Oil Pan baffle question

[Steve in Tampa]

THANK YOU ..THAT IS IT .. steve

[James Rogers]

As in the pictures shown, there is no difference in the basic shape of the tray except the front flange or lip is shorter on some. There doesn't seem to be any date for the change as some of the early trays have either as do the later ones and even the late 31's and 32's are similar.

[Gord. B by the bay]

Good discussion I have two B engines which I had to shorten the B pans to adapt to the Model A fly wheel housing and in the both pans there were no holes of any size both have many miles on them I think I would prefer to keep as much oil in the tray as possible also both have the shield to protect the pump. one engine has 25,000 miles and the other 50,000 still running strong. Maybe Canadian A's did not require holes 8>) Gord. B by the Bay

[A Michigander]

I have an engine that is serial numbered from 1936, and has a model B cam core(fuel pump lobe), Model B oil pump shield and has 4 holes in the flat part of the dipper tray. The holes are 1/2 inch in diameter and neatly punched in the tray. I have never seen these holes in any other pan.

[quickchange]

Does anyone need the oil pump slash shield as i have a number of them or are they easy to get, Derek from a sunny warm day in NZ

[James Rogers]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

I also have 8 or 10 so I suspect they are pretty common.

[criswellnk]

Thank you John, that is the photo I was looking for, very much appreciated.

[Jim Parker Toronto]

Thanks Gord, and James, I'm just removing the bell part of the pan today. Getting close to run time!

[Wily Kyote]

From "Mr. Ford and Racing", pages 17-18, pictures and text explain that these are the earliest windage trays, necessary because of turbulance in the oil pan at 6,000 plus RPM.

[Wily Kyote]

My apology, guys. I went looking for that tome (that I'd read just last night) in my library, and my wife said I'd fallen asleep reading "Alice In Wonderland".

That explains it.

[CarlG]

Is the shield that is mentioned several times above? I have one of these that I forgot to put in last time I had the pan off.

[Clem Clement]

Interesting that the earliest trays, have strength ribs in the baffles. They actually touched the bottom of the pan. Mine show motion of the baffle bottom edges on the pan. Don't you bet that was noisy!

Why was the length of the pan changed? To let more oil go directly to the pan?
clem

[Jim Brierley]

I agree with Gord B. The B engine had a larger OD oil fill tube, this cut down the velocity of the oil trying to get out of the pan, and helped in the consumption of oil.

[Steve in Tampa]

need pictures of the side of the oil splash pan,where the bumps that go into the pan are. B is suppose to be lower sitting in the pan. need to see the difference by comparison side to side. thanks steve in tampa

[Joe K]

Originally Posted by Steve in Tampa

need pictures of the side of the oil splash pan,where the bumps that go into the pan are. B is suppose to be lower sitting in the pan. need to see the difference by comparison side to side. thanks steve in tampa

Post 23 above is the pix. Service Manual says 1/8" lower. If you have either one you have the other.


Joe K

[Joe K]

.How about lowering the level in the sump? Right now it is just below the full mark. Thanks

Lowering the level in the sump DOES help with rear main loss. You technically don't need all that oil since if the oil pump inlet is covered, there is no change to the amount or degree of oiling being performed within the engine. I typically run perhaps a inch down from the top mark on the stick.

But I change oil more often. Ford originally recommended 500 miles. Modern oil and better properties can stretch this out to perhaps as much as 1500 miles (lubricity is the inverse to wear.) So I run it low and change at 500 miles.

As to the fill pipe, running the sump low probably won't affect that much. What comes out the fill as vapor is due more to "windage" and throwing around of oil ABOVE the dipper tray.

Joe K

[Gene F]

Left to right, my March 1928 car had #2 in it when I bought my car.

BTW, look at that one dimple. The dipper tray adjacent to it is stamped differently. This indicates this was not some home-brew modification.

[Gold Digger]

Back to the holes in the dipper trays, 50 something years ago I tour down a 29 engine with 1 inch holes in it that looked like factory made holes. I asked an old man that had lots of model A experience back in the day and he said that the Gleaner combine engines started using trays with holes in them and the larger oil vent pipe for a longer lasting engine. He said that the hot rodders back then started doing the same thing. It was claimed that it let oil down to the bottom of the pan quicker.

[ursus]

Originally Posted by Gold Digger

Back to the holes in the dipper trays, 50 something years ago I tour down a 29 engine with 1 inch holes in it that looked like factory made holes. I asked an old man that had lots of model A experience back in the day and he said that the Gleaner combine engines started using trays with holes in them and the larger oil vent pipe for a longer lasting engine. He said that the hot rodders back then started doing the same thing. It was claimed that it let oil down to the bottom of the pan quicker.

The Model B engine had four 1/2 inch or larger holes in the upper level of the tray and no overflow tube as in the Model A.

[Kurt in NJ]

My theory is the oil pump shield is to direct all the oil onto the dipper tray,having.004 clearance on center cam bearing equals the area of the pipe emptying into the valve chamber.
the holes around the edge of the tray are to limit the amount of oil on the tray.

So it’s make sure all the oil hits the tray and limit it from being excess with the holes.