[dzenno]

Originally Posted by Jeff@topgearsolutions

Not sure if this has any relevance but a guy I know on a big turbo (gt42r?) with a different platform needed to add an oil pump to his setup because he had drainage problems and was losing mass amounts of oil out the exhaust on low load.

I'm not claiming to be an expert just letting you know what he did to solve his problem, albeit being a different platform.

Interesting, at what point in the system was the oil pump added? Any more details on it?

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by dzenno

Interesting, at what point in the system was the oil pump added? Any more details on it?

I'd have to somehow get in touch with him, this was a good 3 years ago. But I do know he added a pump for the oil in the turbo's for drainage.

[gmdoctor]

pump goes in the return line after the turbo. companies like sts with rear mounted turbos do this.

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by gmdoctor

pump goes in the return line after the turbo. companies like sts with rear mounted turbos do this.

That needs a lot of testing/care to make sure you don't starve the turbo by too much pull on the drains...let along it'd require new lines too...same goes for the oil feed restrictor, restrict it too much and you starve the journal bearings of oil...

but in any case, the solution really might not be something that keeps the stock look and frankly I couldn't care less IF that turns out to be the only solution...

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by gmdoctor

pump goes in the return line after the turbo. companies like sts with rear mounted turbos do this.

Yes, similar concept. Possibly some research into what they use would determine a happy medium to try on this platform, perhaps.

[dzenno]

Look what I just googled, find it interesting...might pertain to us as well:

http://www.max-boost.co.uk/max-boost/turbo/turbo.htm

This is a modified oil return for an LET running a much bigger turbo. In order to retain the downward slope they had to re-route it to the top of the sump (instead of the stock point a few centimetres above.)

What they haven't thought is that the splashing inside the oilpan might interfere with the oil return, especially at high revs. This will lead to the turbo smoking (best case scenario).

Anything like this even possible to be causing issues? Probably not but just something else to think about..

[Rob@RBTurbo]

There have been points where I've considered some people may have slightly overfilled the crankcase, blocking drains that are already being overworked from the bigger turbo internals. But that is kind of hard to confirm with an electronic dipstick thats seems less than accurate. Which is why I've said to error on the slightly underfilled method (not enough to cause codes/lights/etc).

[MilehighM3]

I can assure you this is not the case with the car in question...

[Rob@RBTurbo]

Not saying this car has or has not, there are plenty of factors to consider all around. But anyway I was speaking in general in response to the above dzenno quote. I am curious as to how you assure such a thing? Not speaking in jest, I'm speaking from a let's figure out all the do's and don'ts- and how's to make it happen... and I don't have a solid "how" to figure out oil level when the electronic gauge seems to be not very picky unless a qt low. I'm quite certain the crankcase can be at least slightly overfilled and not cause warnings, but could be wrong and would appreciate your input on how to rule it out.

Originally Posted by Bmw135er

I can assure you this is not the case with the car in question...

[Will335i]

Originally Posted by RobBeck

Not saying this car has or has not, there are plenty of factors to consider all around. But anyway I was speaking in general in response to the above dzenno quote. I am curious as to how you assure such a thing? Not speaking in jest, I'm speaking from a let's figure out all the do's and don'ts- and how's to make it happen... and I don't have a solid "how" to figure out oil level when the electronic gauge seems to be not very picky unless a qt low. I'm quite certain the crankcase can be at least slightly overfilled and not cause warnings, but could be wrong and would appreciate your input on how to rule it out.

Like I said Rob I am more than willing to offer my car for you to do some testing on.

[vasillalov]

Dzenno,

Nice find. I saw this in the article:

Contrary to what some people believe, the turbo oil return is not pressurised. Only the oil feed is under pressure. The return is meant to flow using gravity. That's why the pipe diameter is larger (same flow but lower pressure!) It is absolutely critical that the oil can flow freely down that pipe. If it's blocked in any way, then the turbo bearing will be immediately swamped and the excess oil will have to force itself through the turbine or compressor seals (depending on the load and the pressure balance at the time).

A kinked or misrouted pipe can cause such a restriction. So would excessive crankcase pressure.

