Does the forward facing barbed fitting off the valve cover vent to the flame arrestor? I'm trying to wrap my head around how all the vent hoses get plumbed. Am I correct in thinking that you tie the two valve cover vents and the oil tank vent together and vent the whole system to the flame arrestor?

Thanks for taking the time to reply and post pics. Much appreciated.

Vent goes from the top of 1 valve cover to the vent "in" on tank and then another hose goes from vent "out" on tank to flame arrestor. The pic I posted is engine on dyno and it is a temp hook up to vent can just to run on dyno.

Thanks Brian.

Anyone else have any input on what I'm up to here?

I appreciate any and all help and ideas.

Thanks, rob

I'm sure you will have several responses with different ideas of what works. There is usually always more than one way to accomplish something.The dry sump plumbing is pretty straight forward. A 4 stage pump will have 3 scavange sections and 1 pressure section. In most cases, a 4 stage pump is sufficient. The 3 scavange sections will go to the pan. I will have the pump set up with (3) #12 scavange lines and (1) #16 scavange return line to the tank. I run a small breather tank that is attached by a #12 hose to the dry sump tank. Any oil vapor leaving the dry sump tank will get caught in the breather tank.

Personally, we don't run any crankcase vacuum. I just vent the valve covers to the atmosphere. In a wet sump engine, the wrist pins are being oiled by splash lubrication. In a dry sump engine, you are pulling all of the oil back to the pan. If you have pistons oilers, then no problem. For that reason, a lot of dry sump engines will use piston oilers. They also have other benefits, like cooling the pistons. I don't want to pull any more oil away from the wrist pins than need be. But, that's me. I don't have any issues with running this way and have for years and years. Like I said, there is more than one way to get it done. Read the comments and do what you feel is best and suits your needs the best.
Eddie

Thanks for the reply Eddie.

The engine came with valve covers that are vented to the atmosphere and they have -4 AN oil feed lines feeding small internal manifolds that appear to oil the upper valvetrain.

I'll post a couple pics of the valve covers later.

Thanks again,
Rob

Here's a pic of the engine and you can see the filter assembly, the feed into the engine (looks like I'll be adding a cooler in this section of plumbing) and the -4 line going into the valve cover oiling manifold:


Here's a pic of the underside of the valve cover. Notice the discharge tubes are down by the gasket mating area. I would think the oiling would be to wash the springs but they are not directed that way? :


Here's a pic of the pan that came with the engine. Like I said earlier, I couldn't use it as it has no cutout for a conventional starter. Also, I would have needed a 6 stage pump for the pan to function as it's Completely segmented. Super cool scrap aluminum. Lol.:



Here's a better pic of the pump. I ordered new ORing to AN fittings from barnes and we took it apart for inspection and cleaning and it's in nice shape.:

Is dry sumping something that's generally left for higher HP applications? I am building a set of efi's (at some point lol) for my 38 and just wondered of I would see the benifits in an engine in the 500 HP range

While power does factor in, it's more about rpm than anything. However, the 2 do go hand in hand in a sense. In order to make more power, you usually need more rpm to do it (ie, larger cam). It's a little more involved than that but you get the picture. For example, you could have an 800 hp engine that should be dry sumped and 1000 hp that can stay wet sump. Let's say the 800 hp is similar to a Supercat engine....510 ci turning 7400 rpm. You would need to dry sump that engine. You would have a hard time controlling the windage (air) coming off of the crank. On the flip side, let's say you had a 598 with a 4.0L Whipple. It would be able to make 1000 hp at 5700 rpm, or less. There is no need to dry sump that engine.

Another thing to consider is power output. A consequence of horsepower is heat. The more power, the more heat that is rejected into the oil. In a wet sump setup, you can only have so much oil in the pan. It's get tough to control the slosh much over 14-15 qts. I did some pans in the past that were almost 18 qts. I played hell with them because once all of that oil starting moving around, it was impossible to control it. We had bulkheads and trap doors everywhere. It still sloshed all around and flooded the pan rails and leaked. With a dry sump setup, you can have as much as you want. We regularly use a 5 gallon tank. We run just over 4 gallons in the tank, but the lines, cooler, filter, etc, add up to another 4-5 qts. With the larger quantity of oil, it takes longer to heat it up and longer to contaminate it.
Eddie

Just to be clear.......I realize that dry sumping an engine with my intended use is overkill.
That said, the engine I bought is set up for dry sump oiling and it was easier (well, almost) for me to keep it that way.
I'll keep this thread updated as I build this system and hopefully the info will be useful to others.

Thanks to those who took the time and interest to reply.