PDA

View Full Version : Engine: Which is it? 5 or 6 quarts???



jclary
10-22-2017, 10:09 AM
Something I have never had to think about 'till now. Some of you know, I have been diligently working away, at breakneck snails pace:rolleyes:, to get this 1957 truck 289 engine ready to fire up on my engine test stand. I removed the old (break-in oil?) and have replaced it with 4 quarts of 20 wt. oil that I've been circulating through the oil galleries to give the components lubrication and flushing. This oil will be discarded and replaced before attempting to run the engine. The rebuild was completed, and the builder passed away before it could be used, years ago.

When I bought the engine, besides no carb, no decent distributor, and a few other little details...it was missing the oil pan dip stick. I have extras from 232 V8's and other 224 truck V8's. I have a shop manual that covers trucks from 2E through 8E series. On oil capacities, it list ALL V8 engines as 5 quarts. However, all the extra dip sticks I have read "6 quarts":confused: The manual list only the 245 six cylinder engine as calling for 6 quarts in the oil pan. Was this a misprint, or am I misreading something? The manual says "All V8's 5 quarts." But, two truck configured 224 V8's I have read 6 on their dipsticks.:confused:

I"m gonna post this, and make a dash to visit mom's nursing home. I'll check back in later. Appreciate any clarity anyone can provide.:)

ndynis
10-22-2017, 10:16 AM
I believe that it is 5 qts in the pan & 1 qt in the filter for a total of 6 but I'm sure someone smarter than me will chime in.

Gunslinger
10-22-2017, 11:40 AM
That's correct...five quart sump plus one for the filter. Studebaker would print owners manuals that weren't exactly models of clarity in that regard...they would only say a five quart capacity with no mention of adding a quart for the oil filter.

E. Davis
10-22-2017, 11:40 AM
I think you are right but he will have to run the engine for awhile and see what it decides. As stated in earlier posts on this subject the engine seems to determine what it will tolerate. For instance my 289 will throw out that last quart and is content to run with the dipstick on the add line until the next oil change. Believe me...they do have a personality of their own.

Alan
10-22-2017, 11:44 AM
224's used a larger pan like 51-54K's. I bought a late 54K and it had a 224 with the 6 quart pan. At La Palma I looked at the 224 in Bud Grubers 55 stake bed and it had a 6 quart pan.

StudeRich
10-22-2017, 03:03 PM
John, it sounds like all the spare parts you have are too OLD to be for a 5 Qt. Oil Pan. :(
All V8's were 6 Qt. Oil Pan Capacity '51 to '55, after that of course they were 5 Qt.

And it has already been said that they never mentioned the "Total Fill" amount, because the Filter was Optional at least up to early '62.

jclary
10-22-2017, 04:04 PM
John, it sounds like all the spare parts you have are too OLD to be for a 5 Qt. Oil Pan. :(
All V8's were 6 Qt. Oil Pan Capacity '51 to '55, after that of course they were 5 Qt.

And it has already been said that they never mentioned the "Total Fill" amount, because the Filter was Optional at least up to early '62.

I'm still puzzled by this. As you know, the later engines, '56 to '62 (I think) used an inverted "spin-on" bypass disposable filter, instead of the earlier "upright" canister type. So...even with a correct spin-on filter, does not the bulk of oil in the filter drain back to the oil pan when the engine is not running? If a sixth quart of oil was added for the filter, then wouldn't an oil check make it look like it was overfilled? ...That is, if an extra quart was added for the filter as some have suggested.

The reason I'm pestering everyone with this, is that I was planning on robbing the filler tube and dipstick off one of my spare engines. One thing I just now thought about, I also have, (under a cover) a 259 engine that came from a car. I need to grab a can of bug spray, pull off that cover, and see if it's dip stick & tube are still there. If so, that could solve the problem. I can install those, check the oil, and the reading should reflect what I poured into the sump this past week.

One more thing (it's all about the details)...My confusion is probably due to how I have grouped my manuals/information. Included with the shop manual (that covers 1956 to '63 trucks), I have a "Studebaker Parts Manual" that covers all Truck Parts from 1949 to 1956 (revised Jan, 1961). I think I've confused the years covered by the two very different manuals. There's a very good reason I never aspired to be an "accountant." Details matter.:rolleyes:;)

StudeRich
10-22-2017, 04:31 PM
Talk about making something REALLY Simple, sound complicated!! :lol:

You are almost correct about the (Fram PB50) Spin-on Filters. Actually they were used starting in 1958.
Have many engines we see here, been "Modified" since they rolled out of the factory? You bet!