Anyone still not convinced about the OCCs?

[Rob@RBTurbo]

That is the exact premise of why OCCs maybe causing a problem (they certainly aren't helping). They are a restriction to the PCV system. This means worse vacuum in the crankcase at high engine loads when the rear inlet turbo vacuum pull is the only thing venting the crankcase. The high(ER) crankcase pressures affect gravity draining returns. Upgraded turbos have bigger internals that pass more oil, which thus need more drain potential- which can push the limits of the drains as is. This maybe compounded with unnecessarily high oil pressure/flow which as a fix we can restrict back if applicable. But adding in a further restriction of OCC is not helping- really anything.

[Clap135]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

Dzenno,

Nice find. I saw this in the article:



Anyone still not convinced about the OCCs?

Me

[oddjob2021]

Originally Posted by Clap135

Me

me too, convinced is the wrong word to describe it.

[anonemouse]

"There is a good possibility they do, however, the cats will mask the smoke more than catless. I beleive Anemouse runs a completely stock exhaust with RB turbos, maybe he can chime in."

Stock exhaust with catless resonated DPs and I got rid of my OCC few months back. I haven't noticed any smoke. Also I have never had the car over 17 PSI, most of the time on the RBs I was running 15.5 PSI, only now with Meth I run 16.5-17 PSI.

Given Rob's earlier post i am in no hurry to increase the boost or get rid of my stock exhaust. I'll keep the bad fuel economy and slightly less power for the sake of more back pressure until this issue is identified and resolved.

A.

[dzenno]

What I think about the drains is that they really either need to be enlarged slightly (safe but takes away from the OEM appearance, personally don't care) OR you restrict the oil feed (very risky as journal bearings need considerable oil unlike ball bearing)...this is why for ASR it was easy to go with option 2 as their units are ball bearing and don't carry the same risk as RBs when it comes to oil starvation

[sdstatestud88]

Would changing from a 3.0 to a 2.5 inch DP exhaust help at all with back pressure and help crankcase pressure?

[dzenno]

Doubt it'd change it much if at all..3" DPs today all taper to 2.5" at the exhaust flanges..but it'd be interesting to try I guess...i used to have 2.5" catless UR DPs before on stock turbos and never lost much oil or noticed smoke

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by anonemouse

"There is a good possibility they do, however, the cats will mask the smoke more than catless. I beleive Anemouse runs a completely stock exhaust with RB turbos, maybe he can chime in."

Stock exhaust with catless resonated DPs and I got rid of my OCC few months back. I haven't noticed any smoke. Also I have never had the car over 17 PSI, most of the time on the RBs I was running 15.5 PSI, only now with Meth I run 16.5-17 PSI.

Given Rob's earlier post i am in no hurry to increase the boost or get rid of my stock exhaust. I'll keep the bad fuel economy and slightly less power for the sake of more back pressure until this issue is identified and resolved.

A.

How many miles do you have on your RB setup so far and how's your oil consumption been thus far?

[tibra1]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

Dzenno,

Nice find. I saw this in the article:

Anyone still not convinced about the OCCs?

Originally Posted by Clap135

Me

Originally Posted by oddjob2021

me too, convinced is the wrong word to describe it.

Me 3..

OCCs ..Downpipes.. Exhausts..PCVs..Oil feeds etc etc etc..so what?? the whole car has to be redesigned to make it work w these turbos...what about the turbos themselves..is it not possible there is some inherent design flaw in them..talk about denial exterme..think horses people not zebras.

geeezuzz

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by tibra1

Me 3..

OCCs ..Downpipes.. Exhausts..PCVs..Oil feeds etc etc etc..so what?? the whole car has to be redesigned to make it work w these turbos...what about the turbos themselves..is it not possible there is some inherent design flaw in them..talk about denial exterme..think horses people not zebras.

geeezuzz

well speculation doesn't help obviously...only thing we're left with is to prove it or disprove it and you can only do that by collecting data...what else?

[tibra1]

Originally Posted by dzenno

well speculation doesn't help obviously...only thing we're left with is to prove it or disprove it and you can only do that by collecting data...what else?

I understand but a good scientist always rules out the obvious first