|
|
cingmire
|
-- 08-20-2014 @ 1:42 PM
|
| |
I have an early 36 Ford 4 door sedan. It was my understanding that the motor takes 5 quarts of oil. After I change the oil it showed about a quart high on the dip stick. Am I putting to much oil in or maybe I have the wrong dip stick. There is no oil filter on the car. Please enlighten me. Thanks. Chuck
|
|
|
oakhurst
|
-- 08-21-2014 @ 9:39 AM
|
| |
Perhaps too much Gunk left in the pan?
|
|
|
supereal
|
-- 08-21-2014 @ 2:39 PM
|
| |
The correct fill without a filter is 4 quarts. Any more, and it will usually leak out around the crank seals. Later Ford literature called for 5 quarts in everything, for some reason. I suspect they didn't want to remake the dipsticks to save pennies. When you put four quarts in, remark the "full" level on the dipstick.
|
|
|
cingmire
|
-- 08-21-2014 @ 6:26 PM
|
| |
Thanks for the information. The car has been leaking oil. It is great to have access to people who have the answers.
|
|
|
TomO
|
-- 08-24-2014 @ 9:24 AM
|
| |
The 36 Ford Owner's manual says the capacity is 5 quarts. I would use 5 quarts and ignore the dipstick full mark.
Your dipstick should have a 1/4" thick leather seal under the stop washer and should show about 1/2 quart over the full mark when filled with 5 quarts. The 5 quarts help keep your engine cooler. The later V-8s had a smaller oil pan and an oil filter. The pan capacity on thse cars was 4 quarts add one for the filter.
Tom
|
|
|
VT/JeffH
|
-- 08-28-2014 @ 7:26 AM
|
| |
Hi cingmire,
You've asked a question that doesn't seem to get a consensus answer from the reading I've done on the subject.
I agree with TomO that the literature for my '36 says use 5 quarts.
I also agree that many owners, having added 5 quarts, report a high level on the dipstick, and frequently, leaking.
My opinion is along the same lines as oakhurst suggested; That unless you know the inside of the oil pan and valve valley are clean, there is a possibility ranging to a likelihood that through the years some of the oil has turned to sludge and the displacement from the sludge can account for the high quantity reading.
Several additional complications also exist.
This is copied from a post that Kube40 wrote somewhere else... "There are so many variables that might "confuse" folks. Junk in the pan, wrong dipstick, dipstick tube threaded in too far in the boss, missing dust seal at the stick..."
I really like that last suggestion. There is a dust seal, I think it fits up inside a small cap, that ends up making the dipstick sit higher in the tube. Are you missing that dust seal?
-VT/JeffH
|
|
|
supereal
|
-- 08-29-2014 @ 7:23 PM
|
| |
Without the filter, the fifth quart will swamp the labyrinth and slinger "seal" on the rear of the crankshaft, causing a constant leak until the oil level drops to about four quarts. Same is true of the rope seal used in later old Fords. Using full synthetic oil will also cause leaks. We tell customers that if they use it, our warranty against leaks is void. The literature calling for five quarts in all engines is simply incorrect if it doesn't qualify it by mentioning the oil filter.
|
|
|
JM
|
-- 08-31-2014 @ 6:53 AM
|
| |
Regarding Jeff's comment above on sludge buildup in the bottom of an oil pan affecting actual oil capacity; when I removed the oil pan from the engine of a '35 coupe I am working on, there was about a 1" buildup of thick sludge in the lower section of the pan. Just out of curiosity, when I removed that sludge, I put it into an old quart jar to see how much volumn it would fill. After scr*ping as much out of the pan as possible, it wound up filling that jar with ~ 1/2 to 3/4 qt. of sludge!! This is one reason why the debate will continue on "how many quarts of oil does your Flathead engine take"
I will add some pictures of this oil pan showing the sludge buildup and the amount that was removed when I can get back on my computer this Tuesday. There was no coolant in this oil pan when I drained the oil.
John
This message was edited by JM on 9-4-14 @ 3:38 PM
|
|
|
TomO
|
-- 08-31-2014 @ 7:48 AM
|
| |
John,
I think that the change to a 4 quart pan in 1949 when most engine were equipped with an oil filter, has some people confused. With the correct dipstick, most 32-48 cars will show 1/2 quart over the full mark with 5 quarts of oil. They were this way back in the day and it was considered normal. Most cars were the same. It gave the owner more miles before he had to add a quart.
The slinger type seal was never very successful in controlling oil leaks. They worked great until the main bearings developed some wear. The rope type seals were better at controlling oil leaks.
The slinger type was a problem in the hilly country and San Francisco was probably the worst place to have a Ford with one. If you parked with the back of the engine lower than the front, oil would leak out into the flywheel housing.
