[DeTomaso] oiling main mods
Ken Green
kenn_green at yahoo.com
Tue May 30 22:48:46 EDT 2017
Found this on a Mustang forum:
351C Oil System Dilemma
For as long as Mustangs continue to exist, the age old debate on the Cleveland’s oil system will continue with more false and misguided information being re-circulated around than the truth. There have been some old sage Cleveland engineers, mechanics and rebuilders in the past that have tried to clarify this area of misinformation but have literally given up the fight over the years. I still have many of their articles and am just amazed how far from the truth we’ve seemed to come over the years regarding this rather simple matter. We seem to know less now than most rebuilders knew in the 1970’s. So – I will reiterate for them who are now too tired to continue repeating themselves.
First of all, the 351C oil system is not a “defective system” for their original factory manufactured application. It works fine in all the 351C engines that were assembled by Ford and installed in their Mustangs, Cougars, Rancheros, Montegos and Torinos throughout its four years of production. And so long as these engines were assembled just as the factory assembled them with their factory parts and operated in the same realm as they were intended to be operated, everything works just fine. There has never been a factory built or stock rebuilt 351C engine that had ever failed due to a defective oil system or because an oil pump was deficient in volume or pressure. That’s a fact! So what happened? In short - the Cleveland was later modified by engine rebuilders to take advantage of its tremendous horsepower and torque potential which put its operation into an entirely new realm. As such, horsepower and RPM ranges exceeded its originally intended parameters.
It’s kind of like the Mustang itself that was originally designed as a sharp looking sports car that everyone could afford. And it was affordable because it was built on the cheep Falcon chassis and frame with mediocre components (ie: partially framed unibody construction, marginal suspension, outdated but adequate front end, adequate brakes and steering, etc). Great for the low income buyer wanting to look cool in a jazzy bodied sports car, but a horrible platform to build a serious high performance muscle machine on. The Mustang’s initial engineers had no clue that their classic chassis & frame design was going to be turned into a 300+ HP muscle machine in the future! The problem was the car looked so good and had so much public appeal as a performance car that Ford just went ahead and engined and styled it for high performance before its inner guts had time to grow into its muscle. Want to see an entire front end twist before your eyes – build up your 351C to 450 hp, drop it into your all stock 1970 Mustang (put weight in the trunk for traction) and stomp on it. Presto – you now have two cracked shock towers and probably a tweeked unibody frame! Now you can drive down the road like a crippled crab. Do you want to see an engine’s oil system fail – double the horse power and torque from factory, increase your RPMs by 50% and do nothing to update the oil system and go race it! On a Cleveland, this is a guarantee for failure due to a now inadequate oil system design for the realm that you are now operating it in.
Just like Mustang enthusiast have since reinforced their frames, shock towers, brakes, steering and suspension components for their supped up MuscleStangs, the wise high performance Cleveland rebuilders have made engine modifications to make allowances for higher HP and RPM ranges. And when properly done, their oil systems run just fine. Would you install stock u-joints on a driveline that’s going to double the torque delivered to it? Still, with all this being said, it’s a fair statement to say that the Cleveland’s factory oil system was not designed for high performance capability. Other engine’s oil systems might be directly adaptable for high performance, but the Cleveland’s was not. But wait – I thought it was designed as a high performance engine? Yes it was, but its oil system was not. Everything else in the Cleveland was aimed at high performance, but the pressure to save on production costs compromised that one critical area. The bean counters got their way with casting & drilling a less expensive oil gallery layout and the rest of the world of Cleveland performance enthusiasts have had to pay for it ever since. Even still, up to 5500 or even 6000 rpms and 300 HP or less, it’s perfectly adequate. But if you rev up a Cleveland up to 7-8 grand, especially if it’s a built up Cleveland using today’s available parts and inadequate “Cleveland Specific” assembly knowledge, bad things are going to happen.
