Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[porthole]

There is a lot of hype about Baker's +1 oil pan. Some think it is overkill - not worth the expense - doesn't really do what it says  yada yada yada.

Here is my take from looking into it  - and using it.

This picture, from another thread, is only one version of the pan, and the much more expensive version.
Bakers claim is three fold, 1) it is a quart larger in capacity, 2) they claim better cooling - the pan does have more surface area. Their claim is about 10 degrees cooler. 3) better oil circulation because the pan has better baffles and changes the pick area, as opposed to the MoCo's version which dumps and picks up oil in the front of the pan.

The first two items are correct, the 3rd is a bit of a misnomer. Although, they are not "incorrect" in their statement.



The picture below is the trans case and the stock oil pan, with the baffle installed

[porthole]

This is looking up. the front of the trans is down, on  the bench.

You are looking at the the two ports where the engine oil goes in and out

[porthole]

If you look at the right side of the engine between the engine and trans case, there are two hoses. The upper hose is the oil return from the engine and the lower hoes is the oil supply to the pump.

Briefly (and with some missing areas) the TC oil pump picks up oil from the pan, sends it through the cam plate out to the oil pressure sending unit, through the filter, and if equipped to the oil cooler. I think this part is key, the oil is cooled after it is pumped but before it is sent through the engine. Given the choice I would rather have the oil cooled after exiting the engine.

After the oil cooler, the oil runs back into the engine up into the heads and back down to the crank where the scavenge side of the pump sends it back to the pan. At least that is what I recall from reading the oiling system in the manual.

[porthole]

Baker's claim is that the MoCo way of oiling dumps and picks up the oil in the same location at the front of the pan and that the Baker +1 dumps in the front and pick up in the rear of the pan.
Technically this is true, but not exactly the final outcome.

With both pans the oil is returned from the engine at the front of the pan. From the picture above the oil is returned from the top hose and just dumps into the front of the pan.



The picture below shows both pans.
As you can see the Baker on the left uses cast in place baffles and the MoCo uses a plastic baffle which is spring loaded tight against the bottom of the oil pan.

When the oil dumps into MoCo pan it has to migrate to the rear of the baffle (bottom of picture below). The baffle sits tight against the bottom but it snot a perfect fit. There are openings along the side of the baffle and the rear portion is completely open.

So, in theory, with the MoCo pan the oil dumps in the front, migrates to the rear as oil is pumped out from the front pickup port.

Some oil has to get by the baffle but probably not that much.

[porthole]

This shows where the oil is picked up.
Oil feed to the pump is through the raised boss on the bottom of the oil pan.

Although it is obvious the oil is picked up from the rear with the Baker, the oil must migrate to the rear with the MoCo pan before it is picked up.

So, Baker's claim is correct, although a little misleading in my opinion.

[porthole]

Another difference.
The baker and factory pan have different drain plug locations. I forgot to check to see if the o-rings where the same  I hope so, I have a dozen hanging in the parts locker.

[porthole]

Something else to keep in mind as it relates to oil temp.

With the oil sending units mounted in the pan they are bathed in oil AFTER it goes through the pump, oil filter, cooler, engine, top end, back into pan, across the pan and then finally the oil pick up location.
The sending unit is located in the boss that feeds the oil pump, most likely the coolest location for the oil.

I don't know where the MoCo version of the sending unit goes (one of the hoses I think), but if it is in the top return hose that is probably the most accurate location.





This picture below and the next show the MoCo pickup with and without the baffle.

[porthole]

.

[porthole]

Comparison shots

Front

[porthole]

Rear

[porthole]

The bosses you see on the Baker are for an Alloy Art Stabilizer and most likely the Bagger Brace version when it is released.

[porthole]

Forgot to take a before picture

[porthole]

Is it worth it? I don't know only you can decide if it is.

How much did you spend on suspension upgrades, how about stereo upgrades, how much more chrome did you add to a bike that came fully chromed etc.

The pan shown here is the cheapest version. I found it online for $365 delivered to my door. It came with drain plugs, gasket and all new screws.

