• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

Oil Pump Mods - Max Effort

Your o-ring solution seems a good one.
Your pipe is held in place with a bracket and metal stops with 2 thin (probably Viton?) o-rings that squish down into their grooves flush with a pipe that is constrained by the bracket and stops.
Threading/all metal probably isn't necessary for the life of the o-rings/between engine rebuilds.

One problem I've noticed is that all pipes fit a little different...tooling drift?
Can't be worse than being held in place by two rubber o-rings with a skinny pipe.
But might be a problem/not exactly one size fits all.

It was challenging to build the pipe to fit just right, I had to insert the fittings into the pump and block, then tack weld the pipe to the fittings to preserve alignment, then remove the pipe for finish welding. The close fit of the fittings don't leave much room for compliance... I bet the pipe would stay in fine without the bracket. In the future, I might try to add more clearance.

So the stock tubes tend to vary in fitment a bit? Wonder if it's the tube or the block/oil pump geometry that varies?
 
I keep a big box of tubes from fallen engines (somewhere if I can find it again). I've noticed slight variation in stock pipes but don't have a laboratory in my back pocket to take samples of a few hundred or thousand engines to determine how consistent their measurements are. Potential obstacle if one wished to manufacture a little run of these.
Most ~1990+ pipes from rear thrust b230s with the tall gear oil pumps don't seem to vary a whole lot, to the extent I can make out any pattern.
I had to use a different pipe a few times when swapping pumps into earlier motors, but again I'm not entirely sure if it's just pipes that vary slightly in tolerance and/or pump/engines too.
I also have just rooted through the pipes and found pipes that fit a little better than the one installed in the engine (likely) originally. :lol:

Agreed that your hand fitted pipe would probably stay in place fine without the bracket. But the bracket is a nice touch...why allow it to possibly vibrate or lack support in any direction? Or possibly allow that metal flange to vibrate against the thin cast aluminum of the pump unconstrained? In fact, maybe there should be no flange on the pump side? Without a proper brace (or maybe it's not an issue at all), I wonder if the metal flanges you have on that pipe resting against the pretty thin cast aluminum housing of the pump could potentially be an issue? One good thing about the pipe "floating" on the rubber o-rings on both ends is potential for cracking the oil pump around that boring into the thinly cast oil pump aluminum case is unlikely. Thoughts? Maybe the bracket could be "clamped" to the pipe, allowing the pipe to telescope, and allowing the end user/installer to avoid having to weld? Maybe If it could be offered with the brace and pipe and the end user/installer welds brace to pipe and stop washers themselves, but the basic pipe shape is already there with a couple small o-ring grooves in it, but allows for final setting depth to be determined by the installer to allow for slight variations in blocks/pumps? Or figure out where the variation is dimensionally exactly...if its just pipes, or pumps and/or blocks too?

I had problems with the ipd spring. And it didn't really seem to solve the one problem I wanted it to; consistent (especially hot) lower to mid RPM oil pressure.
I suspect your zero clearance late tall gear less flow restricted pump likely does: more efficient pumping at lower rpms, more consistent pressure and supply in all conditions all without reinventing or replacing the existing pump/sump or buying expensive parts or doing permanent alteration to a specific block/pump (this can in theory be bolted on and carried over to any SOHC red engine). Labor time and fab seems significant, however.

All the ipd spring seemed to do was increase the maximum pressure a little dangerously and make the pressure less consistent. Not really what I wanted. Didn't care for it. Make sure nothing is binding or scored or worn in a stock late pump and/or coat it as you did and leave the spring alone imo.

This is one little niggling problem area of a basically good simple SOHC red engine that always bothered me; 1 small kinked pipe floating around on two flimsy square edged o-rings with a small oil pickup and smooth sump oil can easily slide up the side of can ruin all the fun quickly in an unlucky moment. Or just cause premature wear to the pump and/or expensive engine parts due to the above slowly by running around on less than optimal hot low rpm pressure that the driver doesn't/can't easily notice the subtle signs of immediately.
 