First of all, the gallery system design prioritizes the lifter bore channels (with the exception of crank bearing No. 1). The first place the flow is directed to is the right (passenger) side lifter gallery where this gallery intersects each lifter bore by almost quarter of its bore diameter. It’s got an immense exposed area for its oil feed. Fine for 5500 rpms using factory lifters. Keep in mind this is repeated 16 times - once for each lifter bore. If you have much lifter bore wear at all, that’s a lot of leakage potential, especially when it’s at the priority lubrication site. Ford actually had “351C Specific” lifters with specially sized oil holes to control the oil flow up the push rods to the upper assembly. Now think for a moment: Suppose you rebuilt a Cleveland and stuck aftermarket lifters (having larger oil orifices in them – which the parts guys know nothing about) in old worn lifter bores and used aftermarket pushrods that also had your typical large (relatively speaking) oil holes and then ran this engine up to 7500 rpms. What do you think happens? Here’s what does: 1st – the oil pressure builds and it squeezes out towards wherever the resistance is least. If the lifter bores are fairly worn, a bit squeezes out of each (that’s 16 small leaks). If you didn’t buy “Cleveland Specific” lifters (not even available any more) or pushrods with restriction oil orifices, then each lifter’s larger than “Cleveland Specific” oil hole size now allows lots of oil to shoot up to the top end. Remember there is an unlimited source of oil supply to each lifer from its huge oil gallery exposed area. That’s again times 16. Now that’s a lot of oil going up to the top end with potentially a lot leaking around the lifters as well. With the oil pump reving up to 7500 RPMs, that’s more flow than was ever initially accounted for, especially without the factory limiting lifter holes. Fluids don’t compress, so the faster the pump turns, the more oil it moves. This can be so much flow that the small (factory) oil drain holes in the stock heads often can’t drain it as fast as its coming up all 16 supply tubes. It’s even possible for the entire right side (that’s the oil flow’s first delivery side) valve cover chamber to completely fill with oil and then shoot up through the PVC valve and into the intake manifold. Don’t need to tell you what that does. That’s why you may see some older high performance 351C with oil leaking all around the valve covers, especially the right.
So - what do you think is happening to the oil level in the pan at this point? Yep, it’s getting really low, especially in a stock 5 quart volume oil pan. It might even be sucking out faster than it is returning at real high RPMs. Keep in mind that oil pressure is also probably running low not just due to the 16 lifter bore leaks, but even more so since the oil is finding very little resistance (like more leaks) through the upper valve train (unlike the original factory assembly parts). So you’re now running at reduced pressure (32 leaks in all) with less flow to the crank (it’s mostly going to the top end) and a decreasing pan oil level. Now say you are racing this on a track and you’re cornering at a few G’s. What’s the oil doing in the pan now? Yep, what little is in there is all pushed over to one side. Sssssuuck….cavitate…no flow! …zero oil pressure!…crank bearing seize! …BANG Pieces of Cleveland everywhere - all in a split second! That lesson was first learned back in the ‘70’s . Did you know that little bit of very old history? Do you understand it? Think an oil bypass line would have made any difference? It’s primarily a leakage problem, not a supply issue - that is until you’ve pumped your pan dry. But it all started from internal leaks which were aggravated at high RPM because of an oil gallery design that didn’t prioritize the crank bearings and required special lifters to keep from over oiling the top end. The problem was then aggravated by oil drain holes that couldn’t keep up with the high oil flow to the top end at high RPMs. A higher flow oil pump would only aggravate the situation! In this racing scenario where you experience sustained lateral G’s, a high capacity baffled oil pan (7 qt or better) would have helped.
As previously stated, the oil system dilemma stems from a oil gallery design that prioritized the right lifter gallery (with the exception of crank bearing No. 1) and then supplies the cam, crank and left lifter gallery all as a second priority. Now if the next successive path of least resistance is through the left side lifter gallery (for the very same “leak” reasons as the right), then that’s where the pressure will direct most of the remaining flow, even though the distance is shorter to crank bearings 2-5. Anyone understanding basic hydraulics realizes that a fluid will flow to wherever the resistance is least, which is wherever the pressure is bleeding off the quickest - which means where the leaks are. You can’t redirect flow if there is a pressure differential fighting this new direction. Attempting to redirect oil flow to the back side of the right lifter bore gallery accomplishes absolutely nothing! One must fix the leaks before anything else you do is going to matter! This is basic fluid dynamics.
