Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums Modifications General Mods Additional Oil Cooler for SVT

Thanks Roger.
I agree, although it could reduce oil pressure, that would no be why engines would fail. I think most of the failures have been crank whip, with SVTs being more suceptabe do to more time in the high revs. But starvation has seemed likely in some cases, particulary involving hard right turns with high RPM. Here I believe the roush data that was posted about oil accumulation in the head, combined with pan oil shifting, and in many cases oil was a bit low. An increase in backpressure from a oil cooler would not explain this.

But an air/oil cooler seems a good idea...
someone with a oil pressure & temp gauges and SVT cooler..any chance you could check the numbers with & without the cooler???

What exactly is "crank whip"? it isn't the counterweights of the crank splashing through the oil is it?

Roger

Crank whip is one of the harmonic effects on the crank especially at high RPM. It is the crank bending /squirming in the bearings that the crank does..not adequetly quelched by the stock damper...

I have gone through 3 motors on my car. all have been from oil starvation at high rpm in a right hand turn. I know of several other people who have had that problem to. Does anyone have DOCUMENTED proof, not just theroy that this has caused motors to fail? I hought Roush said there were big drain issues with the cylinder heads in the 2.5L. has anyone had a low mileage motor fail in a straight line? If this "crank whip" theroy is true it sounds like any 2.5L driven at high rpm could fail any miniute. I don't know if I buy into it. I'm not calling anyone a liar, I just don't buy into it.

Roger

The proof was the OEM damper supplier. After the failures they did additional tests and found the degree of crank bending was excessive (which "piches" oil from between bearing and crank, causing spun bearings. Judege, who worked for the company described all this long ago. Ford designed a new damper. Problem fixed, end of story. Oh, I believe the reason why Duratec so predisposed to whip is the fact that Ford shortened the crank from the Porsche design without otherwise compensating for this.

Yes, MANY engines have failed in the straight line. Search (OIL STARVATION) back about 1 year ago and you will find that I did a pretty extensive online investigation on oil starvation. I talked to Roush, SVE, Chris Reinke, Al Mirco, Bondurant & others. I had a running total with all info I could gather, including wheter or not a right turn was involved. About 35% involved a hard right out of 25 or so incidents. Some of those admitted oil was low. Most were normal driving failures...many were SVTs with <50K miles.
Why SVTs...my though is they rev better and spend more time at high RPM. High RPM = worse crank whip.

I know the Rousch head data. Some debate about whether the heads could truly hold that much oil but I think that combined with a hard right oil shift in the pan it can result in starvation. So, I think we have 2 things going on....and starvation is more likely the major problem on the track. But I think whip is the leading street motort killer.

And thanks for not calling me a liar.

Some facts :- In Summer of 2000 all 2.5 engine production went from Cleveland to Bridgend in Wales,UK*Engines for remaining Contour/Cougar production were 'stockpiled' at Ford Plants*When B/end started production of the 2.5 in Europe all the component content stayed 'as was' in engines built in Cleveland (that includes oil pan,pump,bearings ,crank etc)*The only crank related component that was revised in design was the crankshaft damper,which was changed to a 'Dual Mode' design*All Mondeos built in Europe since the transfer of production have a DMD*The DMD used on all production UK engines is not listed on any USA 2.5 Ford parts list*All parts made by the USA supplier are shipped to Europe/Bridgend*I saw the first DMD on an engine supplied by 'Ford Power Products' to a 'specialist' vehicle builder Nr Silverstone Racetrack,UK in the summer of 2000.....

*me raises hand*

right, but, not only did they shorten the crank but they also thinned out the crankcase webbing that supports the main bearings.

With this the case, I wouldn't be suprised if the webs were to be inspected with non-destructive testing methods (eddy current, ultrasonic or dye penetrant) and cracks were found. In fact, I'm sure that if the crankshafts were inspected using the magnetic particle method that radial or transverse cracks could be found on a few of the crankshaft journals as well.