360 windage tray

-
63dartman

63dartman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
2,230
Reaction score
24
Location
rio rancho, nm
I know there was a thread posted about why not to use a windage tray on a 360 block but, I could not find it. I just removed mine and do not plan on putting it back based off the info of the post. I just need to find it so I know what the hell it said, I know it explained why not to use it.
 
I think that is ill advice and wouldn't follow it unless it was shown to me on a dyno as a power robber, power looser.

The thinking was the extra 360 stroke causes a problem being the tray was designed for the 340's smaller stroke.

3.58 - 3.31 = .027 difference in stroke. Half of which is on ethier end.
.027 / 2 = .0135 less room when this 360 crank spins inside the engine.

Do you think this is a problem and a power robber? I don't by it. No way, no how in any way shape and form. Sorry, I just can't see it. I just don't by it.

If anybody wants to argue, show me your dyno run slips and video.
Otherwise, please re-read the above parragraphs again.
 
Hey Rumblefish -
I agree with you, but you missed the decimal point placement in your math. The difference in stroke is 0.270" total; 0.270"/2 = 0.135" - just over 1/8". But I agree, I've never seen a windage tray prove to rob power. I'd just make sure there's sufficient clearance by spinning the engine over on an engine stand with the oil pan off and trim the tray if necessary.
 
It was also exressed to me by other race buffs. I left it out on the most recent effort. A well executed pan will do the same, I'm sure. The big thing is getting distance from your source ie sump. This winter I'm installing a crank scraper. Since I have a benchmark, we'll see if it improves the numbers.
 
My 78 was from a police Volare plain-Jane car, and when I pulled it apart it already had the windage tray, apparently from the factory. E58 code engine I believe. Anyway, it's been working trouble free for the past 20 years I've had it, and supposedly worked fine in the cruiser until someone drove the back bumper almost up to the windage tray. :)
 
if you have the 4 different main cap bolts that are required then use it & if you don't have enough clearance then use flat washer(s) to space the tray further away from the crank not the flat washers under the main cap bolt heads(Which you shouldn't use anyhow because you need all the main cap bolt thread engagement that you can) but flat washers between the windage attaching screws & main cap bolts & use longer screws if the washers take up too much thread depth.
 
Rumble, thanks for the advice and backing it up with numbers. I know what the tray was designed to do. My only concern is not getting enough oil to the cylinder walls. I am correct in assuming that the oil splashes up into the cylinders to aid lubrication right? I should read up on the oiling sequence in my engine first. Anyone got any good links for the oiling in a smallblock?
 
ocdart said:
Hey Rumblefish -
I agree with you, but you missed the decimal point placement in your math. The difference in stroke is 0.270" total; 0.270"/2 = 0.135" - just over 1/8".
Click to expand...

HOLY Moly! Thank you!!!!!!!! What was I thinking...or not as the case may be..... Great, can't spell, half blind while doing math....it makes me wonder who I do what I do...he he he.
Thanks.

Rapid Robert, as long as it's all stock, I can't see an issue. I have not been there and done that on a stroker, so he who has been there can comment on it and I wouldn't mind seeing one on it.


63dartman
Rumble, thanks for the advice and backing it up with numbers. I know what the tray was designed to do.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I tend to speak/type as if the poster hasn't been there and such. It makes more sense to the reader that hasn't been there done that. No insult ment, I know you know.
Sometimes, restating it is not only for a newbie bennifit, but also to sure up and make the position or thought process clear and known.


My only concern is not getting enough oil to the cylinder walls. I am correct in assuming that the oil splashes up into the cylinders to aid lubrication right?
Click to expand...
Oil may splash up, but it has to make it's way past the crank. Some of it hitting the crank and slowing it down. Thus the tray for power...(OK, No DUH!)
Oil for the walls comes from the crank as it passes past the bearings and get flung onto the walls. Oil from the lifter galley also hits the crank to get splashed back up.

No oiling mods are needed for most builds. High RPM is more trouble thank stroke will ever be on oiling.
 
This is the first I've heard of this. I installed a Milodon on my Magnum 408, it came with studs and spacers. I did a little bending here and there, spun the engine over on the stand and checked clearance. I thought the windage tray was a bonus, am I missing something?
 
