Block oil feed port bad?
#1
Newb
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 19
Total Cats: -2
Block oil feed port bad?
Howdy all. I'm preparing for going turbo and building an engine with a 94 block, looking into everything necessary, and I found this article that gave me pause:
Assembly By Keegan Engineering, Pt. II - 1997 Mazda MX-5 Miata Long-Term Road Test
Specifically, at the end of the article...
The stock oil boss (directly behind the red fitting), however, remains untapped. Keegan does not like how it would bleed oil pressure directly from the main oil galley at the rearmost main bearing. There's no sense depriving the heavily-loaded mains from any oil when there's a more benign source for the turbo's oil on the passenger side of the block -- at the VVT oil supply.
I searched and couldn't find any discussion of this issue. My 94 block has these ports tapped, and would be nice and clean/simple to use. For a high HP (350ish) turbo setup, is there any evidence that this oil port is a less desirable solution than sourcing oil from the other side of the block, or is this a 'theoretical' problem? Keegan seems to know his stuff... but so do many on here, and many(most? all?) that have that port available use it. Will running a line around to the oil pressure sender port make any appreciable difference in rear main bearing wear? Does the size of the factory block port restrict the flow sufficiently, or must the line be sized to intentionally limit the pressure bleed off?
Assembly By Keegan Engineering, Pt. II - 1997 Mazda MX-5 Miata Long-Term Road Test
Specifically, at the end of the article...
The stock oil boss (directly behind the red fitting), however, remains untapped. Keegan does not like how it would bleed oil pressure directly from the main oil galley at the rearmost main bearing. There's no sense depriving the heavily-loaded mains from any oil when there's a more benign source for the turbo's oil on the passenger side of the block -- at the VVT oil supply.
I searched and couldn't find any discussion of this issue. My 94 block has these ports tapped, and would be nice and clean/simple to use. For a high HP (350ish) turbo setup, is there any evidence that this oil port is a less desirable solution than sourcing oil from the other side of the block, or is this a 'theoretical' problem? Keegan seems to know his stuff... but so do many on here, and many(most? all?) that have that port available use it. Will running a line around to the oil pressure sender port make any appreciable difference in rear main bearing wear? Does the size of the factory block port restrict the flow sufficiently, or must the line be sized to intentionally limit the pressure bleed off?
#8
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,027
Total Cats: 6,593
Sleeve-bearing turbos tend to self-limit their oil consumption, since the bearing clearances are quite small. Just as with the main bearings in the engine, sleeve-bearing turbos require a fairly high oil pressure in order to keep the shaft "floating" properly. You can run a line directly from the oil supply hole on the back of the block to a sleeve-bearing turbo and everything will be just fine with no need for any flow-limiting devices.
Ball-bearing turbochargers require very little oil pressure, and very little flow. They do require an external flow-limiter, as they will tend to pass huge amounts of oil if allowed to. Some designs incorporate a restrictive orifice in the oil inlet port itself, some have a drop-in device, and some require an external limiter such as this:
There's a reasonably good primer article on turbo bearings here: AutoSpeed - Turbo Bearing Tech - Part One
At one point, I seem to recall some company experimenting with permanently-lubricated bearings (eg, like a greased wheel-bearing) as part of an attempt to convince the world of the inherent superiority of rear-mounted turbo systems. Not sure if anything ever came of that.
Also, if anyone is still concerned about robbing the #4 main of oil, don't be.
(edit: the
Here is an image of the oil supply to a MSM engine (note that the turbo an manifold have been replaced with FM-supplied parts):
Last edited by Joe Perez; 11-09-2014 at 10:41 AM.
#9
These turbo's joe? I think their real benefit would be vertical mounting in the engine bay on subarus.
#10
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,027
Total Cats: 6,593
These turbo's joe? I think their real benefit would be vertical mounting in the engine bay on subarus.
I find the idea that some bearing grease and a couple of O-rings are capable of lubricating a turbocharger to be fascinating. I really don't know whether I believe it or not. I am curious about the comment that "Since the bearing system is easily removed as an assembly from the bearing housing, the bearings can be re-greased at appropriate intervals," and I wonder what an "appropriate interval" is considered to be. For a street car, I could probably deal with having to remove and rebuild the turbo once every couple of years. Not so much once a month.
#14
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,027
Total Cats: 6,593
Well played.
Actually, something occurs to me: Presupposing that the grease is the *only* maintenance item (eg: the O-rings are fine), why not design the thing with a Zerk fitting on one end and a removable plug on the other?
Actually, something occurs to me: Presupposing that the grease is the *only* maintenance item (eg: the O-rings are fine), why not design the thing with a Zerk fitting on one end and a removable plug on the other?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
stoves
Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain
5
04-21-2016 03:00 PM
JesseTheNoob
DIY Turbo Discussion
15
09-30-2015 02:44 PM