Yes it is "only" 1 quart more, but the reality is, that it is a 20% increase in capacity.
For me it is worth the the extra capacity.
If I could I would add a bigger pan to my Duramax diesel that only holds 10 quarts of oil.

I have read that the pan is an alternative to the higher compression and or stroker engines that have a tendency to blow out the dipsticks or puke oil in other places.

The larger pan allows you to stay with 4 quarts and have the extra "room" for the the big "air pump" to work.


Ever have oil spit back at you while filling the pan?
This could be part of the problem. The entry hole into the pan is much smaller then the oil fill hole.

[porthole]

OK, the road test. Haven't really had a warm day yet to compare, will know for sure when I have the 95+ day.

If I recall though, it does seem to be a bit cooler. What I did notice is that the temp drops pretty quick while sitting. These bikes always seem to have the oil down cool fairly quick when stopped, but it now seems much quicker.

There is a sizable difference is size that is "in the air".

Also, with the increase in cooling you have to be aware of the increase in warm up time.

[porthole]

This pan is available in silver, black and a billet two piece version, chromed or polished ($$$)

For the price of the billet version you could probably have the cast version chromed and have one less gasket to worry about.

http://www.bakerdrivetrain.com/flt/index.htm#p1p

[Boatman]

Nice write up Duane.   No one even posted between your pictures.   

The only downside for me (I change oil on the jiffy stand) is that the Baker drain is on the high side of the pan.
The aftermarket makes about everything better than HD..

[porthole]

Good point Bob.


I use my jack with a drain pan, so it wouldn't matter for me, but others may want to consider that.






Something else to consider if this might be in your future.

You have to remove the swing arm to do it - so you might as well replace the wear-ables in the swing arm then

http://www.cvoharley.com/smf/index.php?topic=34475.0;all

[Trapperdog]

Duane, Yet another great pictorial from you, Thanks!

[FiveO CVO]

Duane,
Ditto on Boatman's comment.     Great information for considering.  Now that I think of it, no one mentioned the fact that the less that oil gets routed through all the different peices, the less vescosity breakdown as well (more oil to spread the wealth of work).  Granted I use the SE Synthetic.  Thanks for replying to the post.  Especially with all the pic's.  Take it easy.  It's great when someone shows/tells you in laymens terms.

[ragrep]

Duane-

Thanks for all the detail,  I learned a lot from your post. I had been considering this +1 option on my FLHX , but ended up selling  the bike.

[ragrep]

Duane-

Thanks for all the detail,  I learned a lot from your post. I had been considering this +1 option on my FLHX , but ended up selling  the bike.

[porthole]

Thanks for all the detail,  I learned a lot from your post. I had been considering this +1 option on my FLHX , but ended up selling  the bike.

Well thats one way to save some money 

[jeep]

This was a great post ....Thanks for the info...

[jettjocky]

Thanks for a informative thread, I wish Baker offerd one to fit 09, they have not even started working on one.    By the time they do, I will not purchase, if I can wait for a year, I can wait forever.

[JeffsHogPen]

Duane, Nice write up. You really broke it down. I like your oil drain set up. DID you come up with that ?

[porthole]

Duane, Nice write up. You really broke it down. I like your oil drain set up. DID you come up with that ?

The oil drain pan - no, that is an available item from J&S jacks.

[REGGAB]

Good point Bob.


I use my jack with a drain pan, so it wouldn't matter for me, but others may want to consider that.






Something else to consider if this might be in your future.

You have to remove the swing arm to do it - so you might as well replace the wear-ables in the swing arm then

http://www.cvoharley.com/smf/index.php?topic=34475.0;all

What is that red stuff?

[Boatman]

What is that red stuff?

Henry-

That's good ole RL Shockproof.   Bob

[porthole]

What is that red stuff?

As Bob said, and this is how it looks on the gears after the bike sat for about 4 months.

[REGGAB]

As Bob said, and this is how it looks on the gears after the bike sat for about 4 months.

Next question:  What causes it to look like red paint?  Is there a particulate content?

I remember closely examining the pictures of your transmission during the transmission housing mishap, and wondering about what it is that makes that stuff look like that.  When I think about red oil, I'm thinking about Bel-Ray's clear red color.  I've never seen opaque gear oil like that, which is why I'm asking if there is a particulate substrate within.

Just curious.  Thanks.   

[porthole]

Henry

It looks like a frothy strawberry shake right out of the bottle.

[Sean M Cary]

Henry

It looks like a frothy strawberry shake right out of the bottle.

too bad it doesn't smell like it...has a nasty diesel fuel smell

nice thread Duane...that was good to go

[SBB]

Henry

It looks like a frothy strawberry shake right out of the bottle.

I put Shockproof in the 09 SEUC at 1000 miles.

Changed it today.

I use a 24" X 24" pan with a drain for oil and transmission changes.

I poured a quarter size drop of the new stuff in a corner of the pan to compare new with old.

Amazing, other than the "frothy" like Duane said above, it looked the same.

After 10K miles it looked the same.

Good stuff in my book!

       


But Sean is right, it does stink, but it's a smell I can handle once every 10K miles.   

[Twolanerider]

I put Shockproof in the 09 SEUC at 1000 miles.

Changed it today.

I use a 24" X 24" pan with a drain for oil and transmission changes.

I poured a quarter size drop of the new stuff in a corner of the pan to compare new with old.

Amazing, other than the "frothy" like Duane said above, it looked the same.

After 10K miles it looked the same.

Good stuff in my book!

       


But Sean is right, it does stink, but it's a smell I can handle once every 10K miles.   

It should though.  We do so baby the fluids on these things.  The same gear oil we'd put in a transmission or differential of a heavy car or truck and forget about for 100,000 miles we change every 5,000 to 10,000 on the bikes.  Primary fluid really has little to do but carry away heat.  And it gets changed as regularly. 

Of course the somewhat premature changes don't hurt anything (except for wallets and the occasional cross threaded drain plug).  But we're more than a bit anal with this stuff.

[REGGAB]

I put Shockproof in the 09 SEUC at 1000 miles.

Changed it today.

I use a 24" X 24" pan with a drain for oil and transmission changes.

I poured a quarter size drop of the new stuff in a corner of the pan to compare new with old.

Amazing, other than the "frothy" like Duane said above, it looked the same.

After 10K miles it looked the same.

Good stuff in my book!

       


But Sean is right, it does stink, but it's a smell I can handle once every 10K miles.   

Yep.  Both Bel-Ray lubes are stinky as well, so as long as I deal with this task on an empty stomach, I'm good to go.  Noticed too that transmission used oil never looks any different than the new stuff going in.  Isn't so with the primary.....probably due to "the shoe," but for the most part, it is still red.

Have also noted oil in both diffs, transfer case, and ATF in the xmsn of the ton truck look great after 30K miles.......even after stream fording.

[porthole]

Have also noted oil in both diffs, transfer case, and ATF in the xmsn of the ton truck look great after 30K miles.......even after stream fording.

You using syns in the 1 ton too?

I just got a full complement of sysn for the pseudo 1 ton.

[Sean M Cary]

Yep.  Both Bel-Ray lubes are stinky as well, so as long as I deal with this task on an empty stomach, I'm good to go.  Noticed too that transmission used oil never looks any different than the new stuff going in.  Isn't so with the primary.....probably due to "the shoe," but for the most part, it is still red.

Have also noted oil in both diffs, transfer case, and ATF in the xmsn of the ton truck look great after 30K miles.......even after stream fording.

I'd say its more the clutch...  Just had my primary off to put the Hayden M6 in - there was clutch "stuff" in the low points in the primary

[REGGAB]

You using syns in the 1 ton too?

I just got a full complement of sysn for the pseudo 1 ton.

I think MOPAR fluids are synthetic, but not sure.  I just drive and maintain that thing............have enough to keep my true OCD in cheque with two bikes............hehehehe.....and I want another "older" one.

[porthole]

Don't know about mopar, but at the cost of syns I would wonder.

My duramax just broke 50k, so I started doing some "stuff" to it.

When I put the trans kit in (later this week I hope) it will be syn. The rear axle got 8 quarts of syn with the new cover and the engine will get it with the next oil change.