There’s another faulty aspect to the by-pass line theory: The rear top oil port on the Cleveland where the oil pressure sender is normally attached (where a by-pass line is theoretically transferring pressure to) is at the end of the right side lifter gallery, not the left side. This is the gallery that is directly fed from the main pump port exiting the filter. This lifter gallery has a ½ inch I.D. and is a straight 19 inch shot directly over to the rear of the engine where this ¼ inch port for the pressure sender screws in. That means the rear port itself is half the size as the main lifter gallery itself and yet a hose to it is supposedly going to “supplement” it?? But even more than this is the fact that this long multiple curved by-pass line itself is going to be much longer and is typically only ¼ inch in diameter, most having fittings that have 1/8 inch holes at each end. This entire path is literally dozens of times more restrictive that the block’s straight shot to the back having twice its diameter. It is insanely ludicrous to think that this by-pass line can possibly supplement anything! Now if this line were to connect to a port that is directly feeding the left side lifter gallery, one could possibly argue stating that it supplies more than the port junction does at the top side of main bearing No. 5. But that isn’t the case! It is impossible for a by-pass line to supplement any flow or pressure beyond what the lifter gallery itself provides to this location unless one were to first stick a marble into the right lifter gallery to totally restrict it. Enough said!
But there is one really good, very common sense solution to all this. Simply put: Fix the leaks! All these mentioned internal leaks and excessive oil transfer starts it journey from the cavernous lifter bore cutouts. So ….why not simply bush these lifter bores thereby eliminating those huge cavernous bore gallery areas from where the oil flow problem first begins. If you do this and drill a sized oil orifice in each bushing for your particular lifter and valve train design, the oil flow passing through will meet the demands of the lifter without allowing an excess to bleed through to the top side. Just the inserting of new bore bushing alone will help eliminate the leak potentials around all the lifters (which adds up with 16 lifters). And presto – you’re done for all but some of the more extreme high performance applications. For those who want everything out of a Cleveland where you’re topping 8500 RPMs or better, you might at this point need to install flow limiters in the cam bearing gallery ports to redirect more pressure to the crank bearings, but that’s overkill for street applications. In ultra-high performance Clevelands, you might even need to go to a high performance oil pump as well. Novice rebuilders installing high volume oil pumps into street use Clevelands who haven’t bushed the lifter bores and are using aftermarket Non-Cleveland specific lifters are only making the problem worse! And those installing the oil bypass line are ignoring the basic laws of hydraulics and sanity! Re-direction doesn’t override the fact that oil still flows to the path least resistance regardless of how many ways there are of getting there. Additionally, if that line leaks or ever breaks and shoots oil all throughout your hot engine bay, better have about 20 fire extinguishers on hand or it’s bye-bye Mustang! If you still must ignore hydraulic laws and common sense, at least install metal brake line, not hose!
There are other issues that also make one wonder what was Ford thinking. Why build a powerhouse potential engine that requires high revs to make this power (that’s why the cavernous heads and valves, smaller high rev main bearings and even dual points in some cases), but have a cam grind that doesn’t really support that RPM realm or a meager 605 cfm carb that can’t deliver to even a 7000 rpm appetite? Much of that was modified when the ’71 Boss 351 came out, but still there was so much more potential that never got realized because the Fed’s emission requirements literally killed the Cleveland’s performance potential after that. Sadly, after 1971 the race reputation Cleveland became just a “soccer mom’s wagon engine”, but with the heart of an Indy racer. From 1972 on, the heads were screwed with, the timing was screwed with, the compression sucked and yet these lower compression open chambered heads would still detonat at times. In retrospect, the Cleveland really only had two years to live in. But for those who know how to properly build up a Cleveland, the unleashed potential has always been there, but you also need to modify the oil system along with your other performance enhancements.
