|
|
RAK402
|
-- 06-22-2016 @ 10:00 AM
|
| |
I know this has been discussed frequently, and that the current wisdom is to put five quarts of oil in.
Does this change when running an oil filter? Should it be more?
Thank you all very much in advance!
|
|
|
shogun1940
|
-- 06-22-2016 @ 2:15 PM
|
| |
If it's 4qts with out the filter then I would put in an extra qt. best way to check is on level ground overnite leave the dipstick out and check it then.
|
|
|
kubes40
|
-- 06-22-2016 @ 2:57 PM
|
| |
RAK402,
You are correct, this has been discussed frequently. I really don't understand why though. Apparently many simply do not comprehend documented proof. Case in point: The engineering drawing of the oil pan in the Benson Ford Research Center clearly indicates five US quarts. There is no additional quart added for the optional oil filter. Nor is a quart subtracted if no (optional) filter was installed. It's five US quarts - period.
This message was edited by kubes40 on 6-22-16 @ 3:00 PM
|
|
|
kubes40
|
-- 06-22-2016 @ 3:00 PM
|
| |
Shogun,
That is really not a reliable way to check the proper level. The dipstick may have been replaced with an incorrect one. There may be sludge in the pan. The dust seal may be absent from the stick.
The best way to check proper fill is to allow the old oil to drain completely and fill with five US quarts. Allow that fresh oil to settle in the pan and with the car on level ground, check the stick. Mark the stick as "properly full" with the level actually witnessed.
|
|
|
RAK402
|
-- 06-22-2016 @ 3:04 PM
|
| |
kubes40,
My apologies for bringing it up again. It was not my intention be be obtuse, it is just that, in looking at the older posts, I did recall seeing whether there was any difference with or without the oil filter.
Thank you both for your answers.
|
|
|
kubes40
|
-- 06-22-2016 @ 3:13 PM
|
| |
Certainly NO apologies necessary. 
|
|
|
MGG
|
-- 06-22-2016 @ 10:13 PM
|
| |
I just checked my 1934 Ford book and it clearly says to use 5 quarts of oil. There is no qualification of whether or not the engine has a filter. Also later in the book it says to not exceed the full mark on the dip stick. Many of our engines show full with the installation of exactly 4 quarts. I have an original dipstick with the correct seal and no sludge in the pan. What gives and why would Ford do this? I run 5 quarts for better cooling and to be on the safe side with no overflow onto the floor. I have two other old Fords, 1940 truck and 1947 truck and their dipsticks have the full mark even LOWER into the oil pan. I guess maybe that could be a difference between the pans.
|
|
|
shogun1940
|
-- 06-26-2016 @ 2:13 PM
|
| |
Well what a good discussion , if it calls for 5 qts. And then you add a remote filter you are decreasing the oil in the pan while it's running . I agree about putting a mark on your dipstick after changing the oil if you need to , as long as the oil is not being hit with the crank and foaming up I would rather have more than less.
|
|
|
RAK402
|
-- 06-27-2016 @ 9:30 AM
|
| |
I like the idea about marking the dipstick as well-so you will really know where you are at.
I know that with four quarts in mine, it measure at the center mark on the dipstick (which I think is to add one quart).
Next oil change, I will add a mark (if it does not show full with five quarts).
Thank you all!
|
|
|
kubes40
|
-- 06-28-2016 @ 8:20 AM
|
| |
One other thing that I'd failed to mention earlier that can change the "reading" on the stick is the depth the tube is threaded in to the boss. That, along with crud in the pan, possibly an incorrect stick, no dust shield on the stick... it can all add up to an inaccurate reading.
|
|
|
TomO
|
-- 06-28-2016 @ 9:58 AM
|
| |
Mike, have you ever seen a dipstick that read "full" with 5 qts? All that I have seen read full at 4.5 qts. I always assumed that the over reading was to keep the customer's perception of oil usage down. He could lose 1/2 qt and the dipstick would still read "full".
Tom
|
|