oil filter restriction orifice

[AnthonyG]

Prior to 1st time install of oil filter system & after cleaning, i checked the inlet orifice restriction fitting & it measured .070". Think I've read it s/b 1/16", .063"? Am I OK @ .007" over @ .070"?

[JSeery]

I wouldn't think it would make that much difference.

[19Fordy]

Hard to believe that .007 would make much of a difference. Piece of notebook writing paper is .005 ". I would use it.

[51 MERC-CT]

Originally Posted by AnthonyG

Prior to 1st time install of oil filter system & after cleaning, i checked the inlet orifice restriction fitting & it measured .070". Think I've read it s/b 1/16", .063"? Am I OK @ .007" over @ .070"?

I agree that the size will not present any problem.

While you are checking things out check for the two oil return holes in the center tube.

[AnthonyG]

I’ll go w it. thought it’d be fine but always best to check. I knew from previous threads too big on that diameter would effect oil pressure in the engine.
I’ll check for being clear & size of oil return tube holes as well.
Thx for the help!

[V8COOPMAN]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

The DIFFERENCE in area between the two sizes is 0.0007312 sq. in.! That's way less than one of them curly, blond hairs. DD

[AnthonyG]

Copy Dat!

[supereal]

If you thick a restrictor in the filter line will prevent circulation, just leave the filter body cap loose. Don't ask how I know that!

[AnthonyG]

Not sure what ur saying? I wasn’t concerned about restrictor would stop flow, my only concern was if restrictor hole was too large it would reduce oil pressure to engine. Leaving filter body cap loose sounds messy?

[Kube]

Guys, the factory spec for that restrictor fitting was .058 - .063.
Now to me, if it were .070", I'd solder it up and bring it back within spec.
Yeah, it may not make a difference but then again, it just may.
For a the minimum effort to do it correct - well, why not do it correct?
If .070" was good enough, I'd think Ford would have opened up the spec. The wider the spec, the cheaper to produce.

[cadillac512]

A .060" orifice has 75% of the area of a .070" orifice. So the larger one will flow 25% more than the .060" will. Does it matter? Maybe not,but I'm with Kube here...


Terry

[51 MERC-CT]

Originally Posted by Kube

Guys, the factory spec for that restrictor fitting was .058 - .063.
Now to me, if it were .070", I'd solder it up and bring it back within spec.
Yeah, it may not make a difference but then again, it just may.
For a the minimum effort to do it correct - well, why not do it correct?
If .070" was good enough, I'd think Ford would have opened up the spec. The wider the spec, the cheaper to produce.

Originally Posted by cadillac512

A .060" orifice has 75% of the area of a .070" orifice. So the larger one will flow 25% more than the .060" will. Does it matter? Maybe not,but I'm with Kube here...


Terry

In a test, with an .060 dia. restrictor hole, at idle speed, 5 quarts of oil flowed thru the filter in 11 minutes.
So long as the restrictor does not exceed the flow capabilities of the two .063 dia. return holes there are not any issues.
The larger restrictor hole may in fact be an advantage because it will flow more oil in a given time frame.

[franksford]

I'm running a remote filter housing and ford spin on. I have installed a .062 restrictor fitting in the RETURN line fitting to the engine. this is so there will unrestricted flow to the filter housing with no chance of it becoming plugged. Clean oil can not close the restrictor. The longer the oil is in the can it will have a chance to cool and better filtering. Something that works for me. Oil pressure is good, no issues there. Your thoughts?

Frank

[cadillac512]

That's what I'm doing as well. Makes sense to me...just have to make sure the gasket (if using the OEM can) is in good order since the can will have full oil pressure with the orifice in the return side. I'm also using an aftermarket filter base and a spin-on bypass filter (Baldwin B50) so the filter can gasket is not an issue.



Terry

[mrlaser]

Just in case there may be someone needing a restrictor fitting, I obtained one with a 0.065 orifice from a turbo supply company on eBay. It was less than $10 including shipping.

[earlyride]

Originally Posted by franksford

I'm running a remote filter housing and ford spin on. I have installed a .062 restrictor fitting in the RETURN line fitting to the engine. this is so there will unrestricted flow to the filter housing with no chance of it becoming plugged. Clean oil can not close the restrictor. The longer the oil is in the can it will have a chance to cool and better filtering. Something that works for me. Oil pressure is good, no issues there. Your thoughts?

