talonDSMerr
15+ Year Contributor
- 789
- 19
- Aug 19, 2007
-
Greenwood,
Indiana
I don't really understand why the oil drain has to be around the size of -14 AN while the feed is generally only -4 AN? I'm not saying a bigger drain isn't better, I'm just curious because it's similar to an exhaust with a 2.5" downpipe and 3" catback. The 3" catback doesn't hurt the exhaust flow, but it certainly doesn't offer a better flow pattern than a 2.5" exhaust with the 2.5" downpipe.
A big part of the drain problem, I think, is the huge step down in drain size from the CHRA to the drain fitting. You can see from pictures posted that the diameter of the drain fitting isn't even equal to the width of the CHRA drain. It's like using a ported 2g exhaust manifold on a non-ported 14b 6cm^2 turbine housing. That step will seriously hinder flow.
I'm thinking of "gasket matching" the drain fitting by grinding it at an angle and making sort of a funnel for the oil, and effectively getting rid of any step blocking flow. I'm positive this will help with drainage, but I'm not sure if it will solve the problem. We'll see when it's all said and done.
A big part of the drain problem, I think, is the huge step down in drain size from the CHRA to the drain fitting. You can see from pictures posted that the diameter of the drain fitting isn't even equal to the width of the CHRA drain. It's like using a ported 2g exhaust manifold on a non-ported 14b 6cm^2 turbine housing. That step will seriously hinder flow.
I'm thinking of "gasket matching" the drain fitting by grinding it at an angle and making sort of a funnel for the oil, and effectively getting rid of any step blocking flow. I'm positive this will help with drainage, but I'm not sure if it will solve the problem. We'll see when it's all said and done.