Last edited:
-The Intake Scoop design is likely the least valuable item on my pump, it's the result of a bit of thinking and "mental simulation" on oil control in the pan. My observation is that the pickup location is crammed into the front, passenger side corner of the pan. I'm imagining it sucking that corner dry upon hard acceleration, so limiting the ability to pull from the corner and more from the center of the pan would be maybe a bit better, I have a few other designs to try in the future. Also, not sure if the pan can be removed in-car yet..

-The Pan will get a kick-out on the passenger's side to add about a quart or more capacity and put more oil around the pickup. Also adding another baffle and possibly a swinging door.
Every rear-sumped inline engine I've thrashed down a good road has had the oil light come on under hard braking, and never under hard acceleration, because under brakes you can pull 1G+ and under acceleration if you can approach 1G it's not for very long and the oil naturally falls into the rear of the sump no worries. The factory "top plate" arrangement is about as good as you can do, and the place to add volume is below that plate in every direction you can. I built an "ultimate wet sump" years ago, and it worked well. Might post a pic or three for you another day. No trap doors, though. Total waste of time IMO. Top plates are the winner. Just imagine a roasting tray of liquid and trying to contain it, the best job is done by a lid with a hole in the middle so only some of it "falls out" in any axis of load/tilt.

-Relief Spring, I'm probably bucking convention here, but I think the stock spring is fine for my application, I've tried to increase the efficiency of the pump and in turn produce slightly higher line pressures/volume at lower RPM, Why would I care about lower RPM efficiency? I think the load on the bearings is greater at lower RPM's under high-load acceleration, thus I want more pressure/flow, earlier. Plus, if the pump can do this while using less parasitic HP, all the better. Ultimately, the relief spring just limits the peak pressure in the system IMHO.
This is not your opinion, this is fact ;-) The only thing it can do is raise peak oil pressure if/when it's being reduced by relief action due to high RPM or low temperature. Good with boost in the former case, and bad with oil filter burst risk in the latter case. Me, I live somewhere temperate, never below 0C, and I plan some serious boost, so more pressure up there is welcome, for me.

-Dry sump system, $$$$. Way more than what I've spent on this overkill wet sump system. Remote wet-sump pump? Hmmm...
Dry sump servers a number of purposes, but chief among them is circuit use with high G-loads. Wet sumps, of any design, can never perform well in any reasonable packaging. They can perform well enough, if you're careful and do a good job, but they're still second best above 1G. If you're not abusing your car under brakes/through corners in a serious fashion, dry sumps are more or less a waste of time, too. +1 on not dry sumping a street car.
 
Very neat work mate, very neat.

Cranking up the oil pressure is not meant only for high end race cars. More pressure means for flow, thus better heat dissipation for the bearings.

Do you mind me asking where did you buy the wiseco pistons, and the exact reference please ? I can't find it. Thank you very much.
 
I used a high pressure Melling on a Chevy motor I put in a van once. It blew seals and was a disaster. A top drag race guy some years ago whose name I cannot recall, Pro-stock iirc, said he used 30 psi.
 
I used a high pressure Melling on a Chevy motor I put in a van once. It blew seals and was a disaster. A top drag race guy some years ago whose name I cannot recall, Pro-stock iirc, said he used 30 psi.


Jeeze.
You do know that on any purpose built drag motor that they have probably opened up main bearing clearence to .003 and rods to min .002 dontcha?

---and the industry standard for SBC and SBF which I've heard here and in distant furrin places applied to MANY motors is "10 psi per 1000 anticipated rom and 1 (another 10) to grow on."

And I don't know it helps anybody to just chat casually about stuff like that.."some guy said 30 psi" ...I mean is that a suggestion to TBers to run 30psi?
I doan git it
 
The factory "top plate" arrangement is about as good as you can do, and the place to add volume is below that plate in every direction you can.
Not all oil pans are created equal. Some years the "top plate" is just spot welded in a few places. Under high G's like a track car sees the oil runs out the sides between the top plate and the pan. We weld all of those up with a continuous bead or find the better year pans.
 
