| FAQ |
| Members List |
| Social Groups |
| Calendar |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Brian, I don't have a clue and that's why the engine builder gets the big bucks
You, or anyone have any suggestions ?We, and many others, have used the bolt on crank scrapers sandwiched between the block and pan before with no issues. For me the last three or fiur motors have used them. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Who set up the initial measurements for installing the scraper to the pan?
__________________
Just a blind squirrel looking for a nut. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
I've come up with the solution! Assemble short block. Fit a stand alone scraper for clearance. Reference it to the pan, pull it off and fit the pan scraper to the clearanced one! I've got an extra non Warrior one you can use Steve.
Actually you can get a used human flexible fiberoptiscope with some broken fibers for around $500 to look down motors. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Just a blind squirrel looking for a nut. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thanks Skip, I have another crank scraper on hand that's the same as what's installed in the pan if necessary.
It will be interesting to see if it all works out. And it only costs $20 to have it installed in the pan... if necessary I'll just rip it out and start over ![]() As mentioned we have used the bolt in crank scrapers quite a few times. I don't recall my engine builder having any fit issues with them. On one build we used both the Canton bolt in windage tray that's sandwiched between the block and pan along with the bolt in scraper that was sandwiched as well. It was all a real pain in the ass. Yes I know many have used them together and "glued" everything up with no issues but ours leaked on the dyno. Again it was a pain before and therefore I'm just trying something different here on this new 505 build. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|