By paul2748 - 9 Years Ago
|
At what RPM do you get maximum oil pressure. I want to do an oil pressure test on my 312.
Thanks
|
By paul2748 - 9 Years Ago
|
No kind of spec on this? I want to see if the pump is putting out too much pressure
How about max pressure - what should it be?
|
By 2721955meteor - 9 Years Ago
|
my 292 shows 55psi at1600rpm hot with 5-30 oil, at idel25psi. cold at 1500 70psi. engine has lots of miles with no oil leaks(pan was off with repairs to oil pickup tube,pump is gear type. the guage is mechanical
|
By NoShortcuts - 9 Years Ago
|
Paul. I've seen the FoMoCo oil pump pressure and r.p.m. information somewhere. I'll be darned if I can remember where let alone put my hands on it where I've looked. I checked my Ford Repair Manuals and found nothing. My vintage Motors Manual indicates 50 p.s.i. for the y-blocks, BUT gives no indication of engine speed.
In the back of my head, I'm vaguely remembering 50 psi at 50 mph vehicle in final drive. I'm also remembering seeing higher readings when I was using single weight engine oil and the oil was less viscous when cold.
As Cliff indicated, oil pressure reading is lower at engine idle in an engine at normal operating temperature.
Back in the day, increased tension oil pump pressure relief valve springs were marketed or shims to use with the existing oil pressure relief valve spring to increase the oil pump's output pressure. I remember reading somewhere a caution about increasing the relief valve spring pressure too much, causing 'washing' (eroding} of the engine bearings.
Sorry to have been unable to come-up with concrete info. for you.
|
By slumlord444 - 9 Years Ago
|
I got carried away way back in the day and over shimmed the relief spring. Promptly blew the gasket out of the spin on filter. Took some shims out and was fine. Got the pressure up a bit and the engine lived for a while longer until my then wife put a rod through the side of the block. Still have the rod hanging above my work bench.
|
By Ted - 9 Years Ago
|
From the General Specifications section in the 1957 Ford Car Service Manual, Oil Pressure (psi) Hot @ 2000 rpm 45-50 Before I converted my racing Y in the altered roadster to a dry sump oil system, I would see in excess of 95 psi cold at 2000 rpms using a shimmed spring gerotor pump. Hot oil would put it at in the 35 psi range at the same 2000 rpms. Besides general bearing clearances within the engine, the viscosity and temperature of the oil are major players when it comes to oil pressure attributes.
|
By paul2748 - 9 Years Ago
|
Thank you all. I am worried about too much oil pressure than too little as I can't keep a rear main seal from leaking.
|
By 57 Victoria - 9 Years Ago
|
The other thing with too much oil pressure is that you can actually wipe the bearings and end up with damage.
|
By NoShortcuts - 9 Years Ago
|
Paul. I don't see a relationship between your engine's oil pressure and the rear seal leaking. Yes, the rear main bearing is pressurized, but on the '56 there's an oil slinger on the crank between the rear main and the rear seal area.
Some time ago I wrote about an acquaintance who had three (3) new neoprene rear seals installed before resorting to a BEST Brand rope seal. The engine was a 312 complete rebuild with rear seals 2, 3, (neoprene) and 4 (rope type) installed by a retired Ford mechanic who knows y-blocks. The first neoprene rear seal was done by the machine shop.
What is your history on this rear seal problem?
|
By paul2748 - 9 Years Ago
|
No Shortcuts: History
I bought the Tbird in 2006. It was a running car. I got only very small amount of drips. Did not have to touch engine except for maintenance items. OIl consumption was very little. Block was later replacement block, B9A if I remember correctly. Car originally was a Fordo, now has a C-4.
Drove the car to Oregon from NJ and back in 2008., used only two or,three quarts of oil for whole trip. Old seal was still in the car.