I just put the IPD spring in my M181.

Why?

For O rings, I either put a regular round O ring behind the factory square section to stop it blowing out when cold OR use a trio of regular O rings each end.

Why is there a big dent in the original pipe?

I like to put a radius into the bottom of driven slot too. Forget lockwire too, use Loctite.
 
---and the industry standard for SBC and SBF which I've heard here and in distant furrin places applied to MANY motors is "10 psi per 1000 anticipated rom and 1 (another 10) to grow on."

Industry standard? I read that rubbish along with Smokey Yunick's long rod bs back in the '80's .An SBC does not need 10psi/1000rpm & no amount of pressure will help a Clevo without some restrictors fitted in the right places.
 
Not all oil pans are created equal. Some years the "top plate" is just spot welded in a few places. Under high G's like a track car sees the oil runs out the sides between the top plate and the pan. We weld all of those up with a continuous bead or find the better year pans.
True in a sweeper! In a sweeper you have other issues, too, though. The top end of these engines only drains in right hand turns. In left hand turns it'll well up up there and you'll lose volume/surface level in the sump - this hurts. My head will be modified to assist in this area. The other issue to consider is that the top plate only provides oil control, as the pump is emptying the sump quite quickly and relying on refill through the hole to continue working. That's where lots of sub-plate capacity comes in - it gives you more time to empty and requires more latent oil in the head to cause an issue.

Which year sumps? The 94ish squirter I have has a close fit that fluid can leak through, but not quickly. The shape is more of an issue, though, with the cut out for the pump and pickup quite large. Building a good wet sump (approximating an hour glass) for one of these would not be easy due to exterior space constraints, but I intend to give it a shot :-)
 
True in a sweeper! In a sweeper you have other issues, too, though. The top end of these engines only drains in right hand turns. In left hand turns it'll well up up there and you'll lose volume/surface level in the sump - this hurts. My head will be modified to assist in this area. The other issue to consider is that the top plate only provides oil control, as the pump is emptying the sump quite quickly and relying on refill through the hole to continue working. That's where lots of sub-plate capacity comes in - it gives you more time to empty and requires more latent oil in the head to cause an issue.

Which year sumps? The 94ish squirter I have has a close fit that fluid can leak through, but not quickly. The shape is more of an issue, though, with the cut out for the pump and pickup quite large. Building a good wet sump (approximating an hour glass) for one of these would not be easy due to exterior space constraints, but I intend to give it a shot :-)
This is a cheap/quick/easy fix that we do to our street cars that will see occasional track time. I take a small chunk of 3" exhaust pipe, cut it in half, open it up a little to match/fit the oil pan, mark oil pan, cut hole in oil pan, weld in modified piece of pipe and cap both ends. Works great and keeps average mildly modified street cars with DOT rubber from starving for oil while in long left hand sweepers on a track.

newmotor018_zpsiyrierxj.jpg
 
Do you have a picture of the inside of the pan? What year engine did this pan come from. It looks like an old b20 pan.
 
This is a cheap/quick/easy fix that we do to our street cars that will see occasional track time. I take a small chunk of 3" exhaust pipe, cut it in half, open it up a little to match/fit the oil pan, mark oil pan, cut hole in oil pan, weld in modified piece of pipe and cap both ends. Works great and keeps average mildly modified street cars with DOT rubber from starving for oil while in long left hand sweepers on a track.

newmotor018_zpsiyrierxj.jpg

Hmm, I inadvertently made an extra hole on the right side of the oil control plate when I welded in my oil return for the turbo, I didn't look too close inside when I hole sawed the hole in the side of the pan and ended up being half way in the plate and had to cut out a notch on it. I'm sure it's not as effective as your mod but I feel better now about hammering it around the 270? sweeper at nccar
 
That can't be more than about an extra half quart/litre? Better than stock, but the issue with left hand sweepers cannot be solved by modifying the sump.

