Xu9J4 Oil Starvation Prevention (Never Heard That Before?!)

[wicked 103 3 Cars]

The indicated points are probably not the lowest point in the head

 

A French chap made the hole just above the most right exhaust port:

 

I've some doubt if the size of the hole (14mm) is big enough to really improve on the problem during cornering.

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

That looks a bit dangerous... I suspect that it is quite close to the water jacket, and extremely close to the exhaust. Oilways that close to exhaust just don't seem safe..

I think that it is also worth checking the location in view of the angle at which the head rests in the engine bay and particular driving conditions - e.g. during acceleration it is quite likely that oil will move higher than the point in the pics, whereas during braking the height of drains on the exhaus part won't matter as oil will relocate to the inlet.

[petert 586]

I purposely meant the areas tagged in red, as that's were the bulk of the oil will pool. Remember the engine is at an angle and that area directly behind the exhaust cam/buckets has no where to drain. There would have to be a litre sitting there all the time. That's what I would do anyway. I'm not sure how I'd connect though. It would be nice to have a rigid tube, say OD16 x 1mm, behind the head, with four union type fittings that would allow for assembly/disassembly.

 

Someone should cut a window in a cam cover and glue on some lexan, in order to view oil.

Edited December 3, 2012 by petert

[2052NV 24]

I just read all of this after having my alloy MI blow a big end half way through my first track day after building the engine (ok it was last october ) and im just in the final stages of putting it back together. I had the constella drop in baffle kit and high pressure oil pump and a custom extended sump. But the track i use down here in New Zealand is called Hampton Downs and has a big end killer of a last corner (a looooooooong 3rd gear flat out right hander) well known for killing wrx's etc. That stuff was not enough and i got death rattle by lunch time. (Im running semi slicks and coil overs and very low)

http://www.hamptondowns.com/pages/65/circuit-map.htm

 

So i have rebuilt it this time without the extended sump (think oil may have been going into that chamber instead of staying around the pick up), Bigger oil cooler and a 2QT Accusump system. Im hoping this will be enough to keep me going all day. I am pretty interested in the drain holes at the rear of the head has anyone done this in the location that Petert is sudgesting? Also im pretty sure on the T-16's they drilled a hole into the head directly in the middle and slightly below the cam pulleys and ran a hose from there to the sump i saw a picture of it somewhere but god knows where.

 

Also a big thing i found when i took it apart again is the aftermarket headgasket i put in last time only had a small circular hole for the oil return drains at either end of the headgasket when obviously its a much larger casting at the flywheel end at least. The new one had it correct at the flywheel end but only a small hole at the cam pulley end. So i made that one bigger, i know from the head it is only a circular hole but it cant hurt.

 

 

old headgasket with 2 small circular holes at either end

 

The proper shape

 

and this is before i made the drain hole at the cam pulley end bigger

Edited February 21, 2013 by 2052NV

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

 

Also a big thing i found when i took it apart again is the aftermarket headgasket i put in last time only had a small circular hole for the oil return drains at either end of the headgasket when obviously its a much larger casting at the flywheel end at least. The new one had it correct at the flywheel end but only a small hole at the cam pulley end. So i made that one bigger, i know from the head it is only a circular hole but it cant hurt.

old headgasket with 2 small circular holes at either end

The proper shape

and this is before i made the drain hole at the cam pulley end bigger

 

Could you show pictures of the enlarged drain in the head at cam end?

I wonder whether it is safe to enlarge it to fit the shape of the drain in the block, or whether there is a risk of cutting through the water jacket.

Edited May 14, 2013 by rodionski

[petert 586]

Have you read this thread?

 

http://forum.205gtidrivers.com/index.php?showtopic=148425

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

Peter, yes I have read it, thank you! Still didn't find any positive experience with enlarging the stock drain at cam timing end in the head

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

After taking another look at the engine block - another couple of thoughts.

 

1. Stock drains.

 

The smaller drain from the head into the block was probably not intended as a full-blown oil drain IMO. The corresponding drain in the block which starts as a decent size one, ends up about haft the size on the bottom of the block.

Beneath that drain exit is the crank area with where the crank oil pump gear and chain sit, and further down is the gear on the oil pump.

Therefore it would seem to me that the main idea for that drain was to provide oil for the oil pump gears and chain assembly, whereas draining oil from the head would then be a by-product.

And there would be a rotating counterweight of the crank nearby as well, splattering oil all around.

So in the result we would get more chances of whipping up oil into emulsion by the pump gears and chain, as well as the crank counterweight.

 

That issue would be eliminated with the use of a dry sump system, and I will give it another thought to see if it could be somehow minimised at all.

 

Now as regards the larger drain at flywheel side. This one has a much larger exit, no doubt.

But that exit is not located facing down into the sump. In fact, it is located horisontally, facing.. yes, again another rotating crank counterweight. Or even two counterweights.

So again, the result of that would be similar to the one described above, if not worse due to horisontal positioning of the exit.

