mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

oil pressure guage

To: "MG List" <mgs@autox.team.net>
Subject: oil pressure guage
From: "Tim Economu" <economu@whidbey.com>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 10:34:57 -0700
Hi Kevin, David and James:

All of this talk of oil pressure gauge's makes me think back to the day my
wife got out our Benz wagon with a skirt covered in jet black oil. (yes a
diesel engine oil is the blackest you have ever seen!!) Seems that the
mechanical oil gauge had sprung a leak at the gauge itself!! Turned out to
be a defect inside the gauge, and made a huge mess of the carpets and
upholstery, not to mentioned ruined a dress!! You should have seen the look
on her face when the hot oil began spraying all over the car!!

No, that's ok, I'll stick with my electric oil meter. It may be slow and it
may not be as accurate, but it is 'clean'. I would consider mounting a
mechanical gauge in the engine compartment however. That way I could
periodically compare readings for accuracy, and when the meter leaked, it
would leak where it could be cleaned easily!!

Tim Economu
1969 MGBGT with electrical oil sender
(sold the Benz, so now have Honda Accord with idiot light)



Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:44:52 -0600
From: David Councill <dcouncil@imt.net>
Subject: Re: oil pressure guage

Now that I think about it - and maybe its relevant to the whole question I
brought up - is that I've always had this habit of tapping on the side of
the oil pressure gauge on both my 71BGTs. Typically this would be at
cruising speed when the oil pressure would run a bit low (~60 psi) and
tapping on the gauge would cause a slight increase (to maybe ~70 psi). I
don't ever recall doing that with my 67BGT or the 65B I had in college.

It looks like I'll go with the mechanical gauge when I get my 72B
assembled, which is at least a couple of months away, maybe longer.

David


At 08:28 PM 5/20/2002 -0600, james wrote:
>IMO, part of my decision would be because of the slow reaction of the
>electric gauge.  I have heard them referred to, more than once, as pressure
>indicators (yes/no) rather than gauges.  It is hard to know, after 30 years
>what pressure you really have, versus what the electric gauge is telling
>you.  Since it is an electrical signal, I would expect the condition of the
>wiring to/from the gauge to make a big difference in your reading.
>
>james
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Dodd, Kelvin <doddk@mossmotors.com>
>To: 'David Councill' <dcouncil@imt.net>; <mgs@autox.team.net>
>Sent: 20 May, 2002 9:43 AM
>Subject: RE: oil pressure guage
>
>
> > David:
> >
> > I don't have an answer as to why MG changed to the mechanical guage,
> > it could have been warranty related.
> > The electrical sender did have a high failure rate and was extremely
> > expensive to replace.  I'm remembering about $95.00 from the dealer back
>in
> > the 80s.  It was discontinued by Smiths, so many owners had to do
without
>or
> > convert to mechanical.
> >
> > There are a couple of repros out on the market now which are
> > reasonably priced and seem to be dependable so 68-71 owners don't have
to
> > scrounge used units, or convert.
> >
> >
> > You are correct, the flex line connects to a fitting on the
> > firewall, instead of the sender unit.  The block fitting is the same.
> >
> > The mechanical units are pretty dependable and as accurate as
> > necessary.  Be sure to replace the leather seal at the guage if you undo
>the
> > copper line.

///  or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///  Archives at http://www.team.net/archive


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>