Engine oil cooler feed line insert.

[ajmac]

Does anyone have a photo of the fitting that threads into the block to direct the oil flow to the cooler? I've got one but I don't know if it came from a universal and the British parts book doesn't show it. The one I have is about 2" long and machined as one part including the thread for the block and the thread for the nut of the fitting. It's also waisted to allow oil to get around it over to the port that exits from the side of the Bell housing.

[Jordan Baker]

Previous thread. Hopefully it clears up some of your questions.

http://www.mapleleafup.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=20460

[ajmac]

Thanks Jordan, I even contributed to that and had forgotten all about it! I would still like to get an image of the fitting I have in a parts book! I'm working on a flathead for a friends carrier which needs converting to carrier spec. The cooler return hole has already been drilled but I have to decide if I plug the gallery in the block or turn a new long fitting instead to give me the same result.

[Malcolm Towrie]

Deleted due to being wrong.

[Jordan Baker]

Here is another small thread on these parts

http://www.mapleleafup.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=13429

[ajmac]

That fitting is only waisted as on the V8 it came from there was no cooler return drilled into the block so the horizontal port was used to return the cooled oil into the gallery. All you are doing is preventing the oil going into the main gallery, the long fitting simply does the same job as the grub screw, the one that I'll make will not be waisted as the block already has the cooler return drilled into the main gallery (first post photo). In a UC the horizontal port to the outside world is plugged by design.

Those were the photos I was looking for! Thanks for the second link Jordan.

[Malcolm Towrie]

I checked the 1942 Canadian carrier we have. First of all, I should say I got it wrong. I assumed the long fitting was solid. I just found it's not, it's hollow, which completely invalidates what I said above in the deleted post.

Anyway, our carrier has the fitting installed in the outer vertical port, as all the drawings show. There is no grub screw installed in the horizontal passage between the two vertical ports as shown by the "straw" photo below.

I have attached a sketch of the fitting. The tubing extension on it is 3/8" OD, which is a fairly snug fit in the vertical passage coming up from the pump. I would guess diametral clearance as about 1/32" based on how much it moves side-to-side in the passage.

So it directs most of the oil from the pump up into the cooler but also allows some flow through the gap between the tube and the passage wall to the crank brgs, etc. Just as well, as if there was no bypass, I think starting the engine with the engine and cooler drained would cause bearing damage by the time the oil got all the way around the circuit.



Malcolm

[rob love]

On a normal startup, the oil cooler would still have oil in it, even after an oil change. In fact, even after an engine change. On a mk2 with the external oil filter assembly, I would suggest it would be wise for an operator to fill the pump housing with oil before closing up the lid. On my personal modern vehicles, I always do this as well when I change a cannister filter with the exception of those engines where the filter points upwards.

I will be starting an engine soon in a carrier that has had all the lines and cooler replaced or blown clean. In that case, I'll be priming the cooler system with a bucket-pump to prevent the minute or two that the engine would otherwise be running with minimal oil pressure.

[Lynn Eades]

Good advice Rob. I fill most filters that hang vertically as well.
Malcolm. I have a couple of those fittings that have an internal taper cut in the end of the tube. (not sure what for)
Alistair, they appear to be made up as per Malcolm's drawing with a tube pressed in or sweated into the enlarged bore of a standard fitting (same as the short fitting in the other hole) This could be made with a current std. fitting. except that they would sit slightly higher because of the extra length in the spanner hex. I have not seen one like yours, before.
When Andrew Rowe spoke about a threaded plug in the horizontal hole, that is because the Australian (LP2/2a)carrier fittings do not have the long tube. They made it a total through flow system (all the oil must go through the cooler or the bypass valve to get to the engine galleries)

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by ajmac

That fitting is only waisted as on the V8 it came from there was no cooler return drilled into the block so the horizontal port was used to return the cooled oil into the gallery.

