Bruce,
Thanks for mentioning your installation details. This only proves how
each installation is unique. The oil filter that I am using is the shorter
one, CH48108. I do not know if there is a difference in diameter. My
installation also uses the MAC engine mount with the Barry Mounts and I have
the previously noted .70" clearance. Maybe your 1.4 spacer from B&C was
incorrect. Did you measure it when you received it? It would not be the first
time a vendor sent an incorrect or defective part. Also note that I machined
my 1.4 spacer out of a wood block just to see if it would work. The true test
will be when the real part arrivesand installed. When it does I will have too
look real close to see if there is some dimension that other builders can
measure so that they can determine which spacer will fit. The other
possibility is that there are different engine mounts out there.
Good luck, you'll need it,
Rick D.
Rebel 404R
On 12/26/02 3:48 AM,
LEGEORGEN@AOL.COM wrote to MURPHY-REBEL:
->
-> --part1_139.18f4d8ae.2b3bf8b0_boundary
-> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
-> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
->
-> Rick,
->
-> That's my installation of the B&C 90* filter you looked at on the list
files.
-> I ordered the 1 1/4" spacer with the filter but had to return the spacer
for
-> the larger spacer (2 1/2" ?). The shorter spacer only gave a 1/4"
clearance
-> of the filter from my engine mount (0320 E2D) that was supplied by MAM. I
-> used Barry engine mounts, also supplied by MAM. I did have to sand the
flange
-> on the 2" firewall reinforcing fix, that spans the top two engine mounts,
in
-> order to maintain a 1/2" clearance from the flange. The end product was a
-> 3/4" space between the firewall and filter.
->
-> The filter works very well and keeps an already crowded firewall less so.
I
-> like not having two more long, not to mention expensive to replace, oil
hoses
-> and fittings, like the remote Wolf type filters use. Just one more thing
to
-> maintain. The B&C 90* system is less weight and I would use it again.
->
-> If you have access to a mill, you could mill the large spacer down to
about
-> 2" and it would fit even better. The 1 1/4" spacer was to short for my
-> installation.
->
-> Blue skies and tail winds,
->
-> Bruce 357R
->
-> --part1_139.18f4d8ae.2b3bf8b0_boundary
-> Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
-> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
->
-> <HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Rick,<BR>
-> <BR>
-> That's my installation of the B&C 90* filter you looked at on the list
files. I ordered the 1 1/4" spacer with the filter but had to return the
spacer for the larger spacer (2 1/2" ?). The shorter spacer only gave a 1/4"
clearance of the filter from my engine mount (0320 E2D) that was supplied by
MAM. I used Barry engine mounts, also supplied by MAM. I did have to sand the
flange on the 2" firewall reinforcing fix, that spans the top two engine
mounts, in order to maintain a 1/2" clearance from the flange. The end
product was a 3/4" space between the firewall and filter.<BR>
-> <BR>
-> The filter works very well and keeps an already crowded firewall less so.
I like not having two more long, not to mention expensive to replace, oil
hoses and fittings, like the remote Wolf type filters use. Just one more
thing to maintain. The B&C 90* system is less weight and I would use it
again. <BR>
-> <BR>
-> If you have access to a mill, you could mill the large spacer down to
about 2" and it would fit even better. The 1 1/4" spacer was to short for my
installation. <BR>
-> <BR>
-> Blue skies and tail winds,<BR>
-> <BR>
-> Bruce 357R</FONT></HTML>
->
-> --part1_139.18f4d8ae.2b3bf8b0_boundary--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at:
https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe:
rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator:
mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
