Dry sump - Caterham -v- Pace

[heavenly7]

I am going to fit one this winter.

 

What the are the pros and cons of each sytem?

 

A big factor for me (assuming the performance and reliability are similiar) is ease of fitting. He speaks from a complete lack of knowledge but I get the impression the Caterham system is a significant job to fit (engine out?) whereas the Pace system is relatively easy. I fitted a new flowed oil pump and anti cav this year (works a treat), but I assume thats all to go on "For sale"?

[Dave Barrow]

I'm sure there was a recent thread (within last 2 weeks) on this with a chap from Pace asking for after sales feedback how to improve etc Pace seemed the favourite sorry cant help anti cav myself.

[heavenly7]

Dave - there was and that is what got me thinking. I dont think the thread got invlved with the pros and cons of one system compared with the other though. There is a very significant difference in price I think. That may just mean the Pace systems goes about the problem in a better or simpler way or it may be the Caterham system is better in some ways - you dont usually get something for nothing! Interested in peoples views and anyone who is in a position to make a comparison.

[dino ferrana]

Caterhams system is very intergrated and tidy. Very very well proven over a LONG time. It is more expensive but very good and IMHO better (and no I am not going to justify that statement).

[Sheds Moderator]

The CC system uses the bell housing as an oil tank, therefore obviously you have to separate the engine and Gbox. Having done this it is a very neat installation. The Pace system I understand uses a tank away from the engine and therefore is easier to fit (swap sump pan, install pump and hoses, install tank, done, I imagine). In the real world I'd suggest they both do the same job, it's just the CC solution is very elegant in its execution.

[tiddy1]

From my understanding the important difference is that the pace system removes the rotor from the engine oil pump and relies on the external pump for HP and LP oil,

 

the cc system feeds the engine pump from the external pump so relies on the engine pump for HP oil

 

I have heard that the bell housing tank can keep the oil and clutch rather hot ?

 

 

Does any know the relative costs?

 

Simon

 

 

[Paul McKenzie]

Conventional dry sump would be half the price of Caterham sump and clutch mods.

Paul

[V7 SLR]

£1700 for the CC one and about £1200 (with all the optional tank, hoses and fixings) for the PACE one.

 

CC one utilises 2 separate pumps. The Scavenge pump is the new part, but is uses the original Rover pressure pump. No matter what people may say, this item is a well proven item on each and every K engined Rover out there.

 

Also, there being 2 separately driven pumps means if the belt fell off the scavenge pump (for example), you'd still have the pressure pump being driven (for about 3 seconds until the tank ran out of oil). Not so the PACE system. Does this happen in practice? Very few I'd have said.

 

The PACE one, by comparison, utilises a well proven in competition modular construction pressure and dual scavenge pump with an external tank. I still think the sump casting looks deeper than the Caterham one but the difference is marginal. The toothed belt is said to be better that the poly-v belt which drives the Caterham scavenge pump.

 

The PACE system with external tank can be fitted with the engine in place but the tank's more normal placement in front of the engine actually leads to the oil being overcooled so the tank must be lagged.

 

Although the Caterham tank is a pain to retro-fit (it replaces the existing clutch bell housing) you do get a neat installation and a stronger clutch fork (the original Caterham clutch fork looks a bit weak but that's only an observation) into the bargain. And although the Caterham installation uses only 4.5 litres this has proven to be OK in practice. If you were to rev above 8000rpm this might prove marginal as there would be less "settling" time for your oil to de-aerate in the tank.

 

The Caterham system also comes with a de-aeration tower on top of the clutch bell/tank housing. The PACE tank's inlets are positioned to assist with de-aeration too.

 

In both incidences the oil temp is reduced. Not storing oil in the engine tends to have this effect. It might be beneficial to use a laminova to keep the oil temp up.

 

Any d/s system ought to release a few extra horses too as the crank will no longer be whipping around in a sea of oil.

 

At the end of the day I expect price and convenience to fit will dictate many people turning to the PACE system. Remember that both of these systems are immeasurably better than not having one at all and at least 10000% better than just an Apollo.

 

Worcs L7 club joint AO.//Membership No. 4379//Azure Blue SLR No. 0077//Se7ens List Tours

 

[Sheds Moderator]

Apologies for slight hijack, I have a Caterham DS pan with a few scuffmarks, what's the approx value if I were to sell? it came off a 1.4kss - I imagine it fits all Ks.

