jeepsr4ever wroteI will say that when you take a source point and move the source to two distinct points in any given cavity with pockets (or leaking holes) in between you end up flowing more evenly out of those holes than you will by just filling the cavity from one point.
Perhaps, but how do you explain away those that have found no measurable pressure drop from the pump to the back end of the gallery's?
You guys keep thinking of this as a free stream open ended system. It is not. So long as feed pressure exceeds the rate of leakage it acts like a closed pressurized system.
If Blown7 is losing that much pressure through the valvetrain I would think you would want to address that problem directly, instead of trying to bypass it. Slow the excessive leakage through the valvetrain and you increase pressure to the bearings. On the other hand, he still has in excess of 40-50 psi at the back of the galley, which is more than enough to feed the bearings.
Without knowing what the feed pressure is at the head of the gallery's, you can't conclude that there is a pressure drop from one end to the other. A pressure drop measured from only two points, one at the pump and the other at the end of the gallery's could very well be caused from something further upstream (closer to the pump) from the head of the gallery's - and if that is the case then a bypass line won't help.
Now, should you be able to show by pressure readings that there is a significant pressure drop from the gallery feed manifold to the back end of the gallery, then I will go along with the potential for a bypass line to help, but only if it does not simply increase flow through the valvtrain. Hell, I'll put one in myself! I have not varied from that postion in any of my discussions on the subject.