Now that's what I call OPTIMISTIC! Hoping that massively obstructed horizontal passage can pass enough oil to keep the bearings wet, and praying that no tiny morsel of gunk arrives to block it off completely!



I think it's reasonable to assume those tiny red apertures are not intended to flow oil, but merely transmit oil pressure to the port, so that a sensor can be fitted if required (sender switch or capillary pipe). For example British T16 PRV mod discussed a while back:



Obviously the only safe route for "full flow" oil cooler return is via the third port found on military spec flatheads (or drilled by hot rodders). Oddly enough the Ford CMP manual depicts "full flow" filtration achieved by means of a waisted bushing. This system has never been found on any vehicle, but the diagram serves to demonstrate the potential application for hot rodders. Hence the screw-in waisted fitting may be an aftermarket product for conversion to "full flow" filtration, without having to drill and tap for a grub screw. As you say Alistair: "the long fitting simply does the same job as the grub screw".

[ajmac]

Many thanks to all for the discussion and informative photos / drawings.

[Lynn Eades]

Tony, I assume that the filter assy in the CMP is a bypass filter, not a full flow type? (single centre bolt on lid)
In the carriers there is an unrestricted flow through the cooler and back to the galleries. They are fitted with that type of bypass valve which is supposed to bypass the cooler if the oil is cold and thick.
I am keeping this going because I am not yet 100% sure about how it should be in a full flow situation as opposed to the lesser volumne required for a bypass filter (which probably has a 0.065" restrictor on the line in) It makes more sense to have the cross gallery completely blocked, than have some of the supply head off directly to the rear main.
I guess in the end it just might take one more trip around the circuit before it all goes through (an added full flow) filter.
I have just recently installed my crank and am too late for mods now.

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Lynn Eades

Tony, I assume that the filter assy in the CMP is a bypass filter, not a full flow type?

Yes Lynn, standard bypass filter assembly with return pipe to oil pan. That full flow system described in the Ford manual is a complete mystery to me. Stillborn idea perhaps...?

Originally Posted by Lynn Eades

In the carriers there is an unrestricted flow through the cooler and back to the galleries. They are fitted with that type of bypass valve which is supposed to bypass the cooler if the oil is cold and thick.

Yes, it's the same part in the diagram, intended to protect against blocked filter.

Originally Posted by Lynn Eades

I have just recently installed my crank and am too late for mods now.

No mods necessary for full flow filtration, just a kit for the oil pump. Simples!

http://www.flatheadspeedandmachine.c...sion-kits.html

[ajmac]

Lynn,
In the British UC and Loyd parts book it lists two types of full flow filters fitted to both machines. I've a photo of an original Loyd with the full flow setup. It Is just like that CMP image in the posts above with the exception of the PRV. Sadly although all the parts including mounting brackets are listed none of it is illustrated! A photo is attached. As you know 'full flow' is not quite full flow on a Flathead without the post war / hot rod pump modification.

[Lynn Eades]

Hi Tony, Alistair, Thanks guys. When I said "full flow" I was talking about the std. system (95%) (where oil goes directly to the rear main and has the alternative option of going through the cooler (pressure is equal to both at any one time)
A bypass filter typically receives about 10% by volumne of total circulated oil.
I guess I just haven't established the reason(s) why Ford made that adapter with clearance around it, rather than having a completely sealed system of one definative flow path...... Or am I not understanding something?
I suspect only a percentage of the oil flow is supposed to (and does) go via the cooler because the hole in the adapter would be a restriction (little over 1/4") and much smaller than the main galleries in the block.
The Aussies plugged the cross drilling in the Aussie carriers (in the parts book) but used std fittings without the same sort of flow restriction.(seems better to me) This would be a real trap to someone changing the engine use, and would have caused a few "run" rear mains.

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by ajmac

I've a photo of an original Loyd with the full flow setup. It Is just like that CMP image in the posts above with the exception of the PRV.