In 2010 I decided to do a full restoration. While it was being worked on, I decided to replace the rear main seal and the oil pump while cleaning up the engine. Used a "rubber" seal, offset the ends and used silicone sealant in all the places that I read about here. Finished the resto in 2012. Used an aftermarket (aluminum) seal retainer which didn't fit correctly and I had to grind it some to clear the main cap.. It seemed to work ok and made another trip to the west coast in 2013. About half way here it started to drip oil. At the end of the trip it was using quite a bit. That winter (2013/2014) replaced the seal with another rubber/neophrene seal recommended by Ted (Best Gasket) and carefully matched the retainer to the crank. Both times we looked at the plug at the back for leakage and it seemed to be okay. Used silicone sealer in all the usual places.
The car started to leak again during a trip to Springfield , MO in 2014 and got worse in a trip to Pittsburg, PA in 2015 so in 2015/16 decided to replace it with the new Best gasket rope seal. Bought a OEM retainer and used that. It started to leak almost right away. Crank was removed the last two times that the seal was replaced.to make sure everything went in ok.
I'm at wits end. I can still use the car locally but can't imagine using it at high speeds for out of state trips (want to go to Tennessee in 2017). Not sure what to do. I recently bought a mechanical oil pressure gauge and check pressure. Cold, it's 60 idle, 75 at 2000. Hot, its 30-35 at idle, 60 at 2000/2500
The same guy that helped me did another rope seal (Best)on another 56 312 and he has no problems with it (recently returned from another trip to the west coast).
When the crank was taken out, bearing and crank surfaces looked good and bearings were not replaced. Crank end play was checked and was in spec.
Because you can't see up there, not sure just what is leaking - side seals, crank seal, maybe even the cam plug.
Any suggestions? I should have listened to the old saying, leave good enough alone. I have an extra 312 (57 block) and am seriously thinking of having that rebuilt (short block) to solve the problem. This engine runs really good and I get good gas mileage and hate to replace it but the oil problem is driving me nuts.
Thanks
|
By shakey - 9 Years Ago
|
my 312 is 30 years old in a 54 mercury hasn,t been touched , oil it uses 10/30 oil pressure at 1000 rpm is 55 psi and at idle is 50
|
By NoShortcuts - 9 Years Ago
|
Paul. I can understand your frustration. I can't think of anything to add to the thread you exchanged with Ted last year. Click the link below. http://forums.y-blocksforever.com/FindPost116109.aspx
My sense is that the 312 retainer is more difficult to accomplish a seal with than the 239-292 retainer. I attempted to locate a picture Ted previously provided of the two different seal retainers side by side in a previous Forum thread. The groove for the 312 clearly has less cross-sectional root holding area than the 239-292 retainers have.
|
By NoShortcuts - 9 Years Ago
|
Paul. What follows is theoretical. We need someone like Ted, Tim McMaster, or John Mummert to indicate IF there is merit to the thinking.
IF the crank in your block was turned undersize for reconditioning purposes by a machine shop, might the crank set-up have been SLIGHTLY 'off '? IF not chucked up correctly, could the real seal surface NOT be EXACTLY concentric with the remachined main bearing surface?
Again, I'm suggesting one cylindrical surface being slightly out of alignment with another by mere thousands of an inch creating a minor cam effect on the sealing surface. In initially assembling and running the engine after assembly, the rear seal would tolerate the discrepancy for a period of miles. Seemingly, a concentricity discrepancy would take longer to wear a pliable neoprene seal than it would a fixed rope type (packing style) seal.
IF you proceed to replace the rear seal yet again, the concentricity of the rear seal area could be verified using a dial indicator mounted with a magnetic base to the oil pan rail. The checking would be done after the aluminum seal retainer was removed and before doing anything to the main bearing caps that secure the crank.
