Sump filter gauze

[DAVE BRADY]

Hi,

It looks like the only replacement sump gauze is flat whilst the original looked more like a short top hat.  After a discussion with a well know and trusted engineer at the Nat. Rally I mused this topic.
So the question is do they both have the same capacity for the oil to pass through.
The original seems to have double the area for oil to pass through.  The wire used to make the mesh and hole size obviously make a difference.
Could it be that if the new types are not as porous then the oil in the sump could be kept at too high a level resulting in more oil being flung about contributing to increased oil consumption?

Dave.

[Allan G]

From seeing comments on B50 forums, the issue isn't the gauze but the depth of the bowl in the sump cover. The originals are shallower, and thus there is less space below the suction end to retain oil.

Wire mesh size is complete balls, if you have ever seen the capillary sizes used for testing kinematic viscosity of oils at 40c and 100c, the gauze in the sump cover is much bigger than that. If it's any bigger then your pumping sludge.

That said, I've never had any known issues with oil in the sump or consumption issues (the odd leaks maybe). Anything coming out of the breather is more likely to be down to the high noack volatility of mineral oils. Which is fractional when using a synthetic oil.

That or poor breathing  or a bad return on the pump.

[DAVE BRADY]

Hi,

I am not sure where sludge would be pumped from but I wonder why BSA made a 3 dimensional gauze when a flat one is considered to be OK.  They must have considered that the capacity of the 3D gauze was warranted even if only to preempt partial blockage over time by relatively big bits.  The cost of a flat gauze would have been cheaper and we know that BSA liked cost cutting.

Dave.