So the bottom line here is 90% of the Clevelands out there would be remedied by simply installing a lifter bore bushing kit. Even the extra large oil pan would be overkill. Enlarging the head oil drain holes would be a good idea for any Cleveland and most aftermarket 351C heads already have these enlarged. And that’s the old story retold from when Cleveland builders knew more of the 351C oil system peculiarities than we apparently know today. Many high volume pumps, bypass line kits and gallery restrictors have been sold needlessly over the counter for street Clevelands than never needed these measures. Fix the leaks and your Cleveland will run easily to 7 grand with 400 horses and be happier than a clam. Much more than that, then start using the other measures mentioned, but throw that bypass line in the garbage!
P.S. – and case you’re wondering, no, I don’t sell lifter bushing kits or get any proceeds. It’s just that this modification alone directly remedies the oil situation for anyone building up a high performance street Cleveland using parts available from today’s auto suppliers.
From: "jtaphorn at kingwoodcable.com" <jtaphorn at kingwoodcable.com>
To: detomaso at server.detomasolist.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 6:46 PM
Subject: [DeTomaso] oiling main mods
I respect the opinion of those preceding me and still offer another.
I use it and am an advocate. We ran pressure measurements probably 15 years ago and convinced ourselves it was a good idea. I can't recall the details of the exercise. The idea was controversial back then as well and we convinced ourselves that there was merit. Intuitively, it also makes sense.
I added the feature to my last engine build that is waiting for insertion into a recent restoration underway.
To flow more oil, you can drill the existing oil passage which is located in the block accessible where the oil pressure sender was located, a bit larger.
JT
_______________________________________________
Detomaso Email List is not managed by POCA
Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
DeTomaso mailing list
DeTomaso at server.detomasolist.com
http://server.detomasolist.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
To manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe, etc.) use the links above.
Members who post to this list grant license to the list to forward any message posted here to all past, current, or future members of the list. They also grant the list owner permission to maintain an archive or approve the archiving of list messages.
-------------- next part --------------
Found this on a Mustang forum:
Inline image
[1]351C Oil System Dilemma
For as long as Mustangs continue to exist, the age old debate on the
Clevelandas [2]oil system will continue with more false and misguided
information being re-circulated around than the truth. There have been
some old sage Cleveland engineers, mechanics and rebuilders in the past
that have tried to clarify this area of misinformation but have
literally given up the fight over the years. I still have many of their
articles and am just amazed how far from the truth weave seemed to come
over the years regarding this rather simple matter. We seem to know
less now than most rebuilders knew in the 1970as. So a I will reiterate
for them who are now too tired to continue repeating themselves.
First of all, the [3]351C oil system is not a adefective systema for
their original factory manufactured application. It works fine in all
the 351C engines that were assembled by Ford and installed in their
Mustangs, Cougars, Rancheros, Montegos and Torinos throughout its four
years of production. And so long as these engines were assembled just
as the factory assembled them with their factory parts and operated in
the same realm as they were intended to be operated, everything works
just fine. There has never been a factory built or stock rebuilt
[4]351C engine that had ever failed due to a defective oil system or
because an oil pump was deficient in volume or pressure. Thatas a fact!
So what happened? In short - the Cleveland was later modified by
[5]engine rebuilders to take advantage of its tremendous horsepower and
torque potential which put its operation into an entirely new realm. As
such, horsepower and [6]RPM ranges exceeded its originally intended
parameters.
