Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Oil Pans for late model V8?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Oil Pans for late model V8?

    Does anyone have these new?

    Thanks
    Tom

  • #2
    How late model? SI had a couple of bins full of orange ones at the Swap Meet. I suspect they were for McKinnon engines.

    Comment


    • #3
      I thought I went through the SI catalog pretty good and didn't find any. Of course I could easily have missed them.

      By late model I mean 259, 289. I think they are the same since late 50's to 1964. I don't think there was any difference between the full flow oil 62-64 and the pre full flow 62 down to ?) I don't know about 232 and 224. R series is different.

      I wonder what new ones might cost?

      Comment


      • #4
        Give SI a call. Their catalog does not include the stock from SASCO they now have.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks.

          I'll have to wait until Monday to call.

          If anyone knows what they cost, I'm curious as a cat to know. (I'll post what they cost Monday.)

          Tom

          Comment


          • #6
            I bought an oil pan for a 1963 R1 from Lionel Stone, but I do not know if there were any of those left in his inventory or if that is what you need.
            "Growing old is mandatory, but growing up is optional." author unknown

            Comment


            • #7
              Unless you really WANT a 6 Qt. Oil Pan, you cannot use a '51-'55 V-8 Oil Pan.

              The '56 to '57 is the large drain plug, the '58 to '64 is the small 9/16" wrench size 3/8" drain plug type.
              StudeRich
              Second Generation Stude Driver,
              Proud '54 Starliner Owner



              Comment


              • #8
                Unless you really WANT a 6 Qt. Oil Pan, you cannot use a '51-'55 V-8 Oil Pan.

                The '56 to '57 is the large drain plug, the '58 to '64 is the small 9/16" wrench size 3/8" drain plug type.
                Then what is sitting on my late model 289 on the '55 is sheer sacreliege. The 259 pan from the stock 259 fit without much fuss, but, picking up one of these pans means that you'll need to also get the large drain plug of course. Also, just like when I went to replace my R-series pan with another R-series pan, ensure that the baffles do not interfere with the oil pump, or interfere with installing the pan, as each pan is not constructed to the same exact tolerances. The 289 still has it's original oil pump, but after I installed it I took a probe, opened up the drainplug, and made sure there was enough clearance at the bottom of the pickup, of which I had about 3/4 - 1 inch of clearance around the pickup.

                Oh, and the appearance of the engine is now less(alright far less) than stock .
                1964 Studebaker Commander R2 clone
                1963 Studebaker Daytona Hardtop with no engine or transmission
                1950 Studebaker 2R5 w/170 six cylinder and 3spd OD
                1955 Studebaker Commander Hardtop w/289 and 3spd OD and Megasquirt port fuel injection(among other things)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by StudeRich View Post
                  Unless you really WANT a 6 Qt. Oil Pan, you cannot use a '51-'55 V-8 Oil Pan.

                  The '56 to '57 is the large drain plug, the '58 to '64 is the small 9/16" wrench size 3/8" drain plug type.
                  I don't know much about the early V8's but are you saying that the 51-55 pan would fit and that it is deeper and holds an extra quart of oil?
                  ____________________

                  Ah yes, the Big drain nut and the Small drain plug. I know them well.
                  ____________________

                  Pickup 3/4 to 1" off the bottom is way to high for me. If you take the area through the pickup tube and set the height of the pickup so you have the same "curtain" area, you have massively excessive area at even 1/4" pickup clearance.

                  The sole objective of the sump system is to ensure that the pickup never sucks air. The more oil above the pickup the better. I would shoot for 1/4 to 1/2"

                  Comment


                  • #10


                    This is the now installed 259 six quart oil pan. It is not so much deeper as the pickup area is much larger, and the large drain nut is on the bottom, rather than at the rear. The oilpan has two baffles, one just forward of the nut that splits the pan into two, and another that is in the typical spot before the dropoff in front. The oil pump is at the rear of the engine, which has the 3/4 inch clearance and is right under the drain nut. There is only two ways that oil pump would fail, either if the car is parked nose forward on the incline of a steep mountain, or the oilpan has no oil in it at all, in either case a person has bigger problems than a sump not getting any oil. It is also noted that I have spun this engine on only 3 quarts in the pan, which if it gets down that far, shows the engine has far larger problems than no oil at all.
                    1964 Studebaker Commander R2 clone
                    1963 Studebaker Daytona Hardtop with no engine or transmission
                    1950 Studebaker 2R5 w/170 six cylinder and 3spd OD
                    1955 Studebaker Commander Hardtop w/289 and 3spd OD and Megasquirt port fuel injection(among other things)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Wow, I've never seen one of those. Is that the 51-55 pan? Its not custom made, right?

                      While 6 quarts sounds like an improvement, doing it by making the sump longer is not the direction to go. But it does look narrower - is that right? Narrower is good.

                      That sump is so long it looks almost like a "no sump" oil pan which is always presents other problems. Many circle track guys have low clearance pans with mazes of baffles and spring doors to try to keep oil around the pickup. Anything that moves regarding baffling can stop moving and that is disaster for those pans. The only real solution is a dry sump with multiple pickups which is a serious level of complexity. But nonetheless the new Corvette and Porches for years have been using this on their street cars. Viper folks were very sad when DC decided to not go dry sump on the 600+ HP Gen III.

                      But the most effect system is the deep sump. Its the simplest and works the best. But it is the enemy of ground clearance.

                      THANKS SO MUCH, for those pictures. The locomotive is way cool - I wish I was just a little older to have seen steam engines in service... on a cold January day!

                      Cheers,
                      Tom

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        That is indeed a six quart 259 oil pan that I am now using on the 289. The funnier thing about it is I had to replace the dipstick and tube on the oilpan. I knew it was a six quart oil pan because the dipstick explicitely stated that is was "Six Quarts" on the end of the dipstick. The upper and lower tube is also a different size than the later model V8 dipstick tubes, as when I tried to use the later model upper tube on the early six quart oil pan, the later model tube is the same size in diameter as the lower tube, so it will not press fit down onto the lower tube. Yeah, there's nothing custom about it(except the drain bungs I drilled and installed into either side of the pan), however, the later V8 oil pans had a sump about half the size, but about the same depth, the baffle in the middle of the sump was gone, and the drainplug was of course in the rear.

                        Regarding the steam engine, that is a Studebaker locomotive. It originally served the plant as a switcher, before it was retired and picked up by an Elgin, IL quarry to use in the pit. When they decided to stop using the engine, The city of Bensenville picked it up, put it on a shoefly track in the park, next to the Milwaukee road mainline, and it's been a historical museum of sorts for the Park and Recreation department for quite awhile now. The engine is also accompanied by I believe one or two of the Hiawatha streamliner passenger cars, and a Milwaukee Road caboose. I got the pictures on a Sunday, so I did my shooting around the steam engine outside the gates. So, even though it's not an automobile, it is or was part of the Studebaker history .
                        1964 Studebaker Commander R2 clone
                        1963 Studebaker Daytona Hardtop with no engine or transmission
                        1950 Studebaker 2R5 w/170 six cylinder and 3spd OD
                        1955 Studebaker Commander Hardtop w/289 and 3spd OD and Megasquirt port fuel injection(among other things)

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X