[V7 SLR]

Just the pan? £100 sounds reasonable. Why are you selling?

 

It'll fit all K's.

 

Worcs L7 club joint AO.//Membership No. 4379//Azure Blue SLR No. 0077//Se7ens List Tours

 

[SLR No.77]

Steve YHM

 

Stu.

[V7 SLR]

Bloody hell Stu, are you buying up everyone's seconds?

 

Worcs L7 club joint AO.//Membership No. 4379//Azure Blue SLR No. 0077//Se7ens List Tours

 

[Tarek]

Could someone educate a thicko. Can you fit a dry sumo to a VVC? I seem to remember people saying there are problems. If not, qhy not? Also, do they increase the distance between sump and tarmac?

[Peter Carmichael]

I think the VVC plenum gets in the way of the Caterham DS pump mounting. The VVC is also mounted slightly lower in the engine bay and this isn't possible with the engine mounts used on the Caterham DS setup. The pace system I believe can be made to fit.

[neil patterson]

neil@pace here. it's good to see some interaction here ref the dry sump kits, some balanced opinions.

Pace Dry Sump kit. Just to clear up one or two things;

You have a choice of oil tanks and position that you mount them in, we tend to favour the tank mounted to the rear right hand side of the engine bay.

The system will fit any 'K' engine.

The kit enables you to run a fully sealed engine, you just breathe through the oil tank breathers to a separate catch tank.

Oil consumption will be reduced.

Engine power, from dyno to track none is lost as the system works so efficiently.

The pressure pump is balanced so that it draws the minimum amount of power from the engine

The sump is the most shallow you can get, more so at the front end.

The system has got a certain amount of flexibility about it meaning that we can if need be change some things to suit a customers needs, just talk to us.

Some engines may have to run a water to oil cooler (heat exchanger) to heat the oil quicker, race cars should be ok without.

Please note that we will never say anything negative about the Caterham kit, it is what it is and there's many that's happy with it.

We only got involved with a kit for the 'K' when enough of you Caterham boy's & lasse's decided that they wanted a kit that reflected many of the ideas that they'd thourght of as being necessary.

many of you voiced your opinions and we listened, seems like the majority are happy with what we've come up with.

If you need any further info please contact me neilp@paceproducts.co.uk or 01440 760 960

[Jason Plato]

The third option is a hybrid .......which I would choose given the choice :

 

Take the caterham pump and pan , then use a seperate oil tank ( not the belhousing tank )

 

This will reduce the cost of the caterham kit , you wont have to remove the engine or the oil pump as with the Pace system to fit it all , plus you can have a larger oil capacity than the 4.5L belltank .

 

The oil tank could also be fitted as Alex Wong has done - sunk into the bulkhead , nice and neat .

 

I recall this works out at around £800 ?? ( please correct me if I'm wrong ?)

 

Dave

[Rob Walker]

Are you shure the bell tank capacity is only 4.5L I recon my system needs 5.5L on an oil change.

[robmar]

I am lucky if I can get 4.5 into mine usually a little less

 

however I am guessing that you can get another 1 litre around the rest of the system

 

rob

[richardhomer]

I had already decided to go the route suggested by Dave Jackson of a hybid system with the advantage of a bigger capacity oil tank. Has anyone already installed such? If so, any disadvantages to report.

[Super_Rich_Bernie]

Richard

 

That is what I have. I believe from the paperwork with the car that it was the first Dry Sumped K series, so I guess Caterham hadn't developed the Bellhousing style tank at that point. (1993)

 

The tank sits in front of the footwell on the passengers side. The rest of the system is standard Caterham. There are some long pipes hanging around the engine bay - with the Bellhousing tank the pipe runs would be shorter.

 

It holds around 6 litres of oil - maybe slightly more. It works fine. No oil pressure or temperature problems. I drive it slowly on useless tyres, but a previous owner ran it on slicks and knew how to drive - so it would have been essential.

 

 

Jonathan

 

[Paul McKenzie]

Jonathan,

Is the passenger footwell long or short?

If long what size (diam. and height) of tank did they get in there?

Thanks,

Paul

[Super_Rich_Bernie]

Paul

 

It is a short footwell.

 

I would need to measure it to be precise but the tank is about 6 inches diameter, and reaches from the bottom of the bulkhead to the top - prob 18 inches.

 

I don't think it would work with a long footwell, because it is already close to the exhaust header.

 

Jonathan