Itas kind of like the Mustang itself that was originally designed as a
sharp looking sports car that everyone could afford. And it was
affordable because it was built on the cheep Falcon chassis and frame
with mediocre components (ie: partially framed unibody construction,
marginal [7]suspension, outdated but adequate front end, adequate
[8]brakes and steering, etc). Great for the low income buyer wanting to
look cool in a jazzy bodied sports car, but a horrible platform to
build a serious high performance muscle machine on. The Mustangas
initial engineers had no clue that their classic [9]chassis & frame
design was going to be turned into a 300+ HP muscle machine in the
future! The problem was the car looked so good and had so much public
appeal as a performance car that Ford just went ahead and engined and
styled it for high performance before its inner guts had time to grow
into its muscle. Want to see an entire front end twist before your eyes
a build up your [10]351C to 450 hp, drop it into your all stock
[11]1970 Mustang (put weight in the trunk for traction) and stomp on
it. Presto a you now have two cracked shock towers and probably a
tweeked unibody frame! Now you can drive down the road like a crippled
crab. Do you want to see an engineas oil system fail a double the horse
power and torque from factory, increase your RPMs by 50% and do nothing
to update the oil system and go race it! On a Cleveland, this is a
guarantee for failure due to a now inadequate oil system design for the
realm that you are now operating it in.
Just like Mustang enthusiast have since reinforced their frames, shock
towers, [12]brakes, steering and [13]suspension components for their
supped up MuscleStangs, the wise high performance Cleveland rebuilders
have made engine modifications to make allowances for higher HP and RPM
ranges. And when properly done, their oil systems run just fine. Would
you install stock u-joints on a driveline thatas going to double the
torque delivered to it? Still, with all this being said, itas a fair
statement to say that the Clevelandas factory oil system was not
designed for high performance capability. Other engineas oil systems
might be directly adaptable for high performance, but the Clevelandas
was not. But wait a I thought it was designed as a high performance
[14]engine? Yes it was, but its oil system was not. Everything else in
the Cleveland was aimed at high performance, but the pressure to save
on production costs compromised that one critical area. The bean
counters got their way with casting & drilling a less expensive oil
gallery layout and the rest of the world of Cleveland performance
enthusiasts have had to pay for it ever since. Even still, up to 5500
or even 6000 rpms and 300 HP or less, itas perfectly adequate. But if
you rev up a Cleveland up to 7-8 grand, especially if itas a built up
Cleveland using todayas available parts and inadequate aCleveland
Specifica assembly knowledge, bad things are going to happen.
First of all, the gallery system design prioritizes the [15]lifter bore
channels (with the exception of crank bearing No. 1). The first place
the flow is directed to is the right (passenger) side lifter gallery
where this gallery intersects each [16]lifter bore by almost quarter of
its bore diameter. Itas got an immense exposed area for its oil feed.
Fine for 5500 rpms using factory lifters. Keep in mind this is repeated
16 times - once for each [17]lifter bore. If you have much [18]lifter
bore wear at all, thatas a lot of leakage potential, especially when
itas at the priority lubrication site. Ford actually had a351C
Specifica lifters with specially sized oil holes to control the oil
flow up the push rods to the upper assembly. Now think for a moment:
Suppose you rebuilt a Cleveland and stuck aftermarket lifters (having
larger oil orifices in them a which the parts guys know nothing about)
in old worn lifter bores and used aftermarket pushrods that also had
your typical large (relatively speaking) oil holes and then ran this
engine up to 7500 rpms. What do you think happens? Hereas what does:
1st a the oil pressure builds and it squeezes out towards wherever the
resistance is least. If the lifter bores are fairly worn, a bit
squeezes out of each (thatas 16 small leaks). If you didnat buy
aCleveland Specifica lifters (not even available any more) or pushrods
with restriction oil orifices, then each lifteras larger than
aCleveland Specifica oil hole size now allows lots of oil to shoot up
to the top end. Remember there is an unlimited source of oil supply to
each lifer from its huge oil gallery exposed area. Thatas again times
16. Now thatas a lot of oil going up to the top end with potentially a
lot leaking around the lifters as well. With the oil pump reving up to
7500 RPMs, thatas more flow than was ever initially accounted for,
especially without the factory limiting lifter holes. Fluids donat
compress, so the faster the pump turns, the more oil it moves. This can
be so much flow that the small (factory) oil drain holes in the stock
heads often canat drain it as fast as its coming up all 16 supply
tubes. Itas even possible for the entire right side (thatas the oil
flowas first delivery side) valve cover chamber to completely fill with
oil and then shoot up through the [19]PVC valve and into the intake
manifold. Donat need to tell you what that does. Thatas why you may see
some older high performance 351C with oil leaking all around the
[20]valve covers, especially the right.
