I've started working on the oil system on my Hemi.

Had an MP pan and windage tray.


Bought a Milodon 31580 oil pan and 32000 windage tray to replace it.

Noticed the Milodon windage tray was much closer to the reciprocating assembly which I didn't like. Also, they note in their catalog, #32005 tray was redesigned for better windage scavaging and increased sump protection for big inch inches.

Hmmm, seems odd as the 32000 is full length and 32005 closer resembles in shape of the MP tray.


So, I took the MP tray and added another set of louvers to the drivers side close to the block skirt. Seemed to me logical but my imagination may differ from reality.

Also seemed a flat plate over cross bolted main caps could restrict bay to bay breathing so I made a wooden buck and bumped out the tray over each main cap. Drilled for drainage. Same disclaimer as above.


Next, on to the pans. Wanted to see oil level vs volume. MP pan filled the sump at 4 quarts. 5 took it over.

Milodon pan -nearly- filled the sump at 5. 6 took it over.


Of course everyone says a certain amount of oil is up in the heads/etc in a running engine which brought me to my next thought, cylinder head oil drainback.

Drivers front drains into the timing chain area. The rest drain into the corners of the crankcase right on top of the crank. Strikes me as odd to a point as I would think the passenger side drains would be impeded by oil thrown off the recip.

So, I thought, why not run tubes through the windage tray up to the drain holes. Further thought made me realize that under acceleration more oil would be going to the rear drains......fine. But would it not be better to just drill/tap the heads for an external drain to the pan sump than let the rear drains dump into the back of an oil pan that has a center sump?

Not sure. Maybe it doesn't matter and I'm overthinking things.

When I built my motor I was told closer to assembly the better for windage. In fact I had to dent the tray in a few key areas to clear rod bolts, from a minor scrape. I also noticed the drainage was interesting on the pan, but I imagine slots in the wrong area can allow oil to be pulled up into the rotating assembly by the motion of the rotating assembly.

Here is a drain tube installation I have not seen before.
https://www.facebook.com/Dave-Dudek...tos/pcb.310291396569598/310290853236319/

Mark

Nice find! Yes that's what I was thinking of (though just integrating it into the windage tray)

I like the tubes but farther down into the pan, I want to radius the holes on the top, and run a fine wire down the hole to drain better. Maybe try drilling larger too.

Not sure im a fan of those two little bolts in there

Agree on being better off welding the tubes to the windage tray and an o-ring or interference fit into the block

I found this photo online a couple of years back. It looks like the same arrangement.

What a super idea! I wished that I had seen that tube when I put my current engine together. Keeping the return oil from falling directly onto the crank has got to have more than a few advantages. It's surprising to me that this has not gotten more attention before now.

If your going to that effort, you should be using a wiper vice windage tray no?

what does the head side of the block look like for those drain tubes ?
TIA [as always !]

The tubes just seem so low tech and effective. Something any of us could and should do to eliminate a substantial volume of oil from the crank.

Tubes vs windage trays vs scrapers. It would be interesting to see how difficult it would be to set each one up for success and how much impact each had.

I don't see one offered for Gen II or III Hemi's , and don't know if the Gen II would be close to the RB ones.
I actually went here just to see how they would look for a skirted block.
I think improving drain back from the heads is one issue being tackled and a scraper would not enhance that much........it would catch oil from the rotating assembly once it got there.
As an outsider looking in , I'd say that the link to what Dave Dudek is doing has to be on the right path.
He seems to know his way around the elephants.
Crank Scraper

Agreed on tubing it as shown, seems like the best way. I'll have to save this idea for a future build/refresh as I would have to knock it down to a bare block to do this now.

I bought a teflon crank scraper and needed a bit of clearancing to fit the cross bolted main caps but seems like overall would be the same as any other big block mopar. In the end decided not to use it and just went with the modified windage tray.

I build my own crankshaft scrapers and add 5/8 inch diameter drain back holes at each main web and at the back of the scraper in the front and rear passenger side corners to help drain back

I heard Dudek builder spent a lot of time on the scraper, with the dyno. Heard they even used Vaseline for the wheel bearings to set the record. Relube every pass.

I remember hearing of Pro Stock and other hard core NHRA racers using gear oil only on the front wheel bearings a long time ago
Not me though, I'm not that crazy, yet

Ceramic wheel bearings are the least drag, and no need for a seal. I run them and I can check balance by just having the tire off the ground. A quarter ounce off and the tire will roll to the bottom and rock back and forth a couple times lol. No resistance at all.

Here are some different wet pans I have. I was cleaning them so already had them out. The best one from the dyno results is the dan olsen. Just thought looking at what works might help your decision process.

Which aluminum oil pan is the Olsen?
I think I see a Charlies SS pan in the mix, true or not?