 

This issue could be minimised/eliminated with the rerouting of the exit to point downwards into the sump. I will throw in a crank and see if it could be done, but I doubt it

 

2. Additional head drain positioning on the engine block.

 

A logical place for the drain entry on the engine block would be the oil level sensor. It already has a decent size threaded entry and the sensor itself, being pretty much useless in the first place, would already be broken in just about every engine by now. At least I have not seen a single sensor intact yet.

 

There is another place on the block which could accomodate an additional drain - it is located nearby the oil level sensor entry - there is a noticible blank casting which could be safely drilled through and would provide a nice drain, albeit probably of a bit smaller diameter than the oil level sensor entry.

 

The above setup could be better than drilling into the sump as shorter pipes would be required and they would not have to be disconnected every time a sump is removed.

Oh and another benefit - this setup would work with the dry sump

Edited May 15, 2013 by rodionski

[petert 586]

Dropping oil down the oil level sensor is definitely the way to go, provided you do it with a tube (to below oil level), so that the oil doesn't drop onto the crank. A decent dry sump system would scavenge the head anyway, avoiding oil dropping onto the crank.

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

Correct, Peter - there must be a tube from the oil level sensor enty down to the sump - an idea similar to the tube used in the XU10 block.

It is allthemore strange however that the stock drains seem to aim for the counterweights almost

Any comments on my other observations?

 

As regards the dry sump - all D6C dry sump systems I've seen (Pace and Titan Motorsport) did not have the 4th stage for scavenging the head.

[petert 586]

Pace & Titan are only entry level however. Have you ever seen one in a Super Tourer? Notice this Longman engine has a scavenge drain at each end of the head.

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

Yep. Pace boast however that they have designed the Peugeot touring car dry sump system)

I wonder why the system in pictures inly has drains in the front? That would make sense only if the engine ran upright, not tilted as in a stock car.

[welshpug 1,657]

did that engine not sit bolt upright necessitating the front drains?

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

Well, may be, but not quite upright in this supertourer..

[petert 586]

It must have sat upright, otherwise the trumpets would be through the bonnet.

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

Not necessarily as the engine sat WAAAY lower into the engine bay than normal)

[Batfink 201]

if its the 2nd evolution most likely that engine sat tilted forward or straight upright. They changed the engine position.

Edited May 15, 2013 by Batfink

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

After looking again at the "main" oil drain in the engine block I suppose that fiddling with it would be useless. There seems to be no room at all for installing a tube or some sort of deflector to reroute the drain to point downwards to the sump. So, that main drain will just have to keep feeding oil onto the counterweight, ridiculously splattering it all over the block and creating emulsion. What a crappy design

Edited May 15, 2013 by rodionski

[philfingers 5]

interesting topic, FYI this is what i did to my road rally Mi 4 years ago, all basically to avoid any surge issues and make it reliable. With a proper mechanical gauge in 10k I never had any issues, then I'm not running slicks on a track. It hold about 6.8ltrs of oil from memory! http://forum.205gtidrivers.com/index.php?showtopic=100177

I'm reasonable au-fait with 'sevens', having owned a striker, westfield, phoenix and currently another crossflow Striker. I'd say the Mi is a tall engine for a seven, oil issues side I think it's a non starter, purely from the fact that good Mi's must be hard to get hold of and expensive now. As Baz has mentioned they're are in use in 'seven' type cars. I have a feeling I've heard about a 1600cc version. But they're not common. I think from a business point of view you'll struggle to sell a car which is Mi powered, because the knowledge and parts just aren't available in the mainstream kit car world. It's a hard market anyway, there are lots of variants

As for the drains in the Mi, I looked at it, i'm sure the pictures I came across 4 years ago when I was building mine showed they exited from the just above the exhaust manifold. I don't see an issue with heat. I'd use a 90deg union. With oil running through it then it will get cooled anyway

My view but you're putting yourself in a tight corner with an Mi based car. Unless you can sell one to everyone here, and make the whole car use mostly 205 bits. then most of us would just need to buy the chassis/body and use what we have in our sheds.

[welshpug 1,657]

After looking again at the "main" oil drain in the engine block I suppose that fiddling with it would be useless. There seems to be no room at all for installing a tube or some sort of deflector to reroute the drain to point downwards to the sump. So, that main drain will just have to keep feeding oil onto the counterweight, ridiculously splattering it all over the block and creating emulsion. What a crappy design

Can't be that crappy, or indeed any part of the issue given the rfs engine shares the same block as the rfy, and doesnt suffer so badly at all, the differemce? Head...

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

I rest my case, Sir. That drain design is explicitly crappy in my opinion. Now to which extent that flaw worsens the overall surge issue, is another question. But that drain exit design is just crappy.

[rodionski 3 1 Cars]

A glimpse of what I am currently working on to concur the topic's main problem..

 

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10151479975458937.1073741826.723983936&type=1