Again, this is an unusual possibility suggested by the number of rear seals you've had fail over different mileage periods and by my machining experience which does not include the operation of a crankshaft grinder, but a lot of engine lathe set-up and machining work.
|
By aussiebill - 9 Years Ago
|
NoShortcuts (10/19/2016)
Paul. What follows is theoretical. We need someone like Ted, Tim McMaster, or John Mummert to indicate IF there is merit to the thinking. IF the crank in your block was turned undersize for reconditioning purposes by a machine shop, might the crank set-up have been SLIGHTLY 'off '? IF not chucked up correctly, could the real seal surface NOT be EXACTLY concentric with the remachined main bearing surface? Again, I'm suggesting one cylindrical surface being slightly out of alignment with another by mere thousands of an inch creating a minor cam effect on the sealing surface. In initially assembling and running the engine after assembly, the rear seal would tolerate the discrepancy for a period of miles. Seemingly, a concentricity discrepancy would take longer to wear a pliable neoprene seal than it would a fixed rope type (packing style) seal. Doubt all of that happens, most people just arnt as good at fitting new seal as they think unfortunatley, i have 4 y block cars, all rebuilt at one time, one with turned down 312 crank also and nary a drop of oil from the lot, 2x4, tripower, 4/71 blower and single 4 bbl. IF you proceed to replace the rear seal yet again, the concentricity of the rear seal area could be verified using a dial indicator mounted with a magnetic base to the oil pan rail. The checking would be done after the aluminum seal retainer was removed and before doing anything to the main bearing caps that secure the crank. Again, this is an unusual possibility suggested by the number of rear seals you've had fail over different mileage periods and by my machining experience which does not include the operation of a crankshaft grinder, but a lot of engine lathe set-up and machining work.
|
By NoShortcuts - 9 Years Ago
|
Paul. Here's a picture showing the difference between a 292 and a 312 rear seal retainer. Some engine builders believe that the difference in the depth of the 312's retaining groove affects the reliability of the seal. The length of the 292's retainer 'fingers' would seem to provide a more positive grip on the seal.

|
By Ted - 9 Years Ago
|
Paul. Thanks for sharing in detail the history of your rear main seal woes. It would appear that you’ve tried the majority of fixes. At this point and with a fresh load of leak detecting dye in the oil and with the car on a lift with someone watching under it, start the car and look for the first place the colored oil comes from. Your oil pressure attributes mirror those on my '55 Customline and with 145K+ miles on it now, rear main seal leakage is minimal if any at all. With that in mind, I think you can rule out the oil pressure being the culprit. Were you using the black neoprene seal before going back to the rope type of seal? We likely already discussed this but have to ask anyhow. I’ve had the older orange seals wear out very quickly but have had very good luck with the newer and harder black Best Gasket seals that replaced the orange seals for the 312 engines. While it’s been brought up about the concentricity of the seal surface versus the rear main journal, it would have to be off a bunch to be a sealing problem. Whenever a crankshaft is being turned, it is possible for the seal surface to be slightly out of alignment with the journal and if the crankshaft has been turned multiple times, then this alignment (concentricity) can be off even more but unlikely to be off enough to be a rear main sealing issue. Haven’t seen that yet but there’s a first time for everything. Whatever amount the seal surface is off will be the same as the rear flywheel flange so any misalignment can be checked for at the rear of the crankshaft also. I have cleaned up the 312 seal surfaces as much as 0.010” without any issues in regards to the neoprene seals being a problem so there is a given amount of latitude in that area. If and when the engine is pulled down, look at the rod bearing wear. If the bearings are not wearing squarely across their surface and the wear looks to be crooked or lopsided between the top half and the bottom half of the bearings, then the crankshaft may not have been ground in a grinder that was 'not' parallel between the ends. In this case, you’re dealing with a rear seal surface that’s not parallel with the main journals. It boggles the mind how the first generation of Flathead V8s did not even have a rear seal and wouldn’t have a leakage problem until the blowby was bad enough to actually push some oil out. Now with all modern engines having some kind of a positive type of rear main seal, there’s a major oil leak if all is not perfect.
|
By Vic Correnti - 9 Years Ago
|
Paul do you run a PVC system in the car? Just thinking that if not maybe the crankcase is pressurized in some mysterious way where as the PVC would pull a vacuum.
|
By paul2748 - 9 Years Ago
|
Ted The seal before the new rope seal was the black neoprene one from Best. I know the leak is coming from the area around the middle of the rear of the engine as it is dripping from the trans cover. I did notice a few drips coming from the downdraft tube (running the stock set up) but the major leak is the middle of the rear of the engine. I am going to try the dye thing as it might lend some new insight to the problem.
