That helps a lot. I'm thinking it should clear in my 312 but I'll want to carefully check for crankshaft clearance. I'v got ARP main bolts with the block drilled and tapped for the extra length. Since the Windsor bolts are much longer anyway the big thing is to shim the new bolts so the length  going in the block stays the same. I'll be looking for a thick washer of spacer that comes close enough to hand fit or if worse comes to worse the local machine shop that did my other machine work can do it. From what I can see there may be enough length on the studs that the windage tray bolts on to shim slightly between the windage tray and the head bolts for more clearance if needed.  Great info as always. Going to be interesting pulling the pan with the engine in the car. It can be done but messy and no fun.

Parts came in today. Amazon is quick and good prices with free shipping. I ended up with the Canton 20-942 stud kit. When I compare these with the factory bolts and the studs are prety close in length. One washer may work. Two at the most. Since I have had the block drilled and tapped for the longer ARP bolts I may only need the one washer. When I get it apart I will run the stud all the way down and see where I end up. Since I may have some latitude as to where I finally place the windage tray, would I be better off with it as close as I can get it to the crank while clearing it or as far away from the crank as I can get it? Thanks again for all the great info. I love it when you can switch and swap parts and make them work in different applications. Its what hot rodding is all about.

Yes, the ARP stud kit is nearly identical in length, and if you have one thread deeper than stock it may work just fine.  I am thinking of doing that same thing of drilling and tapping deeper, plus maybe taking one thread off the end of the stud for insurance.  Good luck.  Joe-JDC

JDC

Did any of you follow up with what bolts, etc worked best for this situation if you did not do the install as Ted explained?

Ted,

Have you done any kind of back to back testing using a crank scraper versus a windage tray? 
This thread got me wondering..

Dave

While there has been some testing with windage trays and oil level depths, there has been no testing on my end regarding windage trays versus crankshaft scrapers.  With all the different designs out there, that could take awhile to get a definitive answer.  The main girdle I make for the Y does incorporate a degree of oil scraping in it but because of the universal nature of it fitting a variety of strokes, it’s not exact either.
 

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)

Thanks Ted..
Yeah I understand testing would take forever if trying to do all of them. Was just wondering if you had tested what you had on hand.
I have a scraper for my 572 which is set up to only have .050 clearance on rods and crank throw was the reason for my question.

Dave

I understand that windage trays and scrapers perform different functions, but for a similar goal, oil control so I'm not sure that a versus would be beneficial.  Different designs of each could be but like Ted says, there are lot's of different ideas and designs out there.  Scraper testing would be a huge undertaking since no one produces one for the Y so all configurations to be tested would have to be custom made.


Lawrenceville, GA

 I agree. 
The windage tray that came on the original Boss 302 looks nothing like the canton discussed in this post. For those who have never seen it the Boss tray was a metal one with louvers in it.

As to the scraper, as Ted said each one would have to be for a specific stroke. 
I bought one for my 572 Mopar 4.5 stroke from a Super Stock racer out of FL he builds a lot of engines. He had a cad/cam file and just lazer cut it. Nice piece, not cheap for a piece of metal. Each area  around the rod and crank throw was knife edged. Once I got it fitted perfectly I drilled and installed pins so it would go on in the same place every time.
I'm sure if someone was to make one for the Y it could be digitized and converted to cad/cam and then be manipulated for different stroke combinations. May not be worth it as to numbers to produce though.

I get to reading in here and then I get the "what ifs" or "I wonder" so I have to ask if anyone has done or heard of something.

Thanks

Dave

I have a cad file for a scraper that is in my engine.  I could help with that aspect but I'm sure Ted has it mostly worked out because of the girdles.  Even so, it's still a lot of expense and work.

It's not just the stroke that you are concerned with.  Also rod shape / size and bolt positioning and crank counterweight shape.  These won't be much of a concern for most Ys but for performance oriented ones with more specialized parts, it can be.
For instance, my 3.47 stroke with 2" journals extends about the same amount below the pan rail as a stock 292. I don't remember the exact figures now, but if the scraper had been tailored only to a longer stroke, it would have been off quite a bit.  But, a scraper intended for a stock 292 would have also been incorrect for the combo.



Lawrenceville, GA