Crank Scraper ????

DannyG

Well-known member
Supporter 2018
Supporter 2021
Hey Guys,
I've been in touch with Kevin from www.crank-scrapers.com , and asked if he could build a scraper for our 200's. He said he would consider it, but he'd need an engine to build it off of.
He's located in Florida, anyone have any leads for a hopefully free or very low cost engine ( doesn't have to run , nor have a head )? His PO box is in the Land O Lakes region, I'd assume he's close to that location.
Let's keep an eye out !
Thanks,
DannyG

I'll also cross post this in the "wanted section" so it gets more traction.
 
It's like a windage try, mounted near the crankshaft , actually close enough that when the crank swings past, the excess motor oil that is hanging on it gets wiped off.
Keeps more oil in the crankcase where the oil pump needs it. This version mounts on the block, in between the oil pan and the block.
DannyG
 
Are you using it on the street or race? Crank scrapers are great for racing but can be a problem for street use if they are too efficient. Many rotating components that don't get pressurized oiling rely on splash oiling to survive, and drying up that splash oiling dries up the oil supply to those parts, especially at lower street RPM's.
 
That is an interesting point as my car will be 99.99% street driving.
Would it keep more oil in the sump, while oil still runs down from the head ?
 
Not really, a windage tray would be a good street add-on part though. Unless you have a high volume oil pump, you wont have to worry about pumping too much oil out of the pan. Also, if the engine is apart, its always a good idea to enlarge the oil drain back holes in the head and block to speed up the oil draining back to the pan.
 
Home made baffled pan with scraper. DO NOT USE A HIGH VOLUME PUMP cause of distributor gear failure.
iAIMiEi.jpg
 
/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=72474
xctasy":3uq0ykn1 said:
wsa111":3uq0ykn1 said:
Here is a home made street pan with baffles & a crankshaft scraper.
You need as Bubba said an oil pan with some of the above plus side extensions for extra capacity & control of oil on corners.
Speedway Motors has some nice side extensions that just need to be welded on.
You should see if you can find one of the Aussi pans Mike imported about 5 years ago. He no longer offers them.
BaffledOilPan_zps65169412.jpg


Nice sump.


I liked Peugoet Bills too



Since all Holden Red/Blue and Black L6 engines from 1963 to 1985 and all Ford Falcon I6 engines run the same 4.08" bore spacing, and the Holden ran a bigger 2.25" stroke crank with 12 counterweights as apposed to Fords 4, 10 or 12 counterweight item depending on year, interchanability is pretty close.

Fords I6 cranks were always designed to reduce metal use, but eventually, Ford found that the superior 12 counterweight smooth running EF crank from 1993 to 1998 was better off replaced with a bigger 2.65" main bearing 10 counterwieght crank for the EFII/AU and BA/BF/FG's.

Old holdens with the Canadian forged 179 HP and 149 cranks were good at pulling the vibrations out at high revs, and helped logivity.

A Fox body isolates a lot of NVH, so you won't realise how rough a stock 3m cast iron 3.3 crankl is.

After the 186 engines, Holden downagraded to a cast iron crank for the 202/3.3 L6, but in high performance Holdens since the 1973 Bathurst winning LC XU1 GTR have run a custom steel crank, and in 1980, they added 12 counterweights to the old cast iron crank, and got an amazing improvment inrev range and smoothness. That crank also made more oil windage, but the sump on the Commodore was upgraded to improve oil flow before the better crank was productionized. So a crank scaper and crank/sump pacakge is an art of compromise.

The 1980-1984 2850 cc 173 ran the previous crank, and it was a very harsh engine with its 4 counterweight cast iron crank, despite a short stroke, so Holden proved the worth of the 12 counterweight crank.


If you get enough people together, you can get a steel crank made for any Ford of Holden, in any counterweighting configuration, and that takes a lot of the harshenss of two of the old cast iron crank 202 engines prounounced 4200 and 5300 rpm Holden harmonic periods out of the engine, moving it up to an rpm point where your not running into it.

semifinished_crank.jpg


Back to those sumps.