So - what do you think is happening to the oil level in the pan at this
point? Yep, itas getting really low, especially in a stock 5 quart
volume oil pan. It might even be sucking out faster than it is
returning at real high RPMs. Keep in mind that oil pressure is also
probably running low not just due to the 16 lifter bore leaks, but even
more so since the oil is finding very little resistance (like more
leaks) through the upper valve train (unlike the original factory
assembly parts). So youare now running at reduced pressure (32 leaks in
all) with less flow to the crank (itas mostly going to the top end) and
a decreasing pan oil level. Now say you are racing this on a track and
youare cornering at a few Gas. Whatas the oil doing in the pan now?
Yep, what little is in there is all pushed over to one side.
Sssssuucka|.cavitatea|no flow! a|zero oil pressure!a|crank bearing
seize! a|BANG Pieces of Cleveland everywhere - all in a split second!
That lesson was first learned back in the a70as . Did you know that
little bit of very old history? Do you understand it? Think an oil
bypass line would have made any difference? Itas primarily a leakage
problem, not a supply issue - that is until youave pumped your [21]pan
dry. But it all started from internal leaks which were aggravated at
high RPM because of an oil gallery design that didnat prioritize the
[22]crank bearings and required special lifters to keep from over
oiling the top end. The problem was then aggravated by oil drain holes
that couldnat keep up with the high oil flow to the top end at high
RPMs. A higher flow oil pump would only aggravate the situation! In
this racing scenario where you experience sustained lateral Gas, a high
capacity baffled oil pan (7 qt or better) would have helped.
As previously stated, the oil system dilemma stems from a oil gallery
design that prioritized the right lifter gallery (with the exception of
crank bearing No. 1) and then supplies the cam, crank and left lifter
gallery all as a second priority. Now if the next successive path of
least resistance is through the left side lifter gallery (for the very
same aleaka reasons as the right), then thatas where the pressure will
direct most of the remaining flow, even though the distance is shorter
to [23]crank bearings 2-5. Anyone understanding basic hydraulics
realizes that a fluid will flow to wherever the resistance is least,
which is wherever the pressure is bleeding off the quickest - which
means where the leaks are. You canat redirect flow if there is a
pressure differential fighting this new direction. Attempting to
redirect oil flow to the back side of the right lifter bore gallery
accomplishes absolutely nothing! One must fix the leaks before anything
else you do is going to matter! This is basic fluid dynamics.
Thereas another faulty aspect to the [24]by-pass line theory: The rear
top oil port on the Cleveland where the oil pressure sender is normally
attached (where a by-pass line is theoretically transferring pressure
to) is at the end of the right side lifter gallery, not the left side.
This is the gallery that is directly fed from the main pump port
exiting the filter. This lifter gallery has a A 1/2 inch I.D. and is a
straight 19 inch shot directly over to the rear of the [25]engine where
this A 1/4 inch port for the pressure sender screws in. That means the
rear port itself is half the size as the main lifter gallery itself and
yet a hose to it is supposedly going to asupplementa it?? But even more
than this is the fact that this long multiple curved [26]by-pass line
itself is going to be much longer and is typically only A 1/4 inch in
diameter, most having fittings that have 1/8 inch holes at each end.
This entire path is literally dozens of times more restrictive that the
blockas straight shot to the back having twice its diameter. It is
insanely ludicrous to think that this by-pass line can possibly
supplement anything! Now if this line were to connect to a port that is
directly feeding the left side lifter gallery, one could possibly argue
stating that it supplies more than the port junction does at the top
side of main bearing No. 5. But that isnat the case! It is impossible
for a [27]by-pass line to supplement any flow or pressure beyond what
the lifter gallery itself provides to this location unless one were to
first stick a marble into the right lifter gallery to totally restrict
it. Enough said!
But there is one really good, very common sense solution to all this.