Frank

Think about when you first fire up, untill your oil filter has filled completely you're loosing oil pressure in the engine during that time. I believe I would leave the restrictor in line as designed

[Ronnie]

Originally Posted by franksford

I'm running a remote filter housing and ford spin on. I have installed a .062 restrictor fitting in the RETURN line fitting to the engine. this is so there will unrestricted flow to the filter housing with no chance of it becoming plugged. Clean oil can not close the restrictor. The longer the oil is in the can it will have a chance to cool and better filtering. Something that works for me. Oil pressure is good, no issues there. Your thoughts?

Frank

What filter number are you using?


R

[aussie merc]

easy solution its a bypass filter so plug the fitting at the block start engine and take a reading then install with the restriction in place and take readings again if its the same your fine and the system will handle it any significant drop in pressure check the install or you need to have a good look at your lube system

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by earlyride

Think about when you first fire up, untill your oil filter has filled completely you're loosing oil pressure in the engine during that time. I believe I would leave the restrictor in line as designed

Don't follow this at all, with a bypass filter the canister is always full of oil up to the level of the return holes, which are high up in the canister. Also, how would a restrictor in the return line have any impact on the oil flow to the oil galley. And lastly, I am unaware of any .060 restrictor being designed into a bypass filter system. The .060 restrictor is on the inlet side of the canister and there are two .060 holes in the return pipe inside the canister. Adding an additional .060 restrictor in the return line would defeat the whole idea of doubling the flow out of the canister.

[earlyride]

Originally Posted by JSeery

Don't follow this at all, with a bypass filter the canister is always full of oil up to the level of the return holes, which are high up in the canister. Also, how would a restrictor in the return line have any impact on the oil flow to the oil galley. And lastly, I am unaware of any .060 restrictor being designed into a bypass filter system. The .060 restrictor is on the inlet side of the canister and there are two .060 holes in the return pipe inside the canister. Adding an additional .060 restrictor in the return line would defeat the whole idea of doubling the flow out of the canister.

What I said was you should leave it as originally designed, restrictor in the inlet side. The oil does drain out of the filter canister, in my beehive the oil is almost all drained when sitting, suspect it drains back down the inlet also, so if I were to modify this and install the restrictor in the return instead of the inlet, as two members stated, you would loose oil pressure on start up while the canister fills

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by earlyride

What I said was you should leave it as originally designed, restrictor in the inlet side. The oil does drain out of the filter canister, in my beehive the oil is almost all drained when sitting, suspect it drains back down the inlet also, so if I were to modify this and install the restrictor in the return instead of the inlet, as two members stated, you would loose oil pressure on start up while the canister fills

Ok, thanks for the clarification, I agree 100% on the restrictor being on the inlet side. And, ya, the beehive is a different animal. But an original canister won't drain down much at all, but any is probably not a good deal on startup. With a beehive it could become a much bigger issue. If it was me, this is one I would leave to the original engineers, inlet side.

[mrlaser]

Just for some clarification, the restrictor fitting that I posted a picture of previously is 1/8' fnpt x 1/8"fnpt. It is not an inverted flair like the original. The other fitting in the picture is a "T" type fitting that I closed using a 1/4" long piece of copper rod which I silver brazed in place and then drilled to the 1/16" specification. I used the "T" to move the oil pressure sender to a more accessible location and to add another "T" for adding a mechanical oil pressure gauge. I'm sorry that I didn't point that out originally.

[Zeke3]

Mr. Laser, that is a nice looking installation, but I am not in favor of the long copper standoff. The copper tube will work harden from the engine vibrations and the effect of the mass of the sensor and fittings at the top. The tube will be prone to failure at the threaded connection at the base.

[mrlaser]

Zeke3,

Thank you for your advice. I actually only added the mechanical gauge when I thought that the original gauge was non functional. Access to the original sender was difficult, so I put this setup in place in an attempt to solve both issues. Since the in dash gauge is now working, the need for a the mechanical gauge is reduced. So far I only have about 130 miles on the odometer so if the original gauge continues to function, I plan to remove the mechanical unit. I am not too fond of the under dash look on this otherwise "stock" restoration.