Should be able to have some sort of plug adapter like Jack suggested that then goes from 1/8 or 1/4 NPT to a remote connector. Are the ICP sensors same from 2003 to 2007? I need some numbers and study this a bit.

Rob

 

Jack-Is the depth where the o ring sits in the factory port deeper than a standard ISO6149 pocket? Do you have any dimensions on the actual taper?

Rob

 

Just got back from the farm.

Rob,

Video'd it because I can see the phone display better than with the naked eye. I think these are correct, but best I can do with vernier calipers.





The fitting that I was thinking could be used as the sensor end, but not sure. I think there is enough meat there to massage.





However, the Amazon union might also be a solution, I would need to find the Swagelok fitting to go from the 12mm to 1/4" tube. That was a few years back.

 

The ICP sensors early/late are different part numbers if I remember right, they read slightly different but they are interchangeable with no problems.

 

Thanks Jack. I am just now looking at the video as things like this/Youtube videos are blocked at work. I will see what I can come up with.

Basically if you could utilize one of the plugs Jack had in the photos, drill/tap it for a 1/8 or 1/4NPT Swagelok fitting which is made for high pressure leaktest systems which then goes to a 1/4" diameter stainless line and to an adapter which has the M12 x 1.5 ISO 6149 Female port.

I don't think the McMaster Carr adapter #5182K253 would work as it already has a 3/8 NPT female thread and that measures .675" inside the threads. The M12 measures .472".

I am going to see if I can find any other solution.

Rob

 

Yeah, I picked the wrong fitting last night, I had a layout set up in a spreadsheet but couldn't find it.

For the sensor adaptor, I went through the 1/4" tube to the alphabet of threads, and I think what I may have ultimately came up with was a male thread that had enough meat to use the bit and form the recess. It would have looked weird as there would still be the male threads on the exterior unless it was machined off,

 

So long as it worked. The outside threads could even be ground off to clean up appearances. Do you have any reference part numbers? I think the main thing would be to get the O-ring pocket correct to maintain the proper compression to not leak. An M12 thread is pretty straight forward.


How much spare wire is on the ICP pigtail harness? I remember working on my brother's 2003 F250 when he replaced the HPOP and I suggested he replace the ICP sensor as well. I never thought back then of making an adapter. Where would you mount this adapter?

 

Ah, you have motivation.

Agreed, the threads could be turned off on a lathe, right after creating the pocket with the bit in the tail. The pocket the key, agreed. I’ll have to look again through the drawings for the fitting. It would need to be purchased to confirm the drawing follows the actual part. I used to have ~$10k in Swageloc at my facility, it would have taken a minute. I can get the fittings in a day with easy returns for the non-compliment.

The harness would need to be modified, the additional wire spliced dependent on the location. That doesn’t bother me, wire or shielding.

The location I had not finalized. I was going to look at that again once I got the top of the motor back together. I have the possibility of two 3/16 or 1/8 tubes for my back of head burping, and I was pondering bring those to the same location to tie into the degas burbing line from the manifold. But anything is an improvement compared to the ICP existing location.

My gut call was between the turbo and FICM, utilizing the intake studs a vibration dampening bracket as a holder off two intake studs. I would bring the sensor vertical rather then horizontal as it currently is, utilizing the possibility of oil leakage moving away from the electrical connector. Not sure it still wouldn’t wick. But with some elevation it would be free to view to see if it’s leaking, an excellent location for changeout, and certainly easier to change. Also with it at that location lightly attached one could energize the regulator, fender crank the starter and bleed the air from the tubing. You could do it after starting too, with the sensor unplugged.

Fabbing up the tubing for me is not a problem. After decades of modifying brake lines I can pretzel tubing and get it where I need. The 0.065 wall is necessary for the pressure range and fatigue resistance, but admittedly I overthink those kinds of things.

You could even go whacked and install a Swageloc ball valve below so the sensor could be changed without loosing prime. I’ve never had to change a sensor in 200k, so that may be extravagant.

 

Truck definatly runs better cold but it don't like the delo

EOT @ 50* just after start throw in gear it wanting to die

 

Jack,

I have attached a PDF showing what I came up with. Sometimes the hamster is in overdrive on the brain cage. Some of the guys at work call me the squirrel as I see something and am on it or have a hundred things on the go at the same time.