Tom
|
|
|
supereal
|
-- 08-31-2014 @ 3:46 PM
|
| |
I've never seen that much sludge in the oil pan unless there was a coolant lean into the oil. If you are curious about how much sludge is in your engine, remove the intake manifold and look in the valve "valley". I have scooped handfuls of what we used to call "black Jello" out of there. Trying to dislodge those deposits with the engine in the car is risky. Once disturbed, it is likely the particles will end up in places you don't want it, even with a filter. Old Henry didn't think much of filters, air or oil. That is one reason Ford tractors, and some trucks, were equipped with a removable panel in the bottom of the oil pan so the sludge could be scr*ped out. For the tractor, it was a must, as the engine and cast oil pan form the tractor chassis. Detergent oil, now common, contrary to the prevailing myth, will not remove heavy sludge deposits. The purpose is to keep sludge in suspension so the oil filter can catch it, and is safe in old engines. As for the debate on 4 vs 5 qts, if your engine is leaking oil, simply try the lesser amount. The old manuals were often revised with no attention to earlier information.
This message was edited by supereal on 8-31-14 @ 3:49 PM
|
|
|
David J
|
-- 08-31-2014 @ 8:02 PM
|
| |
Chase the tail subject here . On Fordbarn several years ago I did a fill test with a stock 33-34 oil pan . I set the pan at the same angle it would be at in the car and added 4 qts and then one more . Well it was enlightening as the 4 quarters were really pounding the drum hard at the time and the test showed that with 5 qts in a stock pan the level was below the baffle . BELOW THE BAFFLE !! How can this cause what they say it does ? Why don't my cars leak out the fifth quart ? Others have done the same test with some different year pans with pretty much the same results . Your call of course but these tests AND the fact Ford calls for 5 qts ends the discussion in my eyes . You will find the 4 quarters to be both dedicated and noisy so you will probably hear much more .
|
|
|
kubes40
|
-- 09-01-2014 @ 5:44 AM
|
| |
This discussion has been raised so many times and so many times, the same variable answers are set forth.
I am to the point of laughing when I see a thread similar to this.
Folks, the oil pans were designed to be "full" at five USA quarts with or without a filter. Check the engineering drawings as I have done and you will no longer have any lingering doubt.
Myths and "old wives tales" are one thing. Proper research is quite another.
|
|
|
JM
|
-- 09-04-2014 @ 5:15 PM
|
| |
These are pictures of the sludge I found in the oil pan of my 35 5w coupe when I removed the engine. This type of sludge buildup is one reason why some "think" their FH engine takes less oil than others claim. This is the third engine that I have taken apart with this kind of sludge build up in the oil pan. WARNING: Viewer discretion is advised...this stuff is filthy ugly. LOL 
John
|
|
|
JM
|
-- 09-04-2014 @ 5:17 PM
|
| |
Since only one picture can be posted at a time, I will have to make several posts.
John
This message was edited by JM on 9-4-14 @ 5:34 PM
|
|
|
JM
|
-- 09-04-2014 @ 5:19 PM
|
| |
another
John
|
|
|
JM
|
-- 09-04-2014 @ 5:21 PM
|
| |
Hi Bruce, please eliminate this post since picture attached will not open. Thank you
John
This message was edited by JM on 9-4-14 @ 5:54 PM
|
|
|
JM
|
-- 09-04-2014 @ 5:22 PM
|
| |
Hi Bruce, please eliminate this post since picture attached will not open. Thank you
John
This message was edited by JM on 9-4-14 @ 5:53 PM
|
|
|
JM
|
-- 09-04-2014 @ 5:23 PM
|
| |
Hi Bruce, please eliminate this post since picture attached will not open. Thank you
John
This message was edited by JM on 9-4-14 @ 5:52 PM
|
|
|
JM
|
-- 09-04-2014 @ 5:44 PM
|
| |
Hopefully these will work.....
John
|
|
|
JM
|
-- 09-04-2014 @ 5:46 PM
|
| |
another
John
|
|
|
JM
|
-- 09-04-2014 @ 5:48 PM
|
| |
and that's all folks....I hope
John
|
|
|
Drbrown
|
-- 09-04-2014 @ 7:57 PM
|
| |
This topic is certainly controversial. I have a newly rebuilt '48 in my '47, clean oil pan, and 5 quarts reads well above full on dip stick. Book says 5 quarts. It has no filter system. Experience no leaking. I sleep at night.
This message was edited by Drbrown on 9-4-14 @ 7:58 PM
|
|
|
supereal
|
-- 09-05-2014 @ 1:42 PM
|
| |
The oil filter holds about a pint of oil when the element is saturated. Without a filter, five quarts is an overfill. I suspect the revision of the manual was done so owners wouldn't have low oil level if they installed a filter and stayed with four quarts. It is probably better to overfill and oil your garage floor, than to run low. High oil level in the pan is not dangerous unless it comes in contact with the crankshaft counterweights. Then, aeration of the oil will cause foaming, allowing the oilpump to lose prime.
|
|