Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Maintenance and Repair / February 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Where to add engine oil

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Steeleagle - 16 Feb 2006 11:31 GMT
I know that this is going to sound totally silly but, I just purchased
a 67 chevelle with a small block 350.  There is no oil filler cap on
either valve cover but, an oil breather cap on one of the valve covers.
I am sure this is where I add the oil (remove the breather cap) but I
wanted to be 100 percent correct.  Is this where you add the oil?
Thank you and I hope the not too  many are blinded by the glow of my
embarrased face!!!
Al Bundy - 16 Feb 2006 13:31 GMT
> I know that this is going to sound totally silly but, I just purchased
> a 67 chevelle with a small block 350.  There is no oil filler cap on
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Thank you and I hope the not too  many are blinded by the glow of my
> embarrased face!!!

Yes
Shep - 16 Feb 2006 21:23 GMT
Sounds like this 67 is not the kind of car you should own!!

>> I know that this is going to sound totally silly but, I just purchased
>> a 67 chevelle with a small block 350.  There is no oil filler cap on
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Yes
Mike Walsh - 16 Feb 2006 14:55 GMT
Yes. Before positive crankcase ventilation it was common practice to use the oil breather cap to add oil.

> I know that this is going to sound totally silly but, I just purchased
> a 67 chevelle with a small block 350.  There is no oil filler cap on
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Thank you and I hope the not too  many are blinded by the glow of my
> embarrased face!!!

Signature

                  Mike Walsh
           West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A.

Ad absurdum per aspera - 16 Feb 2006 15:49 GMT
This persisted well into the Positive Crankcase Ventilation era,
actually.  My recollection (warning: small-sample statistics dead
ahead) is that the dedicated oil-filler tube came along sometime in the
70s, probably in response to ever increasing government demands to cork
up or intramurally recirculate a car's various vapors.

I'm not sure when Chevvies grew PCV valves, but I think that the
devices started coming along in the early 60s,  supplanting the earlier
"road draft tube" as a means of crankcase ventilation.   (AFAIK the
first use was on the original  Willys Jeep, as part of an attempt to
make it fare better in water crossings.)

My '66 Bird, for example, has PCV (and as a California-spec car was
supplied with first-generation versions of both Air Injection Reactor
and  Exhaust Gas Recirculation) but also a breather cap on the valve
cover, connected to the intakes with a hose, that doubles as the oil
filler neck.

Although I am having trouble finding truth carved in stone on the
subject of when PCV came to be required where, I am taking a slightly
educated guess that first generation PCV (vented breather cap) came out
in 1963 as a 49-state requirement, having been pioneered in California
a few years earlier.  Then in 1986, closed-loop PCV became the
requirement.  I get this by interpolating among
http://www.camaros.org/emissions.shtml
and (with the caveat that some of their statements are pretty
Pontiac-specific)
http://www.firstgenfirebird.org/firebird/FAQ/engine/general.html
as well as
http://www.allpar.com/mopar/emissions.html
and
http://www.harmons.com/catalogPdf/2004/Chevelle/67a83-108.pdf
and
http://www.ajgeneral.com/chevelle_parts/
I'm imagining a three-foot hose with a 90 degree bend molded into it,
and a PCV valve in the valve cover opposite the breather cap.

The implication for the original poster is that there should probably
be a PCV valve in there somewhere.

Finally, there's the great question of all newly acquired vintage cars:
whaddaya got in there anyway?

I *think* (again, I'm not even the sorcerer's apprentice, much less a
guru, on that era of Chevy) that in 1967 only the Camaro got the
brand-new 350.  So I wonder if you've got a retrofitted engine (either
used or a "universal" crate motor).  The 350 was an instant hit and
proved to be one of the truly enduring instantiations of the
small-block, so the earth was soon carpeted with them and they found
their way into all sorts of cars, including some that didn't originally
have a V8 at all, non-GM vehicles, rods and customs, you name it.

In that case, the proper assortment and disposition of smog controls
and other accessories might not be exactly that of a 1967 Chevelle or
El Camino with a 327.  Casting numbers on the block and heads might
help you research what year it's from, just as you'd use the VIN to
find out what the car had in it originally.

Just think of it as one of the interesting and fun parts of the
hobby...

Cheers,
--Joe
Shep - 17 Feb 2006 01:24 GMT
Yup 63 were the first pcv's, I worked for Cadillac at the time I remember
retroing one on my 62.
> This persisted well into the Positive Crankcase Ventilation era,
> actually.  My recollection (warning: small-sample statistics dead
[quoted text clipped - 59 lines]
> Cheers,
> --Joe
Scott Dorsey - 16 Feb 2006 15:29 GMT
> I know that this is going to sound totally silly but, I just purchased
> a 67 chevelle with a small block 350.  There is no oil filler cap on
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Thank you and I hope the not too  many are blinded by the glow of my
> embarrased face!!!

Yes.

Let me say, also, that as much as I rag on Chilton's manuals as being
less than useful on modern cars, the one for your car is pretty good and
worth picking up.
--scott

Signature

"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Mike Walsh - 18 Feb 2006 15:37 GMT
Motor manuals of that time were also excellent. How times have changed!

> Let me say, also, that as much as I rag on Chilton's manuals as being
> less than useful on modern cars, the one for your car is pretty good and
> worth picking up.
> --scott

Signature

                  Mike Walsh
           West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A.

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.