• Hi Guest!
    You can help ensure that British Car Forum (BCF) continues to provide a great place to engage in the British car hobby! If you find BCF a beneficial community, please consider supporting our efforts with a subscription.
    There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
Tips
Tips

How do you reduce oil flow in aux. oil line?

Share this page

G

Guest

Guest
Guest
Offline
'Splain to me again how I can reduce the oil flow in my auxillary oil line to the head. Something about inserting a friction pin somewhere to choke it down.....
 
The best way to reduce the flow is to "remove it." My car had one when I purchased it. I have not found one source that says this is a good idea. I removed it right away thinking that the oil pressure belongs in the bottom end not the top. I also heard it said that Kas had never seen a need for the thing.

I am now running roller rockers and every time I pull the valve cover to check the valve lash or to make visual checks, there is plenty of oil up top without the by-pass. So it is in the storage cabinet in a plastic bag.

There are many opinions on this and you are in the right place for them all, pros and cons. This is just one.
 
"I think" when you install an auxillary feed, you should block the passage in the block that feeds the head. That will require removing the head. I would not go through that much effort and will not be using the auxillary feed.
 
Bill- I ALMOST purchased the aux oil feed until
oil lubrication to the rocker assembly was explained
to me in detail.

Nothing I researched indicated a positive result from
the aux oil feed. Without exception- the Triumph forum
members were adamant I should not purchase the aux oil
feed.

I ain't no mechanic but my ears work pretty good.
I listened and did not purchase. Probably you
should take the aux feed out.

just my non-mechanic 2 cents worth.

d
 
Please explain to me why not?

:nonono:

01a.jpg
 
kodanja said:
Please explain to me why not?
Click to expand...

Because the cost of rebuilding the bottom of the engine is much higher than replacing the rocker shaft.

The bottom needs the oil far more.

The more oil on the top, the more oil blown out of the engine into the PCV / air filter or where ever the outlet on the head goes.

If the rocker shaft is clean and assembled properly there is more than enough oil.
 
70herald Because the cost of rebuilding the bottom of the engine is much higher than replacing the rocker shaft. The bottom needs the oil far more. The more oil on the top said:
<span style="color: #990000">To answer your question Bill: as is known by many,
old Tinster knows next to nothing about auto mechanics.

But from my very limited experience having watched TRbill and 2Wrench
struggle with the bottom ends of their engines and poor Paul Rego
on pins and needles just waiting for his new cam to blow to pieces,
I'd have to reckon the cost of rebuilding the bottom of the engine
is much higher than replacing the rocker shaft if it runs dry of oil.

The bottom end needs the oil far more than the rocker assembly.

The more oil on the top, the more oil blown out of the engine into the
PCV / air filter or where ever the outlet on the head goes.

I popped the valve cover off my engine and looked inside. A tiny drop of oil
was coming out from tiny holes in the rocker arms. Everything appeared well
lubricated so I'm guessing there was more than enough oil.

Plus I stayed at a Holliday Inn and called Yisrael for his opinion!!

d :thumbsup:</span>
Click to expand...
 
Bill, next time you talk to Ted ask him , he'll explain it to you.
 
Trick6 said:
So it is in the storage cabinet in a plastic bag.
Click to expand...
Funny, that's where mine is too.

In my case, I installed the line because an incorrectly installed cam bearing insert was totally blocking oil flow to the head (TR3 motor). But it just put way too much oil up there, even after I tried installing a restrictor with only a 1/16" hole through it.

After a valve stem seal came apart and the excess oil cost me a broken piston, I decided the factory metering method was better and drilled out the blocked passage. Never had any trouble with it again.

Unlike rod & main bearings, the rockers do not need a constant flow of oil. As long as they get a little, now and again, they'll be fine. The main problem IMO is that some oils (eg Castrol & Quaker State) tend to fill the rocker shaft with sludge until some rockers get no oil at all.

You can check for this condition by letting the engine idle with the cover off. If the shaft is sludged up, clean it.

Lots easier than replacing pistons !
 
I seem to be one of the few dissenters on this topic, but I'll stick to what I have seen with my own eyes. I put an auxiliary oil line on my stock engine when it had 100,000 miles on it. I pulled the stock engine out during the restification and replaced it with my hot-rod engine. The stock engine at this time had roughly 150,000 miles on it.

The stock engine has never been rebuilt and with 1/3rd of the miles, the high miles, with the auxiliary oil line attached, the bearings showed zero excessive wear. Yes, they were worn but didn't look any worse than an engine with like mileage that didn't use an auxiliary oil line. The oil pressure was also still hitting 30psi at warm idle. So to me, that doesn't sound like its starving the bottom end of the engine for oil.

Kas Kastner is a reputable source, but not really about the longevity of street driven Triumphs. His knowledge, considerable that it is, is centered on racing. Where those engines would spend a LOT of time at the upper end of the rev range, even beyond the design specs. He also broke a lot of cranks when it had nothing to do with lack of lubrication but lack of support and too much crank flex. Especially when they would hit the second harmonic over 6,000 rpm. Again, not a problem with a typical street driven engine.

The factory put a threaded hole there for something. I've never really bought into the explanation that its left over from a machining process. They could have plugged several other ways much cheaper than threading it if that was all that it was. The TSOA archives even list using an auxiliary oil feed for light competition and rallye use, which is probably why its threaded and not plugged.

The oil passages that feed the head are very small and can get plugged very easily. This is less likely to happen with today's better, higher detergent, oils though. So maybe its not needed as much as it might have been at one time.

The majority opinion is that they are bad. But the majority opinion is also against the Pertronix Ignitor. I've had good luck, and no negatives with both products so I'll be keeping them. My Pertronix has been in my car for over ten years now. I've even left the key on longer than two minutes with zero ill effect to it. Maybe I'm just lucky.



Bill, to answer your question, yes, supposedly you can use a roll pin to reduce the flow amount to the head. I've looked into it but am not quite sure how it would work without effecting the flow to the oil pressure gauge if you have that hooked to the auxiliary line adapter as well. A fellow on the 6-Pack forum was experimenting with an adjustable line control for the auxiliary oil line though. Might be worth checking out how that is working for him.
 
No Tom, that sounds like some sa comment that Bill would make to me.

The ball is back in his court now. :angel:
 
Back
Top