Anybody had any experience of using a foam wet sump baffle?

link:

https://www.caterhamparts.co.uk/product_info.php?cPath=137_139&products_id=2830&osCsid=c611fbdb0dab0d9fa0e5d0ffd10c9170

i heard it breaks down quite quickly. so best to change it at every service. i have one but not fitted it.

I have no experence of it all, caterhams or any other, however of the reports i have heard there have been several that have mentioned breaking up of the foam.
- I see no reason why a suitably designed foam insert of the right foam shouldnt work very well and prehaps decent ones (from caterham?) work fine and its mearly cheap copys that the problems are with (very easy to make a cheap copy, very hard to know its its good or not) but clearly broken up foam in the oilways and pump is a massive no no!


Daniel

We used a similar foam in race bike fuel tanks in the early 80's. It was called Explosafe and it worked well as a baffle apart from robbing a bit of capacity. No problems at all with it breaking down even soaked in a 50/50 mix of Avgas 110LL and 4 star.

The other benefit was supposedly that it prevented the fuel vapour from exploding in the event of an accident.

might be ok on a race engine that gets stripped and inspected regularly. i wouldn't have it in my engine though

If you trawl the tech-talk on www.blatchat.com you'll find 'Oilyhands' (Dave Andrews) recommends removing the foam all together and drilling a couple of strategic holes in the sump gasket to improve oil drainage into the sump. This is what I have done.

When I bought the car, the sump foam was squashed up under a windage plate, not sloshing around in the sump. This is normal aparrently. How a bit of foam 1cm deep, squashed up like that could make a difference to anything, I just don't know. It's utterly useless, even if it doesn't break down. Just do Dave Andrews' gasket modification instead.

As I am getting bad vibes from most of you, I think I'll give it a miss.

Thanks for all the replies,

Regardz, Steve.

The problem with the sump foam is that it goes brittle. I'm not sure if its heat or a reaction with the oil, or a combination of both, but when I first got my Caterham, I got a new foam to put in it at the first engine upgrade (Didn't take me long...) As soon as I felt the difference in the two, there was no way it was going in.

The new foam was soft and flexible. The old one was hard and crispy...like supernoodles before you add the water. Obviously something had happened and it had become brittle, and I didn't want this continuing, breaking up then blocking the pickup gauze, or heading up to the pump.

I spent ALOT of time sorting my wet-sump surge issues on the Caterham, and eventually discovered that the gasket wasn't allowing oil down quick enough, and due to the angle of the engine in the Caterham, a pool of oil was sitting above the gasket...instead of returning to the sump. I took the centre out of the gasket, so it was just a gasket and not a baffle (Still kept the windage plate with no foam) and filled the oil to the max with the engine running (As some volume is in the oilways, pump etc. This cured my surge issues.

As Charlie says, the foam in the Caterham sump is really more for windage, as it does nothing for surge...but having experienced the stuff, I wouldn't risk putting it in my engine.

If you want anti-surge, go for baffles or a dry sump. Something I have toyed with the idea off is a floating pickup pipe, that swings with the flow of oil. I even have a lump of suitable plastic pipe that I intend to trial at some stage, although a mechanical linkage would be nicer to stop bounce.

Willie

I agree that if i was after anti surge i would be welding in physical baffles.
- Hadnt heard about the gasget issue before (i have a cvh) but i do fill mine right up to the top of the max, or very slightly above. If the oil gets a bit low (from about the middle of min and max) surging will occur but not if its kept full.


Daniel

Which gasket are we talking about here?? I also have surge issues to resolve but am worried about spending £300 with SBD or QED for their wet sump lowline setup and it still being a problem.

I was referring to the gasket in a K-Series engine.

In a K-Series the gasket is not use a thin 1/2" strip around the outside, its more like a big plate the whole way across the sump, with a bit removed in the middle.

Have a look here for photos.

Its more of a problem in the Caterham install as the engine sits at an angle.

Willie
p.s. Sorry for the delay replying, been busy playing with cars

Ah OK thanks for that. It looks like the wallet needs prized open then

hmmmmm, lots of replies about K series engine, but not about the vauxhall.

I can speak from experience here as I have a caterham HPC wet sump on my vauxhall, WITH foam insert.

If you were to fit the caterham sump without it, your engine will last 1 roundabout.

I get oil surge WITH the foam, and that's on road use, not trackdays.

I have spoken to guys at sprint meetings with caterham HPC's running the wet sump and sticky tyres who claim no problems, well, I can only assume their pressure lights don't work!!

I have an oil light set at 25psi and it comes on on any hard roundabout.

You also have to run the oil level VERY high (i.e. the crank is sitting in the oil when its not running).

I have had NO problems with the foam in the 2 years its been in there though, and nor has anybody else with an HPC that I have spoken to, yet many with K-series cars have had trouble!!! A few have put it down to regular head gasket trouble on the k, putting antifreeze into the oil which has somehow knackered the foam.

I don't like the idea of the foam, but to run the caterham sump you aint got a choice, as it will just not work without it.

With the K series sump you can get away with a baffle, but the HPC sump is only 2 inches deep, and flat all the way along.

Sorry, but the real answer is dry sump.

Mine is getting one as soon as I can afford it, next year.

The amising thing is that the HPC wet sump is actually SHALLOWER than a lot of the XE dry sump pans!!The bottom of the reinforcing fins is more or less flush with the teeth on the flywheel ring gear, and the fins are 13mm deep or so!!!

I am planning to modify my wet sump pan to make it the dry sump pan, its such a nice casting it seems a shame to bolt on a crappy casting like most of the dry sump pans are.

So NS DEV have you any experience with the sbd or QED ones?? the have a built in baffle plate and no foam and are reported to be surge free.
I also notice they have a large and VERY flat pickup pipe as well.
I'm of the opinion that if it does work then I should be able to replicate it but after 3 go's at it i'm still none the better off ( but it is getting better.

Not personal experience, but I know of several people running the QED sump which is the same as SBD et al. and they have no problems at all.

The problem with them is that they are deeper than the caterham one, by quite a bit!

I basically exactly replicated the caterham HPC installation in my locost (its a modified Stuart Taylor IRS chassis, which is very small, basically pre-lit westy/ caterham sized) and also used the ST grp which is very low, designed to be a tight fit on a crossflow.

This meant that even with the belt cover removed and the cover "flange" machined off the cam cover, its still only around 5mm off the underside of the bonnet, and the sump flange on the bottom of the engine block is around 19mm above the chassis rail, i.e. you need a very shallow sump!!!

I puzzled over this for ages, as everybody else with MK's and Westfields have MUCH more room, and were all using modded sumps or the QED ones..........

Then I saw the Caterham HPC jobbie on one at a sprint meet at curborough and realised how they did it, the sump is no deeper than the flywheel, and a good half inch of that is reinforcing rib.

here's a pic, doesn't show the actual top flange, its just in the shadow, but you can see the tapered ribs and then the actual pan part, which is around 50mm deep.



sump clearance

[Edited on 19/12/09 by NS Dev]

bear in mind, in the pic above, that the bellhousing has an open flat bottom from which the ring gear just protrudes. The photo makes the sump look lower than it is.

What is the giveaway is the gearbox. The bottom of the type 9 is lower than the pan part of the sump.......



[Edited on 19/12/09 by NS Dev]