The last two times the rear seal was changed the crank was removed and all bearings were examined and did not have any appreciable wear. I really don't have any history on the engine although it is not original to the car because of the replacement block. It looks to be standard bore.
Thanks for the info and thanks to the others who have posted their comments. All are appreciated as it may help me with the problem. I did try a PVC system but it didn't solve anything and I was having a problem with carb to hood clearance so I went back to the draft tube.
I really hate to replace the engine as it really runs good and other than the leak and has gone many miles (even at high speeds) with no other problems.
Just a dumb question - the oil slinger is part of the crank, right? not a separate piece?
Ted (10/20/2016)
Paul. Thanks for sharing in detail the history of your rear main seal woes. It would appear that you’ve tried the majority of fixes. At this point and with a fresh load of leak detecting dye in the oil and with the car on a lift with someone watching under it, start the car and look for the first place the colored oil comes from. Your oil pressure attributes mirror those on my '55 Customline and with 145K+ miles on it now, rear main seal leakage is minimal if any at all. With that in mind, I think you can rule out the oil pressure being the culprit. Were you using the black neoprene seal before going back to the rope type of seal? We likely already discussed this but have to ask anyhow. I’ve had the older orange seals wear out very quickly but have had very good luck with the newer and harder black Best Gasket seals that replaced the orange seals for the 312 engines. While it’s been brought up about the concentricity of the seal surface versus the rear main journal, it would have to be off a bunch to be a sealing problem. Whenever a crankshaft is being turned, it is possible for the seal surface to be slightly out of alignment with the journal and if the crankshaft has been turned multiple times, then this alignment (concentricity) can be off even more but unlikely to be off enough to be a rear main sealing issue. Haven’t seen that yet but there’s a first time for everything. Whatever amount the seal surface is off will be the same as the rear flywheel flange so any misalignment can be checked for at the rear of the crankshaft also. I have cleaned up the 312 seal surfaces as much as 0.010” without any issues in regards to the neoprene seals being a problem so there is a given amount of latitude in that area. If and when the engine is pulled down, look at the rod bearing wear. If the bearings are not wearing squarely across their surface and the wear looks to be crooked or lopsided between the top half and the bottom half of the bearings, then the crankshaft may not have been ground in a grinder that was 'not' parallel between the ends. In this case, you’re dealing with a rear seal surface that’s not parallel with the main journals. It boggles the mind how the first generation of Flathead V8s did not even have a rear seal and wouldn’t have a leakage problem until the blowby was bad enough to actually push some oil out. Now with all modern engines having some kind of a positive type of rear main seal, there’s a major oil leak if all is not perfect.
|
By Cliff - 9 Years Ago
|
Hi, I had a problem like what you have, it turned out to be the cam plug, after 2 or 3 times of taking it apart, the aftermarket retainer may be the problem, if you match up a factory retainer you will find that the bore is off center, in the aftermarket one it is in the center, also the Ford shop manual has good instructions on the subject.
|
By NoShortcuts - 9 Years Ago
|
Paul. Yes, the crankshaft rear oil slinger is part of the crankshaft itself. It's just in back of the rear main bearing surface, but before the rear seal surface.
Click the link below to see a series of pictures of a 312 crank. A couple of the pictures give a view of the rear main bearing surface, the rear oil slinger, the rear seal surface and the adjacent rear crank flange. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1957-FORD-HI-PO-312-CRANKSHAFT-CRANK-1956-THUNDERBIRD-SPECIAL-RACING-Y-BLOCK-/272414611317?fits=Make%3AFord&hash=item3f6d2d1775:g:60cAAOSw-CpX98ld&vxp=mtr
Click on the link below for the dimensional information for the 272/ 292 and the 312 cranks as shown on John Mummert's web site. http://ford-y-block.com/crankshaftid.htm
|