Yes I have always wondered about the drainback thing and when I used to want to know how much Oil is really available to my Engine's Oiling system while running, I leave the hood up before turning off the engine, then shut er down, RUN around to the right fender and pull the stick! :ohmy: It actually makes little or no difference.

The truth be told Jeff, "deepinhock" who actually KNOWS Filters, working for the Largest Mfg. of them; Champ Filters, has said that "most" Brands Should and do have a drainback Valve so that should happen very little or maybe just slowly?

I can attest to fact that I HAVE heard them "Gurgling", making "not pretty" sounds spitting Oil back in the Filler Pipe, so I can't explain that!

But I think the bottom line is, just pour in the 6 Qts. and forget it. :rolleyes:

RDWEAVER
10-22-2017, 07:36 PM
I have one of those spin on filters on a 1959. The oil will not drain out unless you let air into it. I use a Wix filter #51050 and there is no drain back with this filter. It stays full of oil because there is no way to get air in. I learned after the first oil change to drill a small hole into the top of the oil filter the night before I change the oil or suffer the consequences. ;) If you do this the filter is always empty and you wont spill a drop.

jrlemke
10-22-2017, 10:14 PM
I use the Fram PB50 filter, I let it sit for a half hour or so and remove the filter. No spill and no drilling. -Jim

t walgamuth
10-23-2017, 06:26 AM
If the filter drains it would seem to allow a long time to fill it. The engine would have no oil pressure in the time it takes to fill and where is the air going to go?

wdills
10-23-2017, 07:54 AM
I think 2 different block styles are being discussed here.

The filters that can drain back are the ones mounted upside down on top of the engine (partial flow block). The first engine in my car was this design. 5 qts filled it up to the mark on the dip stick and all was happy. There was no delay in building oil pressure at start because even though the filter drained when you shut the car off, the block passages were all still full of oil. Once you start the engine, oil starts flowing through the filter again and fills it up. The oil feed to the filter is through an orifice, so you don't see any noticeable oil pressure loss as the filter re-fills.

My current engine is a full flow block so the filter is mounted down on the side of the engine beside the oil pan. This mounting arrangement doesn't allow the oil to drain back, so it takes 6 qts to fill the filter and the sump.

RDWEAVER
10-25-2017, 07:55 PM
I have one of those spin on filters on a 1959. The oil will not drain out unless you let air into it. I use a Wix filter #51050 and there is no drain back with this filter. It stays full of oil because there is no way to get air in. I learned after the first oil change to drill a small hole into the top of the oil filter the night before I change the oil or suffer the consequences. ;) If you do this the filter is always empty and you wont spill a drop.
The engine I was talking about is a 1959. It uses an upside down filter (it is not what I refer to as full flow) and I am almost certain if I took the filter off oil would run out all over the valley pan under the intake manifold. I have not done this since the first time I changed oil and was surprised to find out the oil was still in there after sitting over night.
In order for the oil to run out of the filter with the engine off air must enter the filter. My engine will not let air enter the filter for some reason. Evidently others will and this leads me to question why this is? Any Ideas what the differences might be? Oh, by the way 5 quarts in my engine leaves me about 5/8" below the full mark. I add enough Lucas Oil stabilizer to bring it up to full and this is where she likes it.

StudeRich
10-25-2017, 08:18 PM
If it will not take a Full 6 Qts. WITH the Filter AND read "Full" after running, you have a dented Pan, wrong dipstick Tube, or WAY too much Oil clogged in the Valley or Valve Covers, the later is a stretch but COULD happen.

The reason SOME drain, and some do not is the Filter BRAND!
But all with a "Drainback Valve" should come off without a mess, just quickly flip it, when it gets loose.
You could always outsmart it, and wait overnight to remove it after running.

52-fan
10-26-2017, 09:25 AM
I wasn't even aware of the drain-back feature until I got my 52 Commander(with a 1960 engine). I use a Wix filter and it drains every time I shut the engine down. The 59 Lark six I had years ago did not drain and I made a mess when changing the filter. The difference may have been the quality of the filter. Back when I had the Lark,1966-69, I used what was on sale. :o