53 8BA Feedback on bypass filter options

R

RuralTowner

Member
HELLO! New here and figured I might get slightly more active help here for any issues than I would at Ford Truck Enthusiasts. A little bit about the vehicle before you burn me at the stake please. :eek:

Back in the 60s the dad made himself a 6-wheeler (tandem drive rear end) meant to resemble and old German (tracked) scout car. Took a couple 53 Mercurys and basically used just the drive-trains. Not a stitch of their former selves remains beyond that. He drove it fairly steadily for 20 years...running all over the desert and even the dunes of Glammis CA before it got parked in 81-2 and sat until the end of last year. Body always was a little rough with unfilled gaps in the body paneling since it was largely built with what he could get...and can easily tell in places he wasn't the most proficient welder at the time either.

It has the 8BA flatty. Got it running finally though it had a stuck valve on the right side that cleared itself up through a separate and unintentional OD of MMO. Working on getting the rest of the instrumentation in it now. Only BIG hangup is having a radiator that doesn't leak at the core//tank joints. But enough of that...for now.

The engine never had an oil filter...and short of ripping it apart to do a full flow as I've read on here is the only time its recommended...the basic bypass is fine. I'd just like to get a little feedback on a couple setups. I've seen 51-MERC CT use of the AMSOIL parts but others at the 8BA Filter Options thread. MERC's looks like a good setup but seems a tad pricey but I'll still go that route if its better but how good is the use of Baldwin# OB1305 filter base and say a WIX 51050 or BALDWIN B50? Which direction seems to work better...AMSOILs or the others.

This rig is no beauty queen as it was built about as basic as you can get. Attaching an image to show it...sorry for the quality. Mind you the rims you see in the picture are currently stand-ins using on hand mounted rubber and it now has a FARMALLs oil bath cleaner perched over the driver's side fender and plumbed to the carb (opposite the passenger side exhaust stack).
 

Attachments

  • 0312171859-00.jpg
    0312171859-00.jpg
    46 KB · Views: 99
RuralTowner said:
The engine never had an oil filter...and short of ripping it apart to do a full flow as I've read on here is the only time its recommended...the basic bypass is fine. I'd just like to get a little feedback on a couple setups. I've seen 51-MERC CT use of the AMSOIL parts but others at the 8BA Filter Options thread. MERC's looks like a good setup but seems a tad pricey but I'll still go that route if its better but how good is the use of Baldwin# OB1305 filter base and say a WIX 51050 or BALDWIN B50? Which direction seems to work better...AMSOILs or the others.
Click to expand...
Happy to see that you took note of my use of an Amsoil bypass filter.
First, I would recommend that you continue with the no filter route with frequent oil changes.
The filter base and filters you are considering are not part of a bypass system.
If you insist on having a filter, I would suggest that you acquire an original 1950-'53 Ford/Mercury filter setup.
I would not give any consideration to a full/95% flow system.
 
It runs so yeah...a tear down just to do full flow is FAR from my mind. The engine was never tore down anytime within the last 50 years and likely none before that and the dad seems to recall it having 50-60k on it when he got it. Since this is the middle of the desert...any little bit will help.

So the options are the original canister or the AMSOIL setup? Either method will end up costing about the same. Doing the remote setup might be a tad simpler as I'm a tad leary at this time of the head bolts. 1 was broke off long long ago before my time when it was being loosened.

The system won't be going on just yet...need to do few more run//flush cycles since have only a couple miles and MAYBE 1 hr on the current new oil and its already discolored. The filter will be for "when it's time" and probably be Rotella T 15W40 (have seen that mentioned as OK I believe). Logistically will simplify oils I use....use it in more than a few pieces here.
 
Last edited:
RuralTowner said:
So the options are the original canister or the AMSOIL setup? Either method will end up costing about the same. Doing the remote setup might be a tad simpler as I'm a tad leary at this time of the head bolts. 1 was broke off long long ago before my time when it was being loosened.
Click to expand...
The original setup is far cheaper than Installing an Amsoil setup.
Used ones that include the correct restrictor fitting are available at swap meets, Ebay etc. The tubing will have to be fabricated.
The Cannister mount on a '53 engine uses a dedicated 3 hole boss that if one has a broken bolt it should be relatively easy to remove.
 

Attachments

  • af.jpg
    af.jpg
    19.3 KB · Views: 53
Last edited:
Will look those up again. Depending on what is available...stock placement isn't as important as function but any of the truck//car setups from the late 40s to early 50s be fine? Local findings are slim...the one guy who would definitely have something would want an arm//leg for.


I know they mount using the headbolts...I'm just leery of a repeat of the long ago shearing of one. The one broken is way up in front on the left side where a single bolt won't matter. Not sure what the reason the dad said he was going to remove it for. After the 1 broke he stopped there. Not sure what to be expecting if one of the ones needed removal ends up being between cylinders if the unfortunate happens.
Going to likely have to do similar to the passenger side anyway to attach a new ground cable since the Ooooold ones end was shot and unservicable and I was forced to cut each strand from the eye-piece that is still held in with a bolt. The interim cable is overly long and bolted down with the pass-side T-stat housing...no T-stat ofc (a common trend in the desert here for older vehicles).

