On the subject of windage trays, almost all of Fords new generation engines has a tray of some type. Oil control is extremely important for power and durability. I use Esslingers windage tray, and am convinced that it will contribute to a significant reduction of HP loss due to oil whipping around, and trying to follow the action of the crankshaft. I will doubt 12 hp gain without seeing the dyno data directly. I know what they all say, but they want to sell parts. I want to see the data. Now, the practicality of it is, don't do it until you have a really good charge air cooler, better valve train. (at least valve springs) larger air meter, (vane or mass air) and a well running vehicle with nothing else wrong with it. Otherwise the investment is not worth it. If you are doing a rebuild next winter and planning purchase of parts, buy the windage tray, and use it, but use all quality parts in that rebuild. Those that comment that you see no effect below 5000 rpm are not quite 100% correct, but the usefulness diminishes at lower engine speed. However even the lowly 3.0L Lima V6 has a tray, and I'm not sure it will run over 5K rpm. Seriously, They are useful. My new project engine (secret) has a tray, and the display engine I plan on having at Carlisle will incorporate Esslingers windage tray, along with a number of new parts that many of us have not seen.p
Again, In the past windage trays were reserved for serious all out engines, but lately lots of engines have benefited from them. I have seen engines run with clear windows installed in oil pans, and you would not believe the cyclone in the pan, and how the oil is whipped up, when not controlled properly.
Anyway, I'm working on a very nice Crower rod 2.3 for a friend. We are using ARP main cap studs and a windage tray. The tray came from Racer Walsh, but looks identical to the one offered by Esslinger Engineering. It is a very nice unit and comes with 4 main cap bolts with a small stud protrusion on the head. These bolt's appear to be the same ones used to attach the brace on the oil pump pickup. Of course using the ARP studs means one does not need the bolts, but it also means something else needs to be done to attach the windage tray.
I ended up drilling the four mounting holes in the tray to .500". This allows a little bit of clearance for the 12mm studs. The nut end of the studs is 12mm x 1.25 thread pitch. This is a little bit odd because the "standard" fine pitch for 12mm is 1.50. I found the 1.25 thread pitch nuts under the Dorman brand at a parts store. On the 4 studs where the windage tray bolts down I had to leave the ARP flat washer off to allow enough stud length for the windage tray and nuts. The ARP nuts get torqued down and then the tray is installed. I drilled the nuts and safety wire since their engagement was less than a diameter of the thread, or less than 12mm.
This worked out really well and I would recommend the windage tray to anyone considering a bottom end rebuild. Another neat thing about the tray is it provides a place to mount a piston cooling oil jet and manifold assembly. More on that later.
>Assumming I won't be bothering with the ARP studs, this sounds like it should be apretty easy install using the supplied bolts, yes?
Correct. Just remove the bolts on numbers 2 & 4 main caps, replace with the supplied bolts, torque and install the tray. Check for clearance by rotating the crank before putting the pan on. You might have to "tweak" the tray out a little bit. On KurTwo's motor I had a slight bit of interference on #2 rod nut and the tray. It was corrected by prying the tray out slightly with a big screwdriver. No big deal at all and easy to correct.
Windage trays and crank scrapers work. A guy at work picked up 40 hp on the dyno by going to a different oil pan and baffle system. The subject motor was a big block Chevy SOLO 1 with a dry sump. He also gained a noticeable reduction in oil temp with the new system. Esslinger claims 10-12 HP for the windage tray on the 2.3.
>On a related topic, what about using threadlocker on the rod and cap bolts ratherthan just simply re-torquing?
Just re-torque. Properly torqued fasteners do not need threadlocker.
