Oil chamfering

[bimeur]

Put your own oil chamfering (if you do so)

Here's mine:



In detail:



I've made them at each side of the crank, on Main et rod places.

You have to do this in the good crank rotation sense (i'm not sure of this word, I'm sorry ^^ )

Made with a Dremel©, a spherical corindon tool, and a non-shaking hand

[themadscientist]

That seems a bit excessive.

[D_Stirls]

I know that you can do them symmetrically on both sides of the supply hole but if you are doing then single sided aren't they supposed to be in the leading edge of the supply hole? And you have to be really careful not to make them too big because you will starve the mains of oil if they are.

[bimeur]

That seems a bit excessive.

there not very deep

I know that you can do them symmetrically on both sides of the supply hole but if you are doing then single sided aren't they supposed to be in the leading edge of the supply hole? And you have to be really careful not to make them too big because you will starve the mains of oil if they are.

normally, you have to do them on one side, because the crank turns in one side, that's what i've heard/read mostly.

I've asked to some french's best engine machine shop, and the same speach comes.

Compared to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2RdzsC5 ... 4F6776E97B

I think i didin't make a bad job

[themadscientist]

A little goes a long way.

[bimeur]

A little goes a long way.

i've seen that

Well, we'll see, I put the engine in the car next week, if my oil pressure is a little bit to low, i'll know why ^^

[D_Stirls]

Compared to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2RdzsC5 ... 4F6776E97B

I think i didin't make a bad job

He's done them on both sides so he can go bigger, also as he said it has to be longer on the side of rotation, you have done yours on the wrong side of the supply hole as yours are only on the trailing edge not the leading edge like you are supposed to when you do them in the single side.
It's supposed to supply a leading edge for the oil to turn into the hole easier at high RPM. It kind of acts as a scoop. That is why you have to be careful how big they are otherwise you remove too much oil from the mains and you starve them

[bimeur]

Compared to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2RdzsC5 ... 4F6776E97B

I think i didin't make a bad job

He's done them on both sides so he can go bigger, also as he said it has to be longer on the side of rotation, you have done yours on the wrong side of the supply hole as yours are only on the trailing edge not the leading edge like you are supposed to when you do them in the single side.
It's supposed to supply a leading edge for the oil to turn into the hole easier at high RPM. It kind of acts as a scoop. That is why you have to be careful how big they are otherwise you remove too much oil from the mains and you starve them

it's the case mate, look at the first pic

[D_Stirls]

I have looked at the first pic and it the first thing that i noticed. The crank (when looking at the nose) rotates clockwise, so the side that is the leading edge of the hole is the side that is on the top of the hole in the first pic. The chamfer is on the wrong side.
The way you have it at the moment will actually reduce the oil supply to the big ends.

[bimeur]

if you look at this pic:




the chamfers are opposite, one way at the main, other at the rods

So if this crank turns clockwise, that means that the rods are in the wrong side, if it turns counter-clockwise, then the mains are wrong, so?

[D_Stirls]

There isn't much of an advantage in doing the big end journals, the main chamfer that increases the flow is the main journal chamfer. The chamfer is on the trailing edge in the big end journal to slightly helps pull the oil out of the gallery and chamfer is on the front side of the main journal to push the oil into the gallery.
So to answer your question, your mains are the wrong side which is the most important of the two.

Something else to note in that picture is how small the chamfers actually are.

[themadscientist]

Alright, spin it!

[bimeur]

Hey everyone,

who said that I'll got oil pressure problems?

some pics I took yesterday

idle, cold:



3krpm, cold :



idle, hot :



And i didn't take a pic when it's app. at 85/90°C, but it goes to 2b, not lower.

[biosehnsucht]

Where are you measuring the oil pressure from though? You could have fine pressure upstream of the holes, but from where the holes on out have insufficient lubrication..

[themadscientist]

Good taste in gauges.

[bimeur]

Where are you measuring the oil pressure from though? You could have fine pressure upstream of the holes, but from where the holes on out have insufficient lubrication..

as usual, at oil filter OEM place.

Well, I finished the period when you have to take care of the engine(after a rebuild, I forgot the word, sorry ^^ ), so now, I rev the engine progressively, change oil at 500km, and then at 1000km(with oil filter too), and i didn't noticed anything wrong in the oil pressure, or in the oil when I inspect it.

[TheMAN]

then your oil sending unit is upstream of the crankshaft

like most typical engines, the CA takes oil from the pan through the pickup tube, in through the oil pump, and out into the oil filter... the sending unit is probably immediately downstream of the oil filter, but it is still upstream of the main journals

without finding another oil source to install the sending unit to, you will never know whether you're really bleeding off oil in the crank or not

[bimeur]

then your oil sending unit is upstream of the crankshaft

like most typical engines, the CA takes oil from the pan through the pickup tube, in through the oil pump, and out into the oil filter... the sending unit is probably immediately downstream of the oil filter, but it is still upstream of the main journals

without finding another oil source to install the sending unit to, you will never know whether you're really bleeding off oil in the crank or not

uuuuhhh

If you say so, but when I read my FSM (which I get a copy from my best friend, my official and real Nissan parts dealer/maintenance garage), of the ca18det, it doesn't say the same

here's what oil do, from oil pan:

oil pan>oil pick-up tube>oil pump>oil/water cooler(yeah, in europe we have an oil/water cooler install)>oil filter>main block oil galery>main crank bearing>rod bearing>pistons/cylinders, etc, etc, etc..... sorry

and BECAUSE of this oil way, when your bearings blows, you had to change your oil pump.