Either way I do lack 1 piece of info...torque specs for the head bolts. Thought I saw somewhere its 80lbs or somewhere around there.
 
Last edited:
Ah okay. That's GOOD! Think I found a couple good options but one of them is the truck of same year range...just to be sure...no difference just shorter mount flange?
 
The proper filter housing for your 53 8BA engine does not use the head bolts. There are three dedicated holes for that purpose.
 

Attachments

  • 53head.jpg
    53head.jpg
    55.6 KB · Views: 39
Now I recognize the location. Thought it merely an odd omitted chunk in the mold that would've been for the coolant outlet that was blocked when cast. Know better now. Found a good condition FRAM housing for the 49-53 year but it claims to be for a picckup. I'd imagine either car//truck used same mounting with just the bracket being different height.
 
Found a good condition canister-type on Ebay...an old FRAM type. Picked it up today and to my dismay the bolt pattern is for the HEAD bolts...not the mini triangle. That's what I get for aftermarket style. I didn't bother to look at the flange in other images to try and confirm. It will still WORK...either make a plate that bolts to the head and bolt the filter to the plate...or just re-drill the bottom 2 holes. Just inconvenient as hell.

(EDIT: And wouldn't you know it that one with the right flange turns up well AFTER ordering for 20$ less. Most I found it seems though...even FORD add-ons have the LARGE head bolt pattern though)

Now how to go about putting the restriction orifice in the setup? Also what filter element to look for.
A nipple with internal//external threads (if can find this) and install a plug with center drilled out to ~0.060" then thread coupler on outside then whatever fitting needed into IT to allow connection to ports?

I've read 1/4" line would be sufficient...when finally installed will get measurements and just get pre-made brake line of adequate length.
As the outlet is on the BOTTOM this would eventually drain when engine is off and would take a measurable amount of time to fill up after start.
 
Last edited:
For the restrictor fitting do a search. Some suppliers care them, they are also available under turbo charger oil restrictors.
 
Hmm. Found a potential info source. Will also follow up on others. To allow the filter to fill up sooner and achieve pressure (puts pressure on the canister itself though so the gasket must be REAL good) I see on this thread that it can be on the return end as well. Might go this route.
I think I see now. AS LONG AS there is a restrictor somewhere in the circuit is whats important and .060 or under in size.
Filter won't be going on immediately as I need to fab up a means to bolt on the canister and check out the turbo fitting.
As for the filter element itself any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
RuralTowner said:
Hmm. Found a potential info source. Will also follow up on others. To allow the filter to fill up sooner and achieve pressure (puts pressure on the canister itself though so the gasket must be REAL good) I see on this thread that it can be on the return end as well. Might go this route.
I think I see now. AS LONG AS there is a restrictor somewhere in the circuit is whats important and .060 or under in size.
Filter won't be going on immediately as I need to fab up a means to bolt on the canister and check out the turbo fitting.
As for the filter element itself any thoughts?
Click to expand...
If the Fram aftermarket filter is like the original Ford setup, you don't have to worry about filling it.
The two .063 dia. drain back holes in the center tube limit the level of oil that is drained.
The one .060 restictor hole should be located on the inlet side of the system.

 
I have the canister in hand for a closer look. There is ONE small hole near the top at about the same level as the inlet port. At the bottom is the piece the filter sits against and will spin in place...has 4 arched cutouts...can't get it to come off the pipe to see what the outlet itself is like unless I remove the bottom fitting from the canister. To see if there were any unseen openings at the bottom I covered the hole in the riser and outlet on the bottom and try blowing through...try as I might no air flows so its the same setup as the image you posted minus 1 hole as far as the routing goes.
 

Attachments

  • 0522171246-00.jpg
    0522171246-00.jpg
    48.2 KB · Views: 16
  • 0522171247-00.jpg
    0522171247-00.jpg
    35.3 KB · Views: 16
Restrictor needs to be on the inlet side. The stand pipe usually has two holes.
 

Attachments

  • 51 MERC Picture.jpg
    51 MERC Picture.jpg
    44 KB · Views: 13
  • 11632a-1-.jpg
    11632a-1-.jpg
    29 KB · Views: 15
This one has only the 1 hole in the riser. No clue if the result is much the same flow limitation as 2 hole + restrictor, Have a LARGE set of cheap drill bits I picked up at a swap meet a couple years back and tried some of them. The hole is smaller than the 1/16" (smallest in the SAE side of the kit) while a #60 bit fits with a little wiggle room and a #58 fits with no play. Looked this sizing up and it comes out to around 0.042"

This mean the canister already has the restrictor?
 
The restrictor on the inlet prevents the filter system from robbing the engine of oil while the filter canister is filling (after sitting for an hour or more). The orifice in the center tube is, I believe, to encourage oil flow thru the whole element, evenly.
 
So still install the .060 on the inlet side to control the flow.
While the single orifice is the actual restriction then to get the pressure as it's already part of the canister as its barely over 040 as is?
If this was an OEM Ford can with the 2 holes then the inlet restrictor would be it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top