From post #2,
The thinking was the extra 360 stroke causes a problem being the tray was designed for the 340's smaller stroke.
Click to expand...
\And it is a bounus.
 
I agree with Len, if you have a deep sump pan and you run the oil down in the sump the crank won't windage up the oil so a windage tray would not be needed. There main purpose or use is to keep from picking up oil from a stock sump were the oil if very close to the crank.

The theory is that if you use a 340 windage tray on a 360 is that the oil that is sitting on the tray gets kicked up because of the reduced clearance because the increase in stroke. I have not seen proof of this on a dyno though.


Chuck
 
Oh yes! A race deep pan keeps oil away. I have seen dyno tests and spoken with old time racers on that.
 
man you guys are good....as this is just a street car and not a high rpm engine I will probably just leave it off and call it a weight savings(about 2 pounds):)
 
Lenweiler, If this was not a mopar site I would wince with pain when you mention crank scraper..........brings back memories of my long lost buck tooth girlfreind:)
 
Here are two pix of a 340 tray on a 4" stroker... ok... so it is tight... but the only real issue was the 4 bolt caps....

Kory

Tray on Engine Try 1c (Small).jpg


Tray on Engine Try 1d (Small).jpg
 
Ok I've read this thread a couple times and thought I would put my two cents in. I'm not an oil control expert so take it for what its worth.

From what I understand the windage tray is not a baffle or a place for the oil to just sit around. The purpose is to keep the oil in the sump from getting hit with oil droplets off the crank that are going 100+++mph. When oil droplets from the crank get flung at the oil in the sump it creates a splash sending more oil into the rotating crank which causes drag. Also by the same effect when the oil gets flung into the sump it traps air in the oil in the sump. Air is not a lubricant. As far as I know this is the reason so many people(and factory) use it. The oil from the crank hits the tray then drips back into the sump not creating the bad effect. The hp only comes from the reduced drag on the crank from less oil splash.

As for the difference in 340 to 360 trays....the bolts holes are a different length apart and you may have to bent it in some places to clear the long stroke.
 
koryliss said:
Here are two pix of a 340 tray on a 4" stroker... ok... so it is tight... but the only real issue was the 4 bolt caps....

Kory
Click to expand...

I want to run a tray on my 408 stroker. All the aftermarket ones are non clearance. Where did you get that one?
 
I'd always run a windage tray unless I had a high dollar, deeeeeeep oil pan. It also keeps the wind from the Crank from pushing the oil in the oil pan. Chrysler put them in every high performance engine they made. Supposedly 15 HP gain.
 
I'm a believer in windage trays....just my 2 cents.

I realize my 2 cents may not mean much....LOL
 
A post on using the MP tray on a 360 with 4” stoke and oem rods:
12many said:
Just thought I'd mention that if one intends on using the MP windage tray there will be some shimming and cutting required in order to clear the rods after the pan is installed. The tray kit comes with the studs, bolts and 8 washers, you double up the washers so the tray mounts a little further down to clear the rods bolt/nuts likely for stroker applications. That works fine until you install the pan. The windage tray has rolled edges that curl outward so when you push the pan home the tray is squeezed, reducing clearance. I had a few rods that hit the tray so I ended up cutting the rolled edges off. When the pan is installed the tray still is squeezed and sits tight to the pan sides, but there is ample clearance for the rods. This issue "may" only apply to the Blueprint stroker as they use the cast Scat 4" (iirc) crank with oem magnum rods w/arp bolts. Something to definitely consider if thinking about the MP windage tray.
Click to expand...
Note, when the pan is installed the edges of the windage tray (cut down, as shown in picture) fit close to the sides of the oil pan, so ignore the gap as shown between the tray edge and block.
E89CCF0B-B715-49E8-8658-B6A6AC947B48.png


AD143C9C-6C5B-4A8A-AA8B-AF4587DF7EFA.png
The picture above shows how the un-modified tray mounts, the curled ends extend outward onto the block oil pan rails. Note how close the rods are to the tray, and if the pan were installed with the tray “as is” the tray will compress inward and the rods will then contact it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top