A factory copy of the auxillary sump on the 4.0 Ford Territory or any 2003 to data Falcon Bara 183/195/240/270/315 DOHC engine employs a sump baffle and scraper.

http://www.gmh-torana.com.au/forums/top ... -dyno-202/

The Aussie guys are racing there XU1 GTR red, blue and balck L6's to 8000 rpm without dry sumping.

They run the 4.0 liter DOHC BA Falcon Bara 183 sump splashgard in some cases.


4.0 liter DOHC BA Falcon Bara 183 sump splashgard In big form....


null-3.jpg


null-4.jpg


null-2.jpg
 
So in the quest for "cool things" on my upcoming build, do you guys think the scraper would be detrimental to a street driven car ?
DannyG
 
Never. It

1. reduces oil temperature,
2. improves oil circulation.

Closer you can make it the better. Mick Webb did his AUSCAR sunps at less than 60 thou clearnace, pactically a spark risk if nudged in a shunt, but it removed the need to go to an oil cooler. As he said, an oil cooler is a problem hiding a problem.


Oh, Mick Webb built the Ford Special Vehicles 1971 v8's, a factory 351c with 350 hp net engine horsepower at the flywheel with all engine ancilaries, including muffled Tri Y header exhast with dual pipes and mufflers. ...250 Quality Control engines were made like that, his was the best.


Its a Crocodile Dundee thing...

You call this a Crank Scaper...

windage2.jpg



Ya call that a sump?


This is a sump!

SUMPPH4.jpg



Best test of it was done by Ford Australia in 1970 to 1972. First, they had two persex plates, one in the floor well, and then another in the sump...and first a guy in the foot well looking at the sump, then som Super 8 camera footage, and almost died when they found the oil pickup was never fully imersed, and even through the oil gage was never below spec, the engine was sucking air something like 35 seconds a 2.25 minute lap. That's when they re-did the sump design. The best was this

image004.jpg


e0d0b58ddf0e1bf6f5d0c2f3f0ba8bb6.jpg


351c_winged_sump.jpg


getimage.aspx


the Phase IV sump with Briggs and Stratton 3.5 hp 158 cc engine fuel tanks as left and right wings, a homologated option.


were of the same shape, dimensions & therefore the same capacity, i.e. 5 quarts (see note below). The Boss 351, HO & Cobra Jet oil pans were baffled, the others weren't. But the Boss 351 dip stick was calibrated for an extra quart. The Boss 351 had a six quart dip stick with the standard 5 quart pan. Ford engineers obviously believed adding an extra quart was OK.

There was an exception, one 351C oil pan had a different shape and held more than 5 quarts. Ford of Australia installed a widened sump oil pan on the Australian Falcon XA Phase 4.

Ford put baffels in for 1970 for the first 500, and then for 1971, a windage tray (crank scrapers, esetially) in the next 500 US import M code 300 hp 4V HO 351C engines down here so they would cope with racing like this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUu5gjyYmMQ

Height above Sea Level = 2828 ft,
with a total rise of 640 feet per lap,
steepest grade = 1 in 6.13, or 16.3%
150 mph down Conrod in basically a mildly modified March I Mustang V8,

which isn't like San Francisco's steepest streets, which are Bradford above Tompkins (41%), Broderick Street between Broadway and Vallejo (a sidewalk-only area) which is a full 38% grade


but pretty darned steep anway....

3.811 miles per lap for 131 or 163 laps (500 miles, then 621 miles).

V8 Lap Record : 2.06.89 mins Kiwi Gregg Murphy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAkcR561Sno
 
Was thinking about this today. Curious to see if there's been any further follow-up with the manufacturer. :beer:
 
I haven't heard from Kevin ( Crank-Scrapers.com) in a long while.
He was recovering from a surgery and this got put on the back burner.
My engine is almost finished , so it looks like I won't be taking the pan off to add this when it's finally ready..
DannyG
 
They also require special or longer main bolts or studs made for windage trays, and this often introduces an expense component to a rebuild that people often overlook and don't expect until they are trying to figure out how to install it.
 
Most windage trays aren't that wide and bolt to the main caps. I guess it depends on who designed or makes them.
 
Back
Top