Simply put: Fix the leaks! All these mentioned internal leaks and
excessive oil transfer starts it journey from the cavernous lifter bore
cutouts. So a|.why not simply bush these lifter bores thereby
eliminating those huge cavernous bore gallery areas from where the oil
flow problem first begins. If you do this and drill a sized oil orifice
in each bushing for your particular lifter and valve train design, the
oil flow passing through will meet the demands of the lifter without
allowing an excess to bleed through to the top side. Just the inserting
of new bore bushing alone will help eliminate the leak potentials
around all the lifters (which adds up with 16 lifters). And presto a
youare done for all but some of the more extreme high performance
applications. For those who want everything out of a Cleveland where
youare topping 8500 RPMs or better, you might at this point need to
install flow limiters in the cam bearing gallery ports to redirect more
pressure to the [28]crank bearings, but thatas overkill for street
applications. In ultra-high performance Clevelands, you might even need
to go to a high performance oil pump as well. Novice rebuilders
installing high volume oil pumps into street use Clevelands who havenat
bushed the lifter bores and are using aftermarket Non-Cleveland
specific lifters are only making the problem worse! And those
installing the oil bypass line are ignoring the basic laws of
hydraulics and sanity! Re-direction doesnat override the fact that oil
still flows to the path least resistance regardless of how many ways
there are of getting there. Additionally, if that line leaks or ever
breaks and shoots oil all throughout your hot [29]engine bay, better
have about 20 fire extinguishers on hand or itas bye-bye Mustang! If
you still must ignore hydraulic laws and common sense, at least install
metal [30]brake line, not hose!
There are other issues that also make one wonder what was Ford
thinking. Why build a powerhouse potential [31]engine that requires
high revs to make this power (thatas why the cavernous heads and
valves, smaller high rev main bearings and even dual points in some
cases), but have a cam grind that doesnat really support that RPM realm
or a meager 605 cfm carb that canat deliver to even a 7000 rpm
appetite? Much of that was modified when the a71 Boss 351 came out, but
still there was so much more potential that never got realized because
the Fedas emission requirements literally killed the Clevelandas
performance potential after that. Sadly, after 1971 the race reputation
Cleveland became just a asoccer momas wagon enginea, but with the heart
of an Indy racer. From 1972 on, the heads were screwed with, the timing
was screwed with, the compression sucked and yet these lower
compression open chambered heads would still detonat at times. In
retrospect, the Cleveland really only had two years to live in. But for
those who know how to properly build up a Cleveland, the unleashed
potential has always been there, but you also need to modify the oil
system along with your other performance enhancements.
So the bottom line here is 90% of the Clevelands out there would be
remedied by simply installing a [32]lifter bore [33]bushing kit. Even
the extra large oil pan would be overkill. Enlarging the head oil drain
holes would be a good idea for any Cleveland and most aftermarket
[34]351C heads already have these enlarged. And thatas the old story
retold from when Cleveland builders knew more of the 351C oil system
peculiarities than we apparently know today. Many high volume pumps,
bypass line kits and gallery restrictors have been sold needlessly over
the counter for street Clevelands than never needed these measures. Fix
the leaks and your Cleveland will run easily to 7 grand with 400 horses
and be happier than a clam. Much more than that, then start using the
other measures mentioned, but throw that bypass line in the garbage!
P.S. a and case youare wondering, no, I donat sell lifter bushing kits
or get any proceeds. Itas just that this modification alone directly
remedies the oil situation for anyone building up a high performance
street Cleveland using parts available from todayas auto suppliers.
__________________________________________________________________
From: "jtaphorn at kingwoodcable.com" <jtaphorn at kingwoodcable.com>
To: detomaso at server.detomasolist.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 6:46 PM
Subject: [DeTomaso] oiling main mods
I respect the opinion of those preceding me and still offer another.
I use it and am an advocate. We ran pressure measurements probably 15
years ago and convinced ourselves it was a good idea. I can't recall
the details of the exercise. The idea was controversial back then as
well and we convinced ourselves that there was merit. Intuitively, it
also makes sense.
I added the feature to my last engine build that is waiting for
insertion into a recent restoration underway.
