Engine angle
- Thread starter DaWizard
- Start date
C26Pinelake
BANNED
Mr. Wizard. You can't expect cooperation from this group when you resort to name calling. The people you refer to as clowns are many of the smartest people in the world when it comes to Model A Fords and many other subjects. If you only ever attain half their knowledge and expertise you will indeed be fortunate.
Your next logical step in this process should begin with an apology and an admission that you have a lot to learn to get to their level. At this point you have not impressed many if any Barners! Think about it! Wayne.
Dave in MN
Well-known member
DaWizard, I get your question and concern. I work on lots of engines so I know the internals and the theory of the designed lubrication.
I am away from my motor shop at the moment so I am rounding some numbers off on the spacing and height of the two oil dams in the valve chamber. It is these dams that control the height of the oil supply for the main and cam journals.
It has been 40 years since I seriously used Trigonometric Functions but according to my calculations, lowering the front 2" would change the relative height between the front and rear valve chamber dams about .10". Lowering the front 4" would create a difference of .20". This is based on the unverified spacing of these dams at 6" and rounding off the engine slope at 3 degrees instead of 3.5 degrees.
I have to be pretty close.
The only thing I would be concerned about in the valve chamber would be that the height of the front dam is lower than the "rough" opening between the valve chamber and the cam gear at your chosen stance. Verify the rough opening is higher when you have the desired stance and you should be good to go as each dam area progressively fills from the front to the rear.
Your question about the dippers:
I would guess that 90% to 95% of the oil piped from the valve chamber to the front (#1 rod) depression in the dipper tray ends up flowing over the rear dam of this tray. The balance is lost between the edges of the tray and the pan. That means it makes its way across all the remaining depressions after being splashed around the crankcase. Again according to my calc's, the overall difference in height from front to rear of the dipper tray is about .21" if you drop the front axle 2" and about .42" if you drop the front axle 4". With a lowered stance, each dipper depression should hold a little bit more oil so you won't be starving the dippers.
The only thing I would be remotely concerned about is that the front and sides of the dipper tray fits snuggly against the pan. A loose fit will rob a small amount from the oil supply available to the dippers.
Level of oil in the pan:
The level of the oil in the pan would likely be about .4" lower in relation to the rear main cap drain tube if you drop the front 4".
It is important for this tube to be immersed in oil to avoid a rear main leak.
So my assessment of your plan: IMO: 2" drop don't worry. 4" drop, check the height of the front dam to the opening between the front of the valve chamber and the timing gear area. Verify the front dam is lower than the opening so the oil flows over the dam. IMO: Add a bit more oil to make sure the rear main cap drain pipe is still adequately submerged in oil. 1/4" higher on the dip stick than you do now should be correct.
Now, back to the spirit of most of the previous posts: I think Tom Wesenberg has the most valid concern regarding the "aim of the headlights" being off if you lower the front.
Good Day!
I am away from my motor shop at the moment so I am rounding some numbers off on the spacing and height of the two oil dams in the valve chamber. It is these dams that control the height of the oil supply for the main and cam journals.
It has been 40 years since I seriously used Trigonometric Functions but according to my calculations, lowering the front 2" would change the relative height between the front and rear valve chamber dams about .10". Lowering the front 4" would create a difference of .20". This is based on the unverified spacing of these dams at 6" and rounding off the engine slope at 3 degrees instead of 3.5 degrees.
I have to be pretty close.
The only thing I would be concerned about in the valve chamber would be that the height of the front dam is lower than the "rough" opening between the valve chamber and the cam gear at your chosen stance. Verify the rough opening is higher when you have the desired stance and you should be good to go as each dam area progressively fills from the front to the rear.
Your question about the dippers:
I would guess that 90% to 95% of the oil piped from the valve chamber to the front (#1 rod) depression in the dipper tray ends up flowing over the rear dam of this tray. The balance is lost between the edges of the tray and the pan. That means it makes its way across all the remaining depressions after being splashed around the crankcase. Again according to my calc's, the overall difference in height from front to rear of the dipper tray is about .21" if you drop the front axle 2" and about .42" if you drop the front axle 4". With a lowered stance, each dipper depression should hold a little bit more oil so you won't be starving the dippers.
The only thing I would be remotely concerned about is that the front and sides of the dipper tray fits snuggly against the pan. A loose fit will rob a small amount from the oil supply available to the dippers.
Level of oil in the pan:
The level of the oil in the pan would likely be about .4" lower in relation to the rear main cap drain tube if you drop the front 4".
It is important for this tube to be immersed in oil to avoid a rear main leak.
So my assessment of your plan: IMO: 2" drop don't worry. 4" drop, check the height of the front dam to the opening between the front of the valve chamber and the timing gear area. Verify the front dam is lower than the opening so the oil flows over the dam. IMO: Add a bit more oil to make sure the rear main cap drain pipe is still adequately submerged in oil. 1/4" higher on the dip stick than you do now should be correct.
Now, back to the spirit of most of the previous posts: I think Tom Wesenberg has the most valid concern regarding the "aim of the headlights" being off if you lower the front.
Good Day!
Last edited:
zzlegend
Well-known member
Sorry to be a clown Wizard, I deleted my previous post. Just my warped cense of humor. 
Now here is a picture of my 27 roadster on an a frame with stock A motor, with 4" drop in front. Am I worried? No. There are a bunch of stock A's around with dropped axles. I see no problem. Excuse the chubby guys in the picture. It is the only one I have with a side profile.
Now here is a picture of my 27 roadster on an a frame with stock A motor, with 4" drop in front. Am I worried? No. There are a bunch of stock A's around with dropped axles. I see no problem. Excuse the chubby guys in the picture. It is the only one I have with a side profile.