Ok, new argument about engine building!

I am hopeful that there will be some good arguments regarding oil restrictors in SBF's. The reason I bring this up is recently a friend of mine had his 351W let go under drag racing conditions and parts for a replacement 393W are actively being pursued. There was the possibility that the front or rear rod bearings, I don't remember which, looked like they may have had some oiling issues, although very slight. Prior to the engine letting go, we did notice that there was a LOT of oil being pumped through the pushrods and over the rockers at idle. A quick list of the 351W parts are as follows.

• Stock 351W block, crank, & rods
• Milodon deep sump pan with matching HV oil pump & pickup. 7 qts of 15w-40 oil
• Soild roller cam with "no-name" solid roller lifters (there is a side story to these lifters that may have a very obvious result)
• Stock-style CV pushrods
• Crane roller rocker arms
• After years of service, it finally let go at the high end of the track at about 6500-6700 RPM

The side story to the roller lifters seems a bit odd. These were bought through eBay and looked completely functional when they arrived. The seller said they came from a running 351C. The first thing that caught our eyes were the side oiling holes in the lifters. They were brazed shut and a really small hole was drilled into the brazing. A sort of oil restrictor as you will. Well, thinking we knew best, we drilled the brazing globs from the lifters bringing the lifters to the original, manufactured diameter oil hole. Our train of thought was that for some reason the eBay 351C needed the restriction and not the lifters (see, I told you it may be that obvious). Not knowing who made the lifters is not that big of a deal, but I have used several brands of solid roller lifters over the years and have never run into such an oiling issue. So, since oil restrictors are far cheaper than buying new solid roller lifters, would it be recommended to install oil restrictors in the block to slow down the amount of oil going to the top end?

One more piece of info. This engine ran a flat tappet solid cam for years and in the last racing season of the 351W's life, it ran the soild roller cam. The oil flow to the top was acceptable-to-normal with the flat tappet, but when the soild roller was installed, this is when the Exxon Valdez took over the rockers and valve cover area.

As long as your running solids, go with the restrictors. They won't need the oil like the hydros do.

Hi
With the valve covers and rocker filling up with oil maybe you ran the pan dry causing the it to fail? and not get oil to the mains? clean out and inlarge all the drain back holes in the heads and lifter valley. That would be my guess but what do I know.. I have heard of HV pumps sucking the pan dry.. Just my .o2
good luck
tim

A Cleveland engine has completely different oiling requirements than the Windsor based engine. That may explain the Cleveland lifter issue. I have successfully ran 302 Based engines to 8400 rpm with a stock oil pump and a 7 qrt baffled wet sump pan. This assumes that the engine bearing clearances are where they are supposed to be. A Windsor (351 based) engine is suspect to main bearing issues if ran over 7,000 rpm unless you are using the Cleveland based crankshaft. That is a crank with the 2.75" main journal as opposed to the Windsors 3.0" main journal size. The 3.0" main just does not like the rpm's over 7K. And 7K is pushing it with a wet sump oil system.

There are lots of variables with the solid roller lifters when it comes to oiling...Often the oiling band is too low to supply enough oil to the top end(see pic)...I had to modify mine by putting a small notch in the groove to get more oil to the top...The size of the base circle of the camshaft also determines how high up the lifter sits in its bore....It's really hard to say what happened to your windsor...Do you know how "tight" the bottom end clearances were?..They need to be a little loose on a high rpm windsor with the big journals..

frdnut, the engine had been together for more than a few years with no oiling problems at all. The problem began with the replacement of the solid flat tappet cam with the solid roller cam, only. We immediately noticed more oil being pumped to the top of the engine. Bottom-end clearances were where they were supposed to be. After reading some of the replies and looking at the whole picture, I think we can get away with oil restrictors in the bottom end with the current lifters. If we had to replace the lifters, the restrictors would not be installed. I think it is just the current set of lifters allowing excessive oiling.

You might be right about what caused the problem..Especially if the bottom end looks oil starved...As for adding restrictors it might work ok for you..It seems "wierd" to me to design your new engine around a used part that was not intended for a 351W in the first place.What would happen if you damaged one of those custom lifters?...
The cleveland does call for a different part# lifter but I am not sure what the difference is...

not engine building , more like way an engine failed. you can run Cleveland lifters (roller) in a W block but not the W in a C. did you check lifter bores to lifter clearence? to much and it will pump to much oil to the top. easy to control on a W with a restrictor in the back of the block . with years of service you got , might have been time for rod to be replaced. oil pressure light is always a great idea. easy to hook up, lets you know if there is a problem quicker that a look at a gage. -- pan went empty --light will let you know.