GMCforum
For enthusiast of the Classic GMC Motorhome built from 1973 to 1978. A web-based mirror of the GMCnet mailing list.
Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » Oil galley plug
Re: [GMCnet] Oil galley plug [message #237249 is a reply to message #237242] Fri, 24 January 2014 06:48 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Jim Bounds is currently offline  Jim Bounds   United States
Messages: 842
Registered: January 2004
Karma:
Senior Member
Brother, after building in to 200's of these Olds motors, it's been a struggle to pick the performance stuff that fits our needs.  I use an renound Olds builder Drew Koba to assemble our motors, he harps hard about this.  To be honest though, there are so many performance things these tech gurus do that mean absolutely nothing to our motors.  In a very real way, it is more difficult to create torque at low RPM that revving up the motor and doing it there.  HP means less while low RPM torque is king.  The "gliptol" they paint the inside of the motor with is useless for our motors.  We are never going to run our oil pans out of oil running under 3000 RPM on a constant basis.  Revving up to 7K to get a hole shot may do that but who is doing that!  The oil hole again is for those high rev situations to pee a little oil on the dist gear, it's not really a problem at 3000 RPM.  We do not do that hole on ours.  Oil restrictors in the cam galley to
keep oil on the crank is also not really a deal breaker, we're not starving the oiling system!  We don't use restrictors anymore, we just cut a smaller hole in the cam bearings.A performance builder wants compression to get hp and torque, a real motor designed for low RPM torque wants low compression so you won't melt your charge card on fuel, we do it with our roller cam profile.  This is backwards from what a performance Olds or Chevy guy wants to do.  I want good vacuum at idle, not sucking so low at idle you can't use your brakes!  I want all new hardened exh. seats to combat the new ethanol fuel making exh. gasses hotter.  I want an adjustible valve train because of redecked blocks and heads, new valve seats and all that.  God knows where the geometry is on these old war horses today.  I do not do the rubber Ford rear main seal-- if it goes out it's all on me!  If you cherish and run your coach, the rope seal conditions and works great.  I
do use a hi volume oil pump but also a big diameter pick up tube and screen filter.  No need to have a HV pump if you don;t give it oil volume input. 
 
See, there is so much more than just picking this or that and letting a performance guy tell you what to do.  If you are cruising above 3000 RPM in a 12,000 pound projectile, brother you are driving way too fast.  Build the motor for the application we need, it will be a motor that can handle it, cut 1 corner and you are screwed.  Low RPM, grunt torque is a killer of motors...
 
Jim Bounds
------------------------



On Friday, January 24, 2014 1:13 AM, Bill Dolinsky <Wildbillnick@yahoo.com> wrote:



James Hupy wrote on Thu, 23 January 2014 22:33
> Bill, Yes Olds did. The problem that Joe dealt with was one of our own
> creation. When the Olds is fitted with a high volume oil pump, certain high
> rpm operations will deplete the supply of oil in the STOCK OIL PAN. That
> led to restrictors in the oil galleries as an attempt to reduce the flow
> rate and as a secondary benefit?, an increase in pressure. Jury is still
> out on that as a benefit. It is kind of a yes-but deal. I question the
> value in a motor home application. Absolutely bone stock 455 and 403 Olds,
> in heavy vehicle operation, with proper oil change intervals and tune ups,
> easily last well over 100,000 miles. A lot longer in lighter vehicles.  Do
> we really NEED high volume oil pumps? I lean towards the not really, but,
> group of opinions. But, gee let's re gear this sucker, put some headers on
> it, stack on different intakes and camshafts, add on fuel injection, etc.
> and the equation changes quite a bit. You rev these suckers up (like Joe
> Mondello) or you and me in, for example,  a jet boat or street rod? Any
> weak spots in an engine design will quickly surface. Then we have a
> tendency to attempt to "bullet proof" an engine so it will live in
> circumstances of our own creation. That is some of what Joe did. Your
> opinions might vary.
> Jim Hupy
>
> No, I agree with you. When I'm building an engine that I have not had experience with I probably spend more hours researching than building. Same thing I believe quite often a high volume oil pump on a new engine is unnecessary. I like oil at my mains, I like a decent amount of oil flowing over my valve springs and stems for cooling. The factory engine didn't seem to have a problem till the guys wound them to 6000 rpm when there was no more oil in the pan and they figured out that to much oil was pumped up top and drain back to the pan wasn't good enough. That tells me a stock engine should have enough oil slopping down to lube a distributor drive gear. I guess I'll find out, I'll be pulling the intake at least to plug the crossover. Like I say over the last 35 years I don't remember seeing that many olds, remember one that was a total sludge machine but I don't think he changed the oil for 70000 miles, lifters were mushroomed, cam ok.... Last 25 has
been doing airline grou
nd equipment so like I say not many olds.
> Salem, Or
> 78 GMC Royale 403
> On Jan 23, 2014 8:02 PM, "Bill Dolinsky" <Wildbillnick@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > So did olds deliver engines from the factory with the drilled plugs? My
> > impression was they pumped to much oil to the top at high rpms and emptied
> > the oil pan so he restricted oil to the top. I have read his articles and
> > while I agree with limiting oil to the top taking more away from the mains
> > with a controlled leak for a distributor gear and timing chain, we'll if
> > I'd did that I would want the restrictors in the main journals. But then
> > never ran an olds, nothing but bbc and sbc and import na and turbo. Oh
> > yeah, dodge and fords too. Just no experience Buick, olds, caddy except for
> > repair.
> > --
> > Bill Dolinsky
> > Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
> > 1977 Kingsley TZE167V102169
> > _______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> >
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist


--
Bill Dolinsky
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
1977 Kingsley TZE167V102169
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Electric fuel pump safety switch plumbing
Next Topic: Re: [GMCnet] How many people are still running carb, or EFI.
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun May 19 17:50:38 CDT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01364 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.1.1.
Copyright ©2001-2021 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software