years before anyone was selling kits to do it) and never improved the situation until I fitted the 8v rods. I wont re-post my theories of why I believe the rods are the problem but this isn't something I deduced.

I was told this would be the problem by a chap who developed Peugeot BTTC engines in the late early 90's when he was chief development engineer at Mountune, they inherited the contract to build the BTTC engines off Longman.

 

If I were going to advise anyone with an Mi engine how to cure surge related issues who didn't want to dry sump or fit 8valve rods and gti6 sump and wind-age tray. I'd simply say fit a big oil cooler with a stat because the Mi's surge issues only get to the point where they are going to cause you a problem when the oil get hot and looses it's viscosity.

Cheers Martin

[Liquid_106 97 1 Cars]

What do people prefer to reduce surge?

 

Miles recommended me a baffle rather than the pickup but just wondered what others do?

 

Have a look at http://www.mi16.nl/mods_sump.htm - helped me to be able to see the sumps people were posting about

[ravydavy 0]

Just to clarify things. User "Nick" had an Mi engine that surged bad even on the road, it survived the road ok but on the first few laps of a track day it spun it shells. We stripped the engine and re-built it with 8v rods, gti6 sump and windage tray and as since then Nick has never seen surge although he's not had it back on track but as I say it did surged bad on the road before.

I've made load of baffles, fitted windage trays, made extended pick-ups (years before anyone was selling kits to do it) and never improved the situation until I fitted the 8v rods. I wont re-post my theories of why I believe the rods are the problem but this isn't something I deduced.

I was told this would be the problem by a chap who developed Peugeot BTTC engines in the late early 90's when he was chief development engineer at Mountune, they inherited the contract to build the BTTC engines off Longman.

 

If I were going to advise anyone with an Mi engine how to cure surge related issues who didn't want to dry sump or fit 8valve rods and gti6 sump and wind-age tray. I'd simply say fit a big oil cooler with a stat because the Mi's surge issues only get to the point where they are going to cause you a problem when the oil get hot and looses it's viscosity.

Cheers Martin

 

surely if their is no oil in the sump then nothing will work?? or am i banging my head against a wall here??

Btcc engines will have had dry sumps i'm sure as well as maybe 8v rods. there is no cheap solution. only an expensive one. Better solution fit a better engine. there are loads out there.

[black lad 0]

How come the "pipo" built 306 maxi engines used the wet sump and had very few blow ups?

[welshpug 1,661]

£££££££££!

[crf450 0 1 Cars]

surely if their is no oil in the sump then nothing will work?? or am i banging my head against a wall here??

Btcc engines will have had dry sumps i'm sure as well as maybe 8v rods. there is no cheap solution. only an expensive one. Better solution fit a better engine. there are loads out there.

 

There is oil in the sump that's the point. To understand the piston located rod theory you'd need read whats already been posted about why Nick and I did what we did.

I cant understand why people after all these years persist on saying the head holds oil or doesnt return quick enough. If this was the case you could overcome it buy overfilling the sump the amount the head holds. I have tried this and it makes no difference.

 

The top and bottom of this argument is I think I've tried every way of stopping loss of oil pressure through cornering that everyone else has tried but I'm the only one to have fitted 8v rods to try and sort the issue which puts me in a good place to comment. I'm not saying categorically that we've cured it but its seems like we have with Nick's engine. If anyone else would like to go this route I'd be willing to do the necessary machining FOC. If it doesnt cure the problem we'll look elsewhere or just fit a GTi6 engine.

Cheers Martin

Edited March 20, 2010 by crf450

[welshpug 1,661]

here's Nick's build thread that martin refers to.

[JeffR 51]

It's a very compelling argument you put up Martin especially as the Mi16 engine seems to be the 'odd one out' with it's piston located rods.

 

Apart from the 8V big end rod width, do the 2 cranks (8 & 16V) have the same journal width? And is the small end gudgeon the same diameter as the floating 16V pin?

 

Edit:Does anyone know whether the Longman touring car engines swapped over to crank located rods?

Edited March 20, 2010 by JeffR

[JeffR 51]

Mmt, here's how PeterT welded in the trapdoor baffle into my 8V sump. It sits flush with the top of the sump & I've dremelled a slight radius to fit it almost up against the windage tray. I also added an extra support bracket attached to a pump bolt where the overhang is longest.