My whole idea is based on the thread being ISO 6149, M12 threads. I am also assuming a few key things as I am missing some dimensions such as the thru hole on the Parker Reducer/Expander PNF870HG87 and if it is possible to drill and tap it for a 1/8" NPT.

Let me know what you think.

Rob

 

Yep, that's what I had envisioned too.

I found some notes from 3 and 5 years ago, it's on 3 different computers. This goes all the back a dozen years to a DieselGarage forum discussion. Notes are a bad term, a collection of things.

I was thinking at the cover it was best to just drill and tap as I'm not sure there is enough meat in the plug to have a 1/8NPT. 1/16" would also work. Obliterating the cover 12mm though brings another stage of complexity. Another option is to use the existing back plug in the cover with a 90 elbow to run the line if there is enough firewall clearance.

Swagelok has a fitting almost ideal, but I need to pull the o-ring off one of the plugs to see how the O-ring is received on the plug end. The fitting itself may need machining. that may be where I settled on 1/4" tuning.

The tubing does not have to be as large as 1/4" or the 0.065" wall, 0.047" would be fine. The tubing could even go smaller as the reduced OD has a higher pressure threshold. It's not a flow circuit, it's a pressure reading circuit, the volume is not necessary. So any response would be instantaneous even down to 1/8" tubing.

At the receiver end, any fitting would have to be physically checked as I don't trust drawings, manufacturing can change over time.


I had looked at several possibilities for the receiver end, I may have bought one or two since I have a few purple highlights in my McMaster online view, I need to check my inventory.

I'll post up a few of the ones I image copied, but in the end, considering costs it might just be easier to to take a non-Swagelok item or blank piece of steel and just tap one side for 1/16" or 1/8" npt and machine the other for the o-ring.

 

Hi Jack-I think you and I are basically on the same page. Let me know if I can help at all.

Swagelok has a fitting almost ideal, but I need to pull the o-ring off one of the plugs to see how the O-ring is received on the plug end. The fitting itself may need machining. that may be where I settled on 1/4" tuning. Please let me know if you do pull the O-ring off and what you find out

The tubing does not have to be as large as 1/4" or the 0.065" wall, 0.047" would be fine. The tubing could even go smaller as the reduced OD has a higher pressure threshold. It's not a flow circuit, it's a pressure reading circuit, the volume is not necessary. So any response would be instantaneous even down to 1/8" tubing. Completely agree. Smaller diameter would be easier to bend and the higher pressure threshold wouldn't hurt

At the receiver end, any fitting would have to be physically checked as I don't trust drawings, manufacturing can change over time. So true in today's world.


I had looked at several possibilities for the receiver end, I may have bought one or two since I have a few purple highlights in my McMaster online view, I need to check my inventory. Please let me know what you find out.

I'll post up a few of the ones I image copied, but in the end, considering costs it might just be easier to to take a non-Swagelok item or blank piece of steel and just tap one side for 1/16" or 1/8" npt and machine the other for the o-ring. This would be the cleanest. I was just trying to come up with a solution for most people as they do have the ability to do a 1/8 or 1/16 NPT thread and not have to come up with a fancy cutter. Even the shop I work at does not have a ISO6149 port cutter. We do have the SAE cutters. Probably wouldn't be that bad to just cut the O-ring locator/tap for the thread. I can picture this part as I am typing.

 

Had International gone to SAE this would have been so much easier. But every thread in the auto world has been metric for quite some time. I even looked at European sites to see if I could find an adapter, no luck.

Agreed, the cutter is the issue. I'm just not in the situation of buying it right now, other places that need the funds. I've abandoned this modification a few times since my history has been that I've not needed to change that sensor as others have.

The other alternative if you look back at my first McMaster queue list was a high-pressure seal for flat to flat. It's an alternative I was thinking of for the specialized o-ring situation, the possibility of using the sensors flat surface with a straight adaptor for 12x1.5mm, as long as the adaptor has a flat face. But since I never bought one the non-successful "kits" that's out there I do know if that's what they tried. It may just require that the adaptor face is lathe turned perpendicular to the thread.

 

I don't know why you wouldn't just use an adapter.

 

If its common aluminum alloy, it can only handle one or two hundred psi. Class 3000 aluminum fittings, the best, has a ceiling at 3,000 psi. I figure we need about 5k to be in the ballpark. No?

I had been looking for steel.