1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

[Bruce D.]

I have an ongoing question about my 6 quart oil pan on a 340 horse motor with the correct 3 dimples on both sides and dip stick/dip stick tube. When changing oil and the filter does the six quart pan require 7 quarts? I think so... Also the dip stick a have as well as a new one bought from Long Island with the chrome handle and the felt pad at the top registers full at 6 quarts and one quart over at 7 quarts when both the oil and filter is changed. What am I missing? Could the dip stick or the dip stick tube be wrong or is my logic about 7 quarts wrong? thanks in advanced for any thoughts.

[Edward J.]

Re: 1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

Bruce the total cap is 6 Qts. W/filter

[Owen L.]

Re: 1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

I'm a little confused (which happens several times per day!).

Are you putting 7 quarts into the engine and the stick shows the oil level at the full mark after running it and shutting down after a couple minutes? If so, I'm kinda surprised as I thought either 5 or 6 quarts total (depending on which engine option) into the 327s was pretty standard.

[Harry S.]

Re: 1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

Owen as Ed said, 5 in the pan and one in the filter. A total of 6 quarts. Either your tube or your dip stick is incorrect.

[Owen L.]

Re: 1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

Harry, just to be clear, it's not my engine but Bruce's. I was just questioning what he saying was occurring.

[Harry S.]

Re: 1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

Harry, just to be clear, it's not my engine but Bruce's. I was just questioning what he saying was occurring.

Owen, agree.

[Joe L.]

Re: 1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

I have an ongoing question about my 6 quart oil pan on a 340 horse motor with the correct 3 dimples on both sides and dip stick/dip stick tube. When changing oil and the filter does the six quart pan require 7 quarts? I think so... Also the dip stick a have as well as a new one bought from Long Island with the chrome handle and the felt pad at the top registers full at 6 quarts and one quart over at 7 quarts when both the oil and filter is changed. What am I missing? Could the dip stick or the dip stick tube be wrong or is my logic about 7 quarts wrong? thanks in advanced for any thoughts.

Bruce------


The pans are usually described by system capacity. That's why I use quotation marks when describing the pans (i.e. "5 quart" or "6 quart"). As I've mentioned many times before, the actual pan capacity for either pan is FAR greater that 5 or 6 quarts if the pan is filled to the brim. As far as "full" oil capacity with the pan on the engine, that point is nowhere marked on either pan.

1963-91 Corvette small blocks have a system capacity of either 5 or 6 quarts. The only ones with a 6 quart capacity are 1963-65 with mechanical lifters, possibly some 1965 L79, early 1970 LT-1, and all 1970-72 ZR-1. ALL others are 5 quart system capacity.

By the way, 1992-96 small blocks have a system capacity of 4-1/2quarts. Why? Well, because when they changed to the much smaller PF-51/52 oil filter rather than the PF-25, the system capacity was reduced.

How come there was no change in system capacity when the change was made in 1968 from the canister-style filter to the spin-on? I don't know. Apparently, though, GM considered the oil capacity of either filter to be the same. Or, at least, close enough that they did not change the rated system capacities.

[Owen L.]

Re: 1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

By the way, 1992-96 small blocks have a system capacity of 4-1/2quarts. Why? Well, because when they changed to the much smaller PF-51/52 oil filter rather than the PF-25, the system capacity was reduced.

Isn't the PF51/52 the longer filter and the PF25 the shorter? I used the PF52 in my '67 with the screw filter adapter because it looked a similar size to the older element-only original PF141 filter. As I recall, the PF35 was in between heights of the 25 and 52 and they all used the same thread and filter seal diameter.

[Joe L.]

Re: 1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

Isn't the PF51/52 the longer filter and the PF25 the shorter? I used the PF52 in my '67 with the screw filter adapter because it looked a similar size to the older element-only original PF141 filter. As I recall, the PF35 was in between heights of the 25 and 52 and they all used the same thread and filter seal diameter.

Owen------


The PF-51/52 is 1/2" longer than the PF-25. However, the PF-51/52 is almost 3/4" smaller in OD than the PF-25 resulting in a considerable difference in can volume.

The PF-51/52 uses a metric size thread unlike the PF-25. I know of no adapter to retrofit a PF-51/52 to a pre-1968 small block. One could theoretically be retrofitted to a 1968+ small block using the 91-96 oil filter adapter. However, I really don't know why anyone would want to do that. The PF 51/52 was used on 1992-96 LT1 and LT4 in order to provide clearance for the catalytic converters.

[Owen L.]

Re: 1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

Joe, thanks for the reply. I guess my memory of the PF #s isn't accurate. Whatever # I used, it was a long filter very much like the length of the element-only original canister filter.

[Bruce D.]

Re: 1963 6 quart oil pan and dip stick marks

guys thanks. my dip stick shows one qt over because I put 6 plus I for the filter. I thought the pan held 6 qts. my error
thanks for the clarification. I have been running the wrong way for years..