[TheMAN]

we all have the same CA18DET manual as your buddy buddy copy of the manual
you just repeated what I already said about the oil flow path, except in a detailed form... however, the oil sending unit (what non-native English speakers call THE SENSOR) is still BEFORE (UPSTREAM) of the main bearings

I understand that English might not be your first language and might be having difficulties comprehending what I and/or the manual says. So just believe me that your gauges are giving you a false sense of security because you have NO IDEA what the oil pressure is AFTER the crank shaft

[themadscientist]

Having evicerated the entire CA18 oil system I can confirm what TM said. I think maybe you misunderstood him. The factory sensor is where you placed yours, but that is not a real indicator of oil pressure to the rods. The huge chamfers are after the sensor not before. If you are dumping oil at the mains you will not reliably measure that at the main gallery. You won't know until the rod bearings die.

[D_Stirls]

And the chamfers move more oil with increased revs so you won't know if your having issues until your reving it hard. And as the others have said, due to the location of the pressure sender the first sign will be a knock in the bottom end or a rod out of the block.

[blownhemi]

What would you all say, are there more reliably running 400+ whp CAs out there in the world running *with* this mod, than *without*?

[themadscientist]

I would expect without as the the weakness is the rod bolts which allowed the caps to pull and destroy the bearings, not the oil delivery to the rod bearings.

[boost_boy]

It's the user's choice if he/she wants to R&D an idea. It is the reader's choice if he's sold on pictures of cute little drimmel notches on the user's crank ( sounds naughty don't it ). Anyways, I think nissan did a pretty good job on the mechanical aspects of the CA series motors, but if one thinks he/she can make it better, go for it. But only the fools will follow something that hasn't been proven to the core and that's not to say that the user's work will not benefit his particular application. Good luck fellas and gals. My cranks are polished, but unmodified and they function just fine under whatever driving conditions I desire; and that's the way I want to keep it "all natural".

[blownhemi]

It's the user's choice if he/she wants to R&D an idea.

That's true, but there's not much to R&D here. The ONLY conclusion that we can draw is: in case the engine lives a long and happy 400+ whp life, then this mod did not make it WORSE.

[themadscientist]

Well, it seems an attempt to fix something that wasn't broken and with a method that is not actually proven to work better on this engine. Chamfering was so popular in the musclecar crowd because stock cranks often came with ragged oil holes with sharp edges. Most modern cranks and certainly the CA come already chamfered with a beveled countersink. It works really good.

The only weak point that I have seen with any regularity is rod knock. That is a bolt stretch problem, not an oil delivery problem. The CA uses the same system to drive the oil pump, but has a huge drive eccentric on the crank and I have never seen a CA pump explode like an RB. Oil gets to the top with no problem, some say too much oil, but I think that is still open for debate.

The block is built like a tank, but I assert is too short resulting in less than stellar rod angles at the top of the swing. That makes me wonder why people are so obsessed with the 2.0 crank which exacerbates the problem when really they can just push more boost. The same goes for this strange desire to see 9K RPM when the head is running out of breath and the short rods are racing away from the flame front.

The secondary butterfly bull s*** is perhaps more efficient, but I file that away with, but a few levels below variable valve timing. It may help, but I think the extra complexity and parts count make it less than some magic bullet and more of a pain in the a** than anything else. It doesn't surprise me that as the motor evolved you saw the original complicated manifold in the S12 become the simpler, but albeit still butterflied S13 and then finally the oh so simple European four port.

Quit trying to re-engineer a motor that works.

[TheMAN]

it could be worse... at least the CA rods uses nut and studs to hold them together.... many other engines out there use bolts for the rods, which is weaker

[bimeur]

WOW lot of talking about that

think what you want, about oil circuit/pressure/flow rates, I can see that everyone is a Master specialist about oil circuit on the ca18

no offense about what i'm saying, but it's how i feel it.

the result is here :

no oil pressure leak, i'm tracking with it, and I drive it since 5000km........with high revving.......

If there was an oil pressure drop, BECAUSE of my oil chamferring, the pressure should drop (an oil pressure is conditioned about the section of oil holes at final points (ie oil squirter, rod oil holes, crank oil holes, etc..), AND clearance between engine parts)

BTW, i'm glad that my engine is still there and fully alive, and give me a lot of satisfaction.

Cheers

[blownhemi]

think what you want, about oil circuit/pressure/flow rates, I can see that everyone is a Master specialist about oil circuit on the ca18

no offense about what i'm saying, but it's how i feel it.

You're missing the point. Noone here stated they are an expert on the CA's oiling system. The point is, NOONE is an expert on the CA's oiling system, and that includes your wise, old, genius french engine builder.
Yet most people here don't go around messing with crucial engine systems they don't understand completely, or fixing problems that never existed in the first place. Trying to outsmart engine manufacturers may have worked for the 70's Euro and US engines. But the '70s have been over for a long, long time, and it is sometimes difficult for wise, old engine builders to accept that.

No offense meant by me, either, but it's how I feel it.