 

The J4RS sump wall sits 25mm lower.

[petert 588]

I'm going to try and summarize all of this and never speak of it again. You will never cure oil surge with a wet sump, you'll only minimize it. In order to minimize it, you need to attack from a number of angles, as Martin has suggested. I did some measuring. The side rod clearances of three models goes like this:

 

XU9J2 - 0.33mm

XU9J4 - 2.20mm

XU10J4 - 0.30-0.41mm (I measured two cranks)

 

As you can see, a standard XU9J4 is going to leak a lot more oil out the side of the rods than the other two. It has to. On my track 205, I am currently running an XU9J4 head on a XU10J4 block/crank/rods, with all my other wet sump goodies. I have acceptable oil pressure with semi slicks. I have a big red light that comes on at 25psi. Impossible to miss, unlike a gauge, and it only come on at idle. So it has absolutely nothing to do with what type of head you have. Sure, a 16V might retain half a litre more in the head, so put another half in. That's not rocket science.

 

Other than baffling, probably the most important item is a windage tray. This is why Miles recommends the PTS setup. It had a combined windage tray and baffle arrangement. Look at the Moroso web site if you don't think it's important.

 

Finally, consider the following factory improvements of an XU10J4 (and RS) over an XU9J4:

 

- trap door sump

- windage tray

- reduced side rod clearance

- chain guard

- pump baffle

- higher pump speed

- increased oil pressure (the least important IMO)

 

Do all that to an XU9J4 and you won't need to push it on to the trailer, or hire a flat top.

Edited March 21, 2010 by petert

[Batfink 201]

Hi martin

 

Do you have pictures of the Mi16 and 8v rods so I can understand the differences? A picture says a 1000 words and all that.....

I just cannot visualise where the oil is being held.....

Edited March 21, 2010 by Batfink

[JeffR 51]

Maybe we need a new thread on this-

 

'Retro fitting 8V rods to XU9J4's'.

[welshpug 1,661]

D6C MI16 piston (22.7mm) and a 1.6 8v/1.8 16v (B6D/LFY) conrod (24.20mm)

 

 

 

LFY piston/gudgeon pin (V-tight fit in rod, no circlip);

 

[mmt 15]

Mmt, here's how PeterT welded in the trapdoor baffle into my 8V sump. It sits flush with the top of the sump & I've dremelled a slight radius to fit it almost up against the windage tray. I also added an extra support bracket attached to a pump bolt where the overhang is longest.

 

The J4RS sump wall sits 25mm lower.

 

Thanks for the pictures og your PeterT arrangement.

 

I´ll run a similar system and remember the shells in my evening prayr:-)

 

I too has a pressure warning light. Turns bright red whenever under 20 psi. Is that too low?

[crf450 0 1 Cars]

Thanks for the pictures although its hard to see the differences from them.

Batfink - The big end's wears most on a crank assembly and I believe this is where you loose oil pressure through the shells wearing and the the crank going oval which is what happens on any engine as it get older. When this happens the only thing that's holds oil in the crank is the clearnce (gap) between the rod and the cheeks (sides) of the crank. On a 8v engine the gap is a few thousand of an inch where as on the Mi engine the gap is a few milimeters.

I don't believe the Mi engine oil surges any worse than any other engine in the XU range, the problem is it finds it harder to maintain pressure because of the massive leakage round the big ends.

Cheers Martin

[welshpug 1,661]

was thinking about this earlier whilst fitting the bearings into my RFS bottom end, so I checked the side clearance on the rods, 0.35mm, about the same as the RFY goinf by Petert's figures, so why is the RFY more prone to oil issues?

 

it has the same crank, same bearings, same side clearance on the crank, later versions have a windage tray, early ones don't, the difference? nothing significant bar the head that I can see

 

another engine I noticed that has piston located rods like the 1.9 MI16's is the LFY 1.8 16v, pretty much the same head as the RFS in principle, no oil spray bars in the head though, or windage tray, sump baffle of any sort, you don't hear of these engines rattling bottom ends

[petert 588]

I didn't think an RFY was any better or any worse than an RFS in terms of oil control.