[gtofreek]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

I would NOT install a windage tray if you have a good baffled oil pan, it is not needed.

We quit using them quite a few years ago here, had a couple crack and give troubles.

We do use good oil pans, usually Morroso or Canton, and zero issues with them in any application, even drag racing just about every weekend with our street cars.

I don't use or recommend ARP studs either with factory main caps. The stock bolts are better as they have a shoulder to help align the caps and keep them from moving around.

If you do use a windage tray, especially the aftermarket ones, plan on doing some custom shimming and fitting to get them to clear the crank, and any aftermarket oil pan that you purchase......Cliff

Not sure how you figure this. I have measured the stock bolts against ARP studs and the studs are bigger diameter, and hold the caps better than stock bolts do. That shoulder you are talking about on the stock bolt is around .492" IIRC. The ARP stud is .498"-.500", for it's entire length, not just 1/2" at the top. I'm sorry, but the ARP stud is a much better fit in the main cap, and holds it much tighter. I use the studs on any HP build.

[Garry Sr]

I like the looks of those crank scrapers but it seems like it could cause an issue with the pan sealing in the front & rear. No like oil leaks, not to mention I think it's over-kill for a street engine.

[lust4speed]

I've read that Pontiac used a baffled pan with no windage tray in their 73/74 SD engines, while continuing to use the old plain pan with the tray in the standard 455. Pretty interesting if true since the SD was so well thought out.

[chrisp]

Crank scraper technology is OEM equipment on various modern engines from Nissan, BMW, Chrysler, Ford, Mazda, Honda, Toyota, VW, Porsche, GM, Pontiac, Chevrolet, Mitsubishi, Mercedes and many other manufacturers.

[Cliff R]

"Not sure how you figure this. I have measured the stock bolts against ARP studs and the studs are bigger diameter, and hold the caps better than stock bolts do. That shoulder you are talking about on the stock bolt is around .492" IIRC"

Your response prompted me to go open up the shop and measure the bolts on the two engines we are currently assembling. Your dimensions are correct for the outer short bolts (4 bolt main caps), however, the longer bolts are measure .499-.500" and the rears are .562 to .5625.

As it relates to this topic, nothing at all wrong with ARP studs. They can/will produce clearance issues with windage trays and such, and not worth the additional expense as main bolts are not a problem area with these engines right to start with.

Years back we did a 455 for a customer, pushed the power level up from around 450hp to over 600hp. We used ARP studs for the build. It did fine then a few years later and hundreds of runs (drag race only) we kicked the power level up to over 660hp. The engine ran fine, but when pulled down for inspection and freshening up a couple seasons later we had a couple of main cap dowel pins in the oil pan, and main bearings were really taking a beating. Bottom line is that adding APR studs doesn't help that situation, they still allow the mains to move around at big power levels.

We lost that engine after the last rebuild, the owner insisted on a cam that was WAY too aggressive and knocked the lifter bores out of it on the 17th run (had a lifter bore brace in it) taking the entire engine with it. About all we salvaged were the intake, valve covers and a few pushrods. Had to have the heads welded up to save those (340cfm E-heads).

Next effort was to move up to an aftermarket block to handle that kind of power, and it does with zero problems in any area. The car is a "street" car but mostly drag raced, runs 9.90's over 135mph without a lot of "bling", just one of our TH350's, tight 10" converter, and 12 bolt with 3.73 gears.......Cliff

[Skip Fix]

Studs I have in the garage are .493 on the threads, ARP bolts under head .499, stock bolts .495-.498. Not sure how variable or the size of stock cap holes.

[Tim Corcoran]

HWYSTR455,

I don't know what happed to your windage tray but this is the first time I have ever heard of anyone have a problem with the Tomahawk Windage tray.

Pete McCarthy was a big time Pontiac Super Stock racer. Back in the days before there were after market windage trays for Pontiac, on his race cars he used the factory OEM windage trays and drilled several holes in them for faster oil drain back. This was one of his secrets he used to have one up on the competition. This is the reason the Tomahawk windage tray was made with the additional drain back holes.

[HWYSTR455]

I've ran countless engines and have never had a problem with a tray until this one, so I'm writing it off as an anomaly. Like I said, I'm fairly certain it was due to the lower tube being loaded against the tray and vibrations, next time I will make sure that isn't the case.

I will always use a tray, been back and forth on it and done homework on a number of occasions, and even though many don't run them or say you don't need to, I still feel the benefits are enough to take any potential risks.

Also fairly certain that this situation had nothing to do with the tray. I know some don't believe me, but swear this engine saw 8k+ RPM on numerous occasions, I beat on it. Sure that was a factor.

.

[Cliff R]

I put a windage tray in my current engine (69 390HP 428 block with a 455 crank), took some time to "fit" it, and like a dummy I didn't check it on the engine stand for oil level, etc.

For some reason it wipes the stick clean when extracted, and difficult, actually nearly impossible to get a good reading. When it comes out for inspection and freshening up, the windage tray is NOT going back on it......Cliff