DARN AMSOIL!! There's just no way around it!

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

Gary has the insert out of his mount, maybe he can measure if and let us know what the ID is. Myself, I'm kinda tuckered out from killing superman

And, don't forget to make a restrictor for the mount to reduce the oil flow. I beleive it's .040 hole in it.

---

Well ...hmmph. I guess I'll have pick up the slack here...

I'm taking the insert into work today to pin the restrictor. By just eyeballing it ...I'd say it's closer to .010. I was just extruding some tubing last night with a .040-.042 I.D. and the pin was way bigger than what I'm looking at on that brass piece. Our pins only go down to .011, which is pretty darn slim. We use Meyers "minus" pin sets. Allegedly they're .0002 below the spec'd size ..so a slight interference fit (not the normal "light drag") is considered correct. I'll measure the main insert at that time as well.


You've gotta love the information age!!

 

[alloy]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:
Well ...hmmph. I guess I'll have pick up the slack here...

[/QB]

---

That is today. What will you do for me tomorrow?

 

[Gary Allan]

Hockey!

The orifice is greater than .026 but less than .027 on the brass plug.

The fitting itself appears to have a .667 I.D.
a 1.095 O.D. (on threads - probably 1.120 -1.125 stock)
and a wall thickness (I didn't do the math) that measured about .2255

This is the same stock that they use for the other (dual thread) fittings. It could easily handle a 3/4-16 and a 1-16 thread.

 

[olympic]

The restrictor on the BMK-11 kit is listed as 0.032". 0.010" seems awful small and wouldn't allow much flow.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

The restrictor on the BMK-11 kit is listed as 0.032".

---

I tried it with two pin sets. One Meyers ..one VIK ..I got .028 -.029 with the VIK ... .027- .028 for the Meyers. I guess they have a +/- .002 spec

quote:

---

0.010" seems awful small and wouldn't allow much flow.

---

That was a rhetorical "eyeball" measurement. Heck, it took me looking twice to see it at all. I thought it was a nipple installation tool that someone forgot to recover

Heck, .027-.032 ain't gonna flow much either. I would imagine (note I said imagine) that a few quarts an hour would flow through this hole at average pressures (35-40). I guess I could hook it up to a waterline and do a "drop test" to determine the flow @ 35 psi. That would naturally be without a filter in line. I don't quite understand the need for a restrictor given the restrictive characteristics of the filter itself. This, in no way, could filter 1% of your oil flow ..let alone 10% that it claims. What is still unadressed is that the side by side dual mount doesn't have this restrictor ...no one seems to have an answer that works.

 

[olympic]

Understood....

I ordered a bunch of BP-80A's for my fleet vehicles so I can install bypass filters on the transmission cooling circuits. I'll "T" them in after the coolers and then weld a fitting into the dipstick tube for the return line.

I talked to my transmission mechanic and he said to be careful not to draw too much pressure and oil out of the cooling circuit because the returning oil lubricates and pressurizes the output section of the trans. I figure 1/2 quart per minute through the bypass system would be just about right. The entire capacity of the trans would be filtered about every 20 minutes and it wouldn't decrease the flow significantly. Once I have one installed I'll rev the engine to about 2000 RPM and verify the flow rate through the bypass with a graduated container and a stopwatch.

If it indeed is only a few quarts per hour like you estimated I don't think that would be enough to be effective. I'd have to look into a method of opening up the restrictor hole for more oil flow.