SB WINDAGE TRAYS

Haven't found any evidence other than commentary on the subject. Factory windage trays loose power? Aftermarket windage trays loose power(not including crank scraper)? Any hard evidence, something like a real design, where the tray does its job and makes power? No" dry sump" as the solutions please.

I use to race NHRA stock in Division 7, there was a lot of record holding SB Mopar racers racing back then, none of them ran a windage tray, stock or after market
All of them had crank scrapers and added weld in baffles in the stock oil pans
I use to help one of them, he ended setting the record in several different classes during his racing career with 340 motors, he did do a lot of testing both at the track and on a engine dyno
He tested several different windage trays and didn't race with one ever that I know of
Crankshaft scrapers with between .030 and .060 clearances are worth running

Don't know if this is the same on a S/B but on my RB if we didn't run a windage tray we would lose some oil pressure (20 psi) in the shut down.

Who manufactures and sells small block crank scrapers?

- EM

https://crank-scrapers.com/

How much oil did he run? My guess is a lot less than most folks here would be comfortable with. Thanks!

I gave up using them years ago.

All the guys I knew back then ran 4 quarts in a 4 quart stock oil pan
the one I helped eventually went to a oil pan off of a Cordoba that was a little deeper, he added a half of a quart also at that time. Adding the anti slosh baffles, front and rear, really helped on keeping the oil pressure steady at both ends of the track

I have run windage trays on my small blocks and found no big differences. But for the low RPM cop cars the tests were positive. My LRT had one. On the 5.2L or 5.9L Dakota oil pans, 4 qt, there is no room as the pans are shallower, closer to the crank. I don't think you could, or should, run a stock Dak/Durango pan on a 4" or 4.125" stroker crank.

I bought the $110 Crank Scraper kit from Ishihara Johnson (crank-scrapers.com) for my 4 inch stroker 5.9 410. It is a bear to fit. You must fit it to the crank and block. The oil pan bolt holes are undersize. The stand offs for the main caps do not line up. The dip stick hole is way off. Then you must seal it to the block and pan as it is thick and will leave a gap at the front timing cover and rear main cap.

The easiest scraper is one welded inside the pan. No extra gasket + RTV thickness needed.

Done as a downward angle on the cranks upward swing it will grab the loose mass of oil clinging to the crank. Here are two pictures of a Hamburger and Canton Chevy pans as an example.

You could do the 0.030' to 0.060' fitting to this side scraper too.

I bought the IJ scraper but I bought the Teflon scraper. I didn't have near that much fitting on mine.

I also think that a running clearance of near zero is better than the .030-.060 you need with just a steel scraper.

I wouldn't spend money on a scraper.

I would make a pattern on an assembled engine and fab one up. With all the different parts combinations, how could they begin to make one and hope to have it be close.

This is kind of my point above. Lots of work making it right and even then it is still not right. I'd need to weld it up in places and add some steel to other places.

I will put clay in the bottom of my Milodon truck rear sump pan and then carve out a side scraper that fits 0.030" - 0.060" to my 4" throws and weld it to the pans side. I will also be adding baffels to that pan.

And I am running a 5/8" pipe direct pump pickup like below. That stock 5.2 3/8" pump pickup gets a 3/8 pipe plug in the oil pump hole..

I will run 6 quarts in that 8 qt pan but cut the dipstick tube to fit.

Why are you running 2 pick up points

Just a side by side compare.

The factory one will be removed and a pipe plug screwed in the pump. The new pump cover type pickup has a 0.625 inch ID tube.

I run just a scraper now days.. use to run a windage tray but I had to open up all the slots so it would work..
now I just run a bigger pan with the scraper.. no problems at 8200+ rpm and keep the oil level lower

So, to the OP, it seems that those that have been doing this for years do not think it has value. I too agree that in my low level bracket/grudge racing I have not seen any improvements just by adding a tray. Never did any Dyno testing on small blocks back in my racing/hot rod days.

In the tests by the Mopar test group back in the days I seem to remember they were getting some HP gains but everyone was only reving their engines to 6,000 or so back then.

E-58 small block cop car engine would only rev to 5,500 in most cases, first gear was locked out with a bracket.

So, as posted above, a better course would be a deeper sump with the same amount of oil down lower in the sump, proper baffels and a scraper of some sort.

Same reason for someone to run a dual line on a big block. I've fabed systems and ran them. Not hard to do. Worked well

Myself I wouldnt waste my time with dual inlets.. a 1/2" inlet is more than you need so why carry the extra
weight and pluming.. just more possible leaks

Edited my last post above. 1 single pickup, the bolt on pump cover one.