Very interesting Alistair! Thanks for posting.

[ajmac]

The adapter directs all of the pump discharge oil that reaches that point out of the block, the rear main feed issue is just a Flathead design quirk that they couldn't get around and so had to live with. The problem is that the rear main feed is drilled from a gallery closer to the pump discharge than the tapping on the top of the Bell housing.
Any restriction in flow up to the block mounted PRV doesn't matter at all as the original pump on all British Flatheads has no pressure relief, so the oil velocity will be higher through the restrictions but the volume flow will be maintained. Pressure will increase before the restriction to the limit of the pump gear clearance or mechanical failure.
I'll try and measure the dia of the gallery from the pump up to the top of the Bell Housing, it isn't much larger than the fitting extension tube, I think the clearance is just that, rather than a design intent associated with partial oil bleed off.

The waisting of the tube allows the horizontal Bell housing port to see post cooler / full flow filter oil pressure if you wanted to pop on a sensor. The cross sectional area is just less than half that of the fitting extension tube on my version. I will test all this out with some additional sensors when I finally get the 24 stud in my Loyd.

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Lynn Eades

When I said "full flow" I was talking about the std. system (95%)

Sorry Lynn, I thought you meant "true" full flow.

Originally Posted by Lynn Eades

I guess I just haven't established the reason(s) why Ford made that adapter with clearance around it, rather than having a completely sealed system of one definative flow path...... Or am I not understanding something?

Yes Lynn, it appears you and Malcolm have misunderstood the screw-in adapter. It's not designed to provide bypass flow to the motor. That function is performed by the external bypass valve. As Malcolm says: "The tubing extension on it is 3/8" OD, which is a fairly snug fit in the vertical passage coming up from the pump." In other words, just enough clearance to avoid binding when screwing in and out. Any leakage past the sides would be miniscule, as the pressure differential between the two passages is perhaps 5 psi at most. I believe the bypass valve is set at 10 psi (?) to ensure adequate flow to the motor when cold. Of course, it relies on the cooler being full, as you guys mention.

Originally Posted by Lynn Eades

the hole in the adapter would be a restriction (little over 1/4") and much smaller than the main galleries in the block.
The Aussies plugged the cross drilling in the Aussie carriers (in the parts book) but used std fittings without the same sort of flow restriction.

This is one of those counter-intuitive situations where we need to resort to physics. It can be calculated that an adapter of 2" length and 1/4" ID will restrict flow by the same amount as 10" length of 3/8" oil gallery. In other words, it's insignificant. Which begs the question: Why do hot-rod books propose the grub screw method, when the screw-in adapter is so much simpler?

Originally Posted by Lynn Eades

This would be a real trap to someone changing the engine use, and would have caused a few "run" rear mains.

Actually it's the forward bearings which would fail, as the rear main is supplied direct from the pump. Not that it particularly matters! As you say Lynn I'm sure this trap led to catastrophic failures upon engine swap. Again, it begs the question: Why would Aussies booby trap their carrier motors in this way?

[Lynn Eades]

All very interesting, and nice picture Tony. This little trap is an area that has needed covering. I thank you guys for your collective input and I am a lot happier going forward with my carrier, now that I have had the benefit of your input. Thank you again Tony and Alistair.
I must say that Andrew R. said the Aussie cross bore plug has a hole in it. I have not seen the critter in real life ( carrier part no. 656-6) There is no picture (that I am aware of) and no ref. to a hole. Maybe one of the other LP2 guys can chime in to clarify the details of this (1/4 BSP) plug / restrictor.

Tony, the last line, of your last post, is that a pit trap for catching Kiwis?

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Lynn Eades

Andrew R. said the Aussie cross bore plug has a hole in it.

Hmmm, very interesting....that would make it a partial flow oil cooler. This may be cold climate mod (to ensure oil gets hot) or to compensate for late production motor (original motor ran 40 psi, late production ran 70 psi).