Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #42154
From: George Lendich <lendich@optusnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Proposed oil pan./Dry sump
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 08:22:17 +1000
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
 
 Lynn,
What we need is a cheap dry sump system - how far do you reckon you could run that pick up with the flexible hose ?
George (down under)
Had the Sports Car Club allowed dry sumps I would be far richer than I am. They used to have rules to make it cheap like no dry sumps and stock connecting rods. Duh...............13 engines blown to bits is cheaper than one set of Corrillo's???? I was never good at math so I couldn't be a club official.
 
The dry sump system is complex and expensive. However it offers absolute control of oil temps and oil pressure. You can run negative pressures in the crank case. You can store the oil in remote locations, away from the driver. (NASCAR likes the trunk) You need only enough pan to cover the crank and no deeper.
The only situation where oil pressure could be lost, is an inverted car. All professional series that I have had contact with run dry sumps. All formula cars use them just for ground clearance.
 
Lynn E. Hanover
 
 
In a message dated 3/31/2008 10:24:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, wrjjrs@aol.com writes:
Everyone talks about oil pan volume, but I think the best solution is a dry sump. Lynn aren't you running a dry sump now? I know that many racing organizations wouldn't allow dry sump systems, but that is supposed to cut cost, (HA!), not because they work better. 
Bill Jepson 




Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.1/1349 - Release Date: 29/03/2008 5:02 PM
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster