I tested a pretty good wet sump vs a dry sump system on my dyno several years ago. This was for a circle track customer running a small block Chevy engine under the 7448 carb and 2101 intake rules. His engine made around 325 horsepower with the wet sump and it picked up almost exactly 15 horsepower with the dry sump setup.
It was a fun and interesting series of tests to run. We had the engine all set up for the dry sump system so all we had to do was change the oil pan and hook up the drive belt. This took about 1/2 hour and we were back up and running again. I had the tank mounted to the shelving that's next to my dyno and I could look inside the tank while the engine was running.
At low speeds the engine would retain MORE oil than at high speed. I think about 2 quarts more at 2000rpm vs 6000rpm steady state running. The power increase was measured at peak power (5200rpm) and above that it continued to be about 15 horsepower even though the power of the engine was falling off pretty rapidly due to the small carburetor setup. Thus, it made an even larger difference precentage wise as the rpm went higher and higher.
You know it takes more power to run the dry sump which in this case had two scavenge sections and one pressure section than a stock small block pump. It just shows how important it is to get the oil away from the crankshaft and rods.
I don't know if a large engine like the big Ford would gain as much as the little Chevy. The big Chevy would probably be much worse than the big Ford, they do afterall return all of their oil down through holes in the valley and into a very crowded crankcase. The big Ford doesn't have that problem...
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.