To flow more oil, you can drill the existing oil passage which is
located in the block accessible where the oil pressure sender was
located, a bit larger.
JT
_______________________________________________
Detomaso Email List is not managed by POCA
Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
DeTomaso mailing list
[35]DeTomaso at server.detomasolist.com
[36]http://server.detomasolist.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
To manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe, etc.)
use the links above.
Members who post to this list grant license to the list to forward any
message posted here to all past, current, or future members of the
list. They also grant the list owner permission to maintain an archive
or approve the archiving of list messages.
References
1. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003TPWLD2
2. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=oil
3. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003TPWLD2
4. http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&index=automotive&keywords=351c&linkCode=ur2
5. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=engine
6. https://www.amazon.com/Holley-553-107-Customizable-Programmable-Adjustable/dp/B01DS4I6ZA
7. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=suspension
8. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=brakes
9. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=chassis
10. http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&index=automotive&keywords=351c&linkCode=ur2
11. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?toolid=10029&campid=CAMPAIGNID&customid=CUSTOMID&catId=6000&type=2&ext=201928242116&item=201928242116
12. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=brakes
13. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=suspension
14. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=engine
15. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?toolid=10029&campid=CAMPAIGNID&customid=CUSTOMID&catId=6000&type=2&ext=391788542481&item=391788542481
16. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?toolid=10029&campid=CAMPAIGNID&customid=CUSTOMID&catId=6000&type=2&ext=391788542481&item=391788542481
17. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?toolid=10029&campid=CAMPAIGNID&customid=CUSTOMID&catId=6000&type=2&ext=391788542481&item=391788542481
18. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?toolid=10029&campid=CAMPAIGNID&customid=CUSTOMID&catId=6000&type=2&ext=391788542481&item=391788542481
19. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?toolid=10029&campid=CAMPAIGNID&customid=CUSTOMID&catId=6000&type=2&ext=272687978782&item=272687978782
20. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=valve+covers
21. https://www.amazon.com/Mercury-Mercruiser-Quicksilver-843500-Pan-Dry/dp/B00N9HNUOY
22. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?toolid=10029&campid=CAMPAIGNID&customid=CUSTOMID&catId=6000&type=2&ext=172670441953&item=172670441953
23. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?toolid=10029&campid=CAMPAIGNID&customid=CUSTOMID&catId=6000&type=2&ext=172670441953&item=172670441953
24. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007WR8H18
25. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=engine
26. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007WR8H18
27. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007WR8H18
28. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?toolid=10029&campid=CAMPAIGNID&customid=CUSTOMID&catId=6000&type=2&ext=172670441953&item=172670441953
29. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=engine
30. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=brake
31. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=engine
32. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?toolid=10029&campid=CAMPAIGNID&customid=CUSTOMID&catId=6000&type=2&ext=391788542481&item=391788542481
33. http://rd.bizrate.com/rd?t=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fdp%2FB002P8W4DQ%2Fref%3Dasc_df_B002P8W4DQ4966814%3Fsmid%3DATVPDKIKX0DER%26tag%3Dshopzilla0d-20%26ascsubtag%3Dshopzilla_rev_121-20%3BSZ_REDIRECT_ID%26linkCode%3Ddf0%26creative%3D395093%26creativeASIN%3DB002P8W4DQ&mid=184056&cat_id=22000200&atom=10681&prod_id=&oid=2083574839&pos=1&b_id=18&bid_type=4&bamt=8086a9d9f3c0e3ef&cobrand=1&ppr=5501e55eedd08d41&rf=af1&af_assettype_id=12&af_creative_id=2973&af_id=26865&af_placement_id=1&dv=a3453f86b352547acb7cf7920fa65382
34. http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&index=automotive&keywords=351c&linkCode=ur2
35. mailto:DeTomaso at server.detomasolist.com
36. http://server.detomasolist.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: oil gallery.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 127343 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://server.detomasolist.com/pipermail/detomaso/attachments/20170531/2342f9b1/attachment.jpg>
More information about the DeTomaso
mailing list