Here's my old first attempt at this, it has a full-length top plate with volume under it from front to back. The four wings take the volume up a full 2 litres, and the whole lot is spaced down 12mm for another litre, 7 litres all up. The top plate is fully welded and the only cut outs are dip stick and pick up tube of a minimal nature. Top plate height is important, and needs to be below high tide mark, approximately where low tide is at max RPM with a couple of litres of oil up around the rest of the engine. Any lower and you have less volume under control. Any higher and you have air under the plate and more slosh. This thing has worked well, though I've not really stress tested it to my own standards. Doing something like this on the Volvo is going to require more engineering and possibly a two-piece design for ease of removal.

100_3611.jpg
 
That can't be more than about an extra half quart/litre? Better than stock, but the issue with left hand sweepers cannot be solved by modifying the sump.

Here's my old first attempt at this, it has a full-length top plate with volume under it from front to back. The four wings take the volume up a full 2 litres, and the whole lot is spaced down 12mm for another litre, 7 litres all up. The top plate is fully welded and the only cut outs are dip stick and pick up tube of a minimal nature. Top plate height is important, and needs to be below high tide mark, approximately where low tide is at max RPM with a couple of litres of oil up around the rest of the engine. Any lower and you have less volume under control. Any higher and you have air under the plate and more slosh. This thing has worked well, though I've not really stress tested it to my own standards. Doing something like this on the Volvo is going to require more engineering and possibly a two-piece design for ease of removal.

100_3611.jpg

My solution is not about volume. I was trying to cure a problem with the oil light coming on (low oil pressure due to starvation) through sustained left hand high G turns. Once we figured out that it was oil creeping up the side of the block, this solved it. That was backed up with actual track testing at PIR.

Are there better ways to do it with more volume? Sure, but fitting even a Gp A style oil pan in a 240 is a pain in the ass. This drops right in with no problems or clearance issues and it does the job for most mild applications. If you are really serious about tracking (racing) a redblock, you should just dry sump. It's expensive, but so are cranks, rods and pistons after you burn them up.

That oil pan you posted isn't even a reblock oil pan.

And just in case anyone is intending on copying what I did, the bottom and sides are flush with the hole made and the top overhangs about 1/4" to create a natural oil shield of sorts. It's also all just below the original top plate.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I know it's not Volvo. It's the sump that I mentioned in an earlier post and said I'd upload a picture of and it's close to optimal as far as wet sumps go. As you say, and I'd already said, no wet sump is suitable for serious track use, but a sump like the above with lots of volume below a full top plate is as good as it gets. And good enough for most, if other things are taken care of. The engine it's from has the opposite problem to a redblock engine, right hand sweepers. I'm yet to modify that head, but when I do I'll post a thread specifically on oil control and cover it with a few example engines.

As for high-G left handers, the cure is to add drainage to the head on the right hand side so the ~2 litres of oil that get trapped up there can return to the sump and contribute to lubrication instead of flooding everything in site and potentially exiting through breathers (if any). I'm glad the tube oil control method helped, but you/they still had a LOT of oil in the top end that wasn't available for the pump to draw on.
 
I spent some time measuring my block this evening and although it can't hurt, I have my doubts about the benefit of opening up the feed tube to 13mm ID (matching pump and block) from 11mm ID. Why? Because the gallery from the pump entry to the block and the filter is a mere 10.0mm, and to improve this you'd need to bore it out from the bell housing end. Not a minor job, for sure. Is this in the plans? Or just a case of "may as well make it better while fixing the clearance issue"?
 
I spent some time measuring my block this evening and although it can't hurt, I have my doubts about the benefit of opening up the feed tube to 13mm ID (matching pump and block) from 11mm ID. Why? Because the gallery from the pump entry to the block and the filter is a mere 10.0mm, and to improve this you'd need to bore it out from the bell housing end. Not a minor job, for sure. Is this in the plans? Or just a case of "may as well make it better while fixing the clearance issue"?

Well, I guess I'll find out if it makes a difference....
And yes, a lot of this is "eh, might as well while I'm in there".
I'm no Fluid Dynamics Phd, but in my experience it does help to improve some areas of a system, even if they aren't the biggest restriction.
 
Back
Top