Tests I read said that this pump "Cover Type" pickup with a standard volume pump will flow more oil than a stock pickup with a Melling high volume pump.
The stock pickup is a huge bottle neck. I have seen some that are thick tube outside but small inside diameter. The biggest inside diameter ones I have seen are 1/2 inch inside until 1 inch from the pump and then necked down to that 3/8s pipe screw in.

Myself during testing I found that the 3/8 pipe will handle rpm up to and more than 8700 rpm... I normally
build my own pick up to fit my pans(all are custom pan).. the pan I run now will hold 10 qts plus the
filter and lines.. but I dont run that much oil in it.. but your 1/2 pick line looks good.. where did you get
it at with the cover

The one pictured is a Kevko M307. It says for a 9" pan but will be about 7/8 inch off the bottom of my truck pan. I have a old oil pump that had a flat 1/4 inch plate so I drilled a 5/8's inch hole in the exact place as the M307 and MIG welded my bent tube to the cover. I then modified an old pickup strainer for the pipe. Don't have a picture of the final one yet. Son stole my MIG for the week.

EDIT: Pictures below.

I'll have to build one of those for one of my engines

I'm curious about the bent pick up. I have an old MP cover, and it has the bottom inlet. My thought was just a straight drop and pull the oil from the top of the screen. Is there an advantage to either arrangement?

You're trying to fill and pressurize a 1/2'" diameter passage, which feeds all of the oil leaks in the engine and needs to be kept full and under pressure. The pump has to draw oil through whatever plumbing you're using to feed it and accomplish that. Anything you do to relieve the restriction on the inlet side of the pump will help it to do it's job.

As the pump turns it opens an internal space between the rotors that creates a vacuum. The vacuum creates a suction to draw oil in through the inlet(s). Reducing the restriction to the fluid getting to the cavity improves the efficiency of the pump and helps avoid cavitation.

The original configuration is designed to adequately supply the pump requirements at normal RPM levels. Double - or even approach triple - the speed of the pump while using original sized inlet plumbing creates multiple issues.

Anything you do to reduce that restriction to the fluid being drawn into the vacuum created between the rotors, including allowing that fluid to enter both sides of the open space, will help make the pump work more efficiently and without cavitation.

Hummmm. Hummmm, (Thinking) Dual stock size 3/8's inch pipe should be more than enough. Hummmm.


I am coming straight out and down with a slight S bend to a modified stock screen. I am a retired low volt electrician so I have bent 1,000 of sticks of EMT. I put a standard S bend in the pipe that is for a wall switch box with my hand 1/2 inch bender. The S bend goes forward and down so it fits the Milodon 10 1/2 inch sump.

Gotcha. I thought the small rectangle was the one you were running.

I hope you are going to put a screen on that pickup.

I still may but to fit the Milodon deep sump I'd need to cut the pipe and weld about 2 inches in. I can do that if I get my TIG working. For some reason it will not start an arc.

Yep.. all of mine have it

Second picture of the pickup is how I will screen it.

Also, pictures show Windage tray. I have cut up that one to fit the 4 inch stroker crank. Stock trays have a curled lip and my pan pushes the tray into the crank. I am going to remove it and just baffel my pan better. I may weld in 8 1/4 inch nuts and then put a 2mm size stainless steel screen down in the bottom so any oil that gets slung off will drip thru and not get picked up again.


To the OP, we hijacked your thread. Sorry.

Here's my tray / scraper combo

If I had some louver dies I'd modify a tray too. Best I could do is Plasma cut the slots and hammer the shapes.

Do you have any A,B,A test results on using it compare to no tray at the track or on a engine or chassis dyno?
The reason I'm asking is I was told way back when (before 1988) by one of the fastest NHRA Stock SB Class racers in the country that the stock type windage tray costs power, he thought due to it making the oil bounce back up into the oil cloud surrounding the rotating assembly and not allowing the oil to drain back into the pan, especially above 3500 RPM

No, I just thought it would be a good thing to do, I decided if it was capable of peeling some oil off the crank etc. it would be a good thing to do. Once it is bolted onto an assembled engine the vents can be fitted [ bent] very close to each set of rods, and it's got no choice other than scraping excess oil back int the pan.

Trying to compare with wet sump applications with the nascar guys. Only pic I found was for a chevy and there was a screen, looks like a security screen found on industrial windows. Didn't Andy F have some old nascars in his fleet?