LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

High volume vs. High pressure oil pump

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-10-2010, 08:14 PM
  #1  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
mrl510's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 129
High volume vs. High pressure oil pump

Im trying to decide which to get. Im building a lt1 383 supercharged. And i have a canton pan. Which Oil pump should i buy. Its probably gonna be a melling so if you can suggest one of there oil pumps. Thanks
mrl510 is offline  
Old 02-10-2010, 09:58 PM
  #2  
Registered User
 
shoebox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 27,713
Melling 10554. It should come with their pink spring for higher pressure.
shoebox is offline  
Old 02-10-2010, 10:03 PM
  #3  
Moderator
 
rskrause's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Buffalo, New York
Posts: 10,745
No need for an HV pump and there are downsides.

Rich
rskrause is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 12:39 PM
  #4  
Registered User
 
gillta95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 261
Using a Melling 10554 with stock pressure, in experience high pressure pumps have failures.
gillta95 is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 01:29 PM
  #5  
Registered User
 
shoebox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 27,713
Originally Posted by gillta95
Using a Melling 10554 with stock pressure, in experience high pressure pumps have failures.
Nahhhh. What is the reasoning behind your statement.
shoebox is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 01:48 PM
  #6  
Registered User
 
MachinistOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,001
Originally Posted by shoebox
Nahhhh. What is the reasoning behind your statement.
Yeah...I'd like to hear this one too
MachinistOne is offline  
Old 02-12-2010, 01:32 PM
  #7  
Registered User
 
slingshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 132
Having a high volume pump only is bad with a stock pan as it will suck it dry. I have a mellings 10552 which is 10 % higher volume, and it as been working fine with a canton pan. They did not have a 10554 in stock when I bought it, and I needed it same day. The volume it provides is pretty nice, it will start building pressure in the car as it cranks so oil is going through the motor before it starts.
slingshot is offline  
Old 02-12-2010, 08:02 PM
  #8  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
mrl510's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 129
Thats what melling recommended to me was the 10552. So pretty much i need to choose between the 10552 and the 10554
mrl510 is offline  
Old 02-13-2010, 09:38 AM
  #9  
Administrator
 
Injuneer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Posts: 70,817
Originally Posted by gillta95
Using a Melling 10554 with stock pressure, in experience high pressure pumps have failures.
Gee... I didn't know that. I guess I better have them pull the 80psi spring out of the stock/blueprinted pump in my 800HP/800lb-ft 381 LT1..... its only been 10 years since it was built, and I'd hate to have "failures" now.
Injuneer is offline  
Old 02-13-2010, 12:18 PM
  #10  
Registered User
 
94SLUG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 856
Originally Posted by slingshot
Having a high volume pump only is bad with a stock pan as it will suck it dry. I have a mellings 10552 which is 10 % higher volume, and it as been working fine with a canton pan. They did not have a 10554 in stock when I bought it, and I needed it same day. The volume it provides is pretty nice, it will start building pressure in the car as it cranks so oil is going through the motor before it starts.
MAGIC


I have HV for 20k now, and many 120+ pulls no issues... When I asked my machine shop about this suck the pan dry idea they looked at me like I was crazy...
94SLUG is offline  
Old 02-13-2010, 02:26 PM
  #11  
Registered User
 
RUDEDOG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 574
Same here. I never had a problem with the HV pump and stock pan. I tried to get it to suck the pan dry on a dyno and could'nt do it.
RUDEDOG is offline  
Old 02-13-2010, 04:23 PM
  #12  
Registered User
 
shoebox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 27,713
Originally Posted by 94SLUG
MAGIC


I have HV for 20k now, and many 120+ pulls no issues... When I asked my machine shop about this suck the pan dry idea they looked at me like I was crazy...
Originally Posted by RUDEDOG
Same here. I never had a problem with the HV pump and stock pan. I tried to get it to suck the pan dry on a dyno and could'nt do it.
There have been plenty of people post with issues and damage from an HV pump. Glad you guys are not having problems.

All it takes is a momentary loss of pressure at high RPMs to ruin your day.
shoebox is offline  
Old 02-13-2010, 09:42 PM
  #13  
Registered User
 
Bersaglieri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 5,907
I'll be running a High Pressure pump in my 383, we'll see if it poops the bed

-Dustin-
Bersaglieri is offline  
Old 02-13-2010, 10:03 PM
  #14  
Registered User
 
grumpygreaseape's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: culleoka, tn. 38451
Posts: 134
Originally Posted by 94SLUG
MAGIC


I have HV for 20k now, and many 120+ pulls no issues... When I asked my machine shop about this suck the pan dry idea they looked at me like I was crazy...
call me old school, but if i recall correctly, the only gm motor that had an oiling system that could be "sucked dry" by a high volume oil pump was an oldsmobile motor.years ago i built a 403 in a 78 trans am and added rocket heads to it, ran it with a super t-10 i added. at the time when i built it, i called joe mondello (rip) and he said no hv pumps for olds motors. i have had hv pumps in all my sbc chevys-no problems
grumpygreaseape is offline  
Old 02-13-2010, 10:09 PM
  #15  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
mrl510's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 129
im still undetermined whether to get a high pressure or high volume pump. Is there any positives or negetives on either one?
mrl510 is offline  


Quick Reply: High volume vs. High pressure oil pump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:40 PM.