Oil Capacity: '79 351w dual sump pan

[chuzie]

I have a 1979 351w with a dual sump pan installed in my '77 Bronco. I fear it may have the wrong dipstick installed as I lost oil pressure on the trails a few weeks ago and it came back after adding a quart of oil (no leaks, no burn).

Looking to verify the validity of this dipstick but I need to know what my capacity is first. Don't see any casting marks on the pan.

Thoughts?

 

[Broncobowsher]

Dual sump pan = car pan.
Ford's typical oil fill for a car of that era is 5 quarts with filter.

That is as good as I can get without actually knowing the application of the oil pan (engine doesn't care what oil pan is bolted on under it)

 

[chuzie]

That is assuming the pan is original to the engine and year.

If push comes to shove I suppose I could remove pan and test its capacity. How far below the bottom of engine flange do we typically look for?

 

[broncnaz]

Vans also used the dual sump pan. Usually there are numbers stamped into the pan somewhere. Either way most pans will hold 5 qts then another qt for the filter. Id start there and check your level on the dipstick. Probably wont want to go much over 6qt total in any case.
Might want to check the current level on the dip stick then drain the oil and see how much is in there now.

 

[chuzie]

Good idea. Thx

 

[chuzie]

Ugh. Been running on 2qts!

 

[BRONCROB]

That aint good.

 

[chuzie]

Well i know i put 5 quarts in last october. Drove from tampa to NC and back then to NC again in april where I added a quart after losing pressure on the trails, then back to tampa.

There is no smoke and no leaks. Where is my oil going? Coolant looks fine too.

 

[KyddsPly]

Could be burning in the cylinders. Just not a enough the smoke that you would notice. A lot of the newer cars are designed to accept oil burn.

 

[KyddsPly]

Ps- I know it's not a newer vehicle, but it's was just to say oil burning in the cylinders won't always be noticed.

 

[chuzie]

I would buy that theory had i not burned 4 qts in 3000 miles. At this rate, how can it not be visible?

 

[Broncobowsher]

I would buy that theory had i not burned 4 qts in 3000 miles. At this rate, how can it not be visible?

I've know engines that burn more then that and don't smoke. You almost have to be in the quart per 100 mile range to be a visible. I killed an engine about a decade ago that didn't really smoke much in the quart per 50 mile range, but if I got on it it would do a James Bond smoke screen. That was a quart in a quarter mile.

 

[chuzie]

Lovely. So much for the "fresh" rebuild. Oh well. Caveat emptor.

 

[chuzie]

Could an improperly setup PCV system cause this much oil consumption?

 

[ScanmanSteven]

Don't think the pcv would cause that much oil burn but since you now know there's an oil consumption problem just check it more often and you'll be okay. Sure it sucks but in a way you've solved the problem, check it often.

 

[Broncobowsher]

The last couple home rebuilds I did ate oil for several thousand miles until the rings seated. Getting to the point I don't want moly rings anymore.