Images

I've been going through the $2000 O-ring adventure on my own.

I took things apart to measure them, and while I was at it, took pictures with my cheapass $100 digital camera. The pictures suck, but you can still see what you need.

The pictures are at http://www.red4est.com/lrc/pix/r80oilfilter

Feel free to use these pictures in any way that they are useful.

Click on the thumbnail for an 800x600 picture. If you need the 1600x1200 go to http://www.red4est.com/lrc/pix/r80oilfilter/bigpix.

My dial calipers are in inches so I'll include both.

Pictures 1892 - 1901 show the cover, then O-ring, then protective metal shim.

Pictures 1902-1904 show the oil filter in place. It's about 1cm in, so I doubt it is the canister of which Snowbum speaks.

I'll assume that the thin metal cylinder that is about .150" below the surface is what Snowbum calls the canister in http://pweb.jps/net/~snowbum/Oil/htm paragraph 26

Pictures 1905 - 1908 show me measuring the depth of the canister. My caliper was not ideal for the job, my measurements varied from 0.142" to 0.152" as seen in pictures 1909-1913. I will call the depth 0.147" or 3.73mm

In pictures 1914-1916 I measure the black rubber O-ring at 0.133" or 3.38mm. It is soft and squishy, so it's hard to get a good accurate reading on it.

In pictures 1917-1919 I measure the shim to be .012" or 0.3mm.

In pictures 1920-1922 I measure the gasket material to be .022" or 0.56mm

So we have 
	     Each		Total
Can depth    0.147"	3.73
gasket	     0.022"	0.56mm	0.169"	4.29mm

	     Each		Total
shim	     0.012"	0.3	 0.012"	0.3
O-ring	     0.133"	3.38	 0.145"	3.68mm

This puts the shim+O-ring approximately 2RCH smaller than the canister depth which is probably well within measurement error, especially considering the squishiness of the O-ring. If we add the paper gasket that makes the cannister depth about 20 RCH greater.

It looks to me that I should not be running the gasket.