Welcome to our resource for MG Car Information.



MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG MGA - Early Tecalemet Filter

Seal #16 in the moss parts book does not exist. Tried a number of sources. Anyone have a source for this seal? It is for the Early Tecalemet Filter and fits on the internal piece that sits on top of the filter element.
David Holmes

Not certain here, but the elements (fit both type filters) come with two sizes of seal rings, one of which you never use. I'll bet that's the critter. I've been doing this since 1964 and have been waiting to use one - I have a LOT of them! I will note that we used to change the filters to the later type because it was such a PITA to change when you had to remove the banjo pipe, and we knew that our customers would be back soon for another oil/filter change - parts were cheap, patience was not.

Fletcher R Millmore

Yup, that's it. Every cartridge filter element for MGA that I have ever seem comes with two seal rings. The slightly smaller one is for the early one-piece Tecalemit filter internal plug. For the later two-piece canisters you need two of the larger seal rings, but there is only one in the package.

Barney Gaylord

Sorry gentleman, but Barney and FRM are not correct. The number 16 seal is NLA and not anything like the two seals supplied with various filters. The larger of the two seals supplied with filters is used in the engine block to seal the later style (tecalemit or purolator) aluminum filter head to the block. The smaller of the two is used to seal the steel cannister to the aluminum filter head. Both Moss and the MGA 1500 parts list show these two seals as being the same part number, which is incorrect.
As far as replacing #16, just find an appropriately sized o-ring at an industrial supply house.
James Johanski

I thought so. I had a collection of unused seals from oil changes long ago and nothing matched. The seal #16 is just a touch smaller than the others. I guess finding an o-ring the correct size is the way to go or perhaps replace the whole thing with a spin on filter adapter.
David Holmes

Well JJ, you are half right and I am half wrong. I just pulled out all of these parts to check. The SPL and Moss catalog do call for same seal part number above and below filter adapter, and both are correct.

The seal supplied by Moss is same as the fat seal packed with the filter element, and it does fit the glands both in the block and below the alloy adapter for the two-piece canisters (and in the block for the one piece early Tecalimit canister, and for the spin-on adapters to engine block). I was sure this was the case, as I have been assembling these parts repeatedly for years, and I only keep in stock the one part number for the seal. I don't know why you might think the top and bottom seals should be different, but do tell if you know why or what the difference might be.

For the thinner seal packed with the filter element, you are right, it is apparently not for the plug in the early Tecalimit filter. I now have no idea what application this thinner seal might be for. The ID of the thinner seal is about the same as ID of the thicker seal, just thinner wall and smaller OD. But the OD is not small enough to fit inside of the canister ID (early Tecalimit 1-piece with plug inside top).

I "suspect" you are right that a hardware store round section O-ring may work for the early Tecalemit plug to canister joint, but I can't verify it immediately. Problem is I have never installed or re-fitted the one-piece canister to an engine, always toss it aside and replace it with the later 2-piece canister or a spin-on adapter. IMHO the masochistic chore of reinstalling the 1-piece canister is for a concours buff only.
Barney Gaylord

You said " I don't know why you might think the top and bottom seals should be different, but do tell if you know why or what the difference might be."
We only disagree on the use of the second thinner O seal that comes with the replacement filter kit. I have tried to fit the "fat" seal in the bottom of the aluminum filter adaptor and fail to see how this can fit.
Please see the attached picture. These are the two seal rings that come with the Crossland kit. In the bottom of the filter head is the fat ring and to the right are the old ring that pulled from the head and the replacement thin ring. What you cannot see is the groove below the fat ring and that it is not seating completely. The old thin ring did and the new thin ring also seats properly in the filter head.

James Johanski

Here is a second picture showing the thin ring properly seated in the filter head. What you could not see in the previous pictur was the thin groove to accept this seal ring as it was covered and bridged by the thick ring. The thin groove is visible here.

James Johanski

If we persist, we may get to the root of this yet (or maybe not?). See attached picture. This is my late Tecalemit filer head on left, and Purolator filter head on right. The splash plates have been removed so the seal glands are clearly visible. The seal glands are the same width and roughly the same depth, so they both accept the same wide seal ring. There is no narrow groove that would take the narrower seal ring.

Find more photos and additional information here:

Perhaps we have discovered two different late Tecalemit filter heads. Maybe there is a difference in markings on the castings. Perhape one of these is not original for MGA, possibly for some other application, but with current information I couldn't say which is which.

Tag, you're it.

Barney Gaylord

Your pictures clearly illustrate the wider groove for the thicker seal. This is truely a mystery.

The filter head that I show pictures of came off an MGA parts engine that I have, but that is not to say that at some time the filter head was not changed, but I don't think so. It also has the same casting numbers as the Tecalemit that you show. Before your last post, I was thinking that perhaps only the Purolator head had the larger groove, but your pictures show otherwise. To further my assumption (yes assupmtion not claim) that filter heads accecpt a thin seal, I have a NOS example of the original felt oil filter element with one thick and one thin seal ring in the original BMC box and also a NORS felt filter element which also sports the same rings.

I puzzle as to why the factory and other suppliers would do this unless the ring was used.
I speculate that the filter head was meant to remain in place, and therefore, the filter elements were supplied with two rings (thick and thin) to accomodate two different filter heads.

Perhaps other attendees to this BBS can check their heads (filter, that is) to see if their groove is thick or thin.

Until then, I remain your humble assistant,
James Johanski

I'm talking bout the piece of the tecalemit filter that fits inside the cannister and has a seal that goes around it. The pictures you reference is the part that goes against the block. My problem is with the plunger internal piece. That o-ring is clearly smaller than the ones included in a new filter. Just saying. Thanks though for the interesting discussion.
David Holmes

Yeah, we know that. We just got side tracked on a related issue. I don't have one of the early Tecalemit canister units in hand for investigation. If you can measure yours, give me the width, depth, and diameter of the groove, and I may be able to look up a commercial O-ring part number that would work. I have used and specified lots of O-rings in my machine design career.
Barney Gaylord


How about an O ring to replace felt seal AAA1335 at the steering rack where the shaft enters the rack.

Any ideas on a spec? I've been sent the wrong seal by two places now.

dominic clancy

After thinking about it, and reading James' 01 Aug posts, I was prepared to say that I (and Barney) were losing it - James is correct - the wide seal goes against the block, and the narrow one on the filter head adapter. (In my defense, I will say that we rarely ever changed these on routine changes, only on rebuilds when you were using a conversion set, or if a customer had tried to double seal it and had been digging about in the groove. The old seals last for years.)
And you always use the part that fits!
After reading Barney's last, I went and looked at the two I have easily accessible.

One came off a Magnette parts engine, provenance unknown
Tecalemet filter # FA2115, element FG2471
This has the large radiused center boss as shown for Tecalemet on left, bottom left pic ...100a

The other is known original from a 67 MGB
Tecalemet filter # FA2126, element FG2471
The center boss is as shown for the "Purolater" filter.

Both of these have the relief valve as shown in the 2nd from bottom LH picture on ...100a - the "Purolater" one!

AND - BOTH have the narrow seal groove!

This problem has been going on for a long time - I looked in my old 1500 and Magnette Parts Lists, and all the numbers for all of these seals including the early Tecalemet that David started with are circled with question marks. Said notations were made pre 1966.

I'm not going to transcribe all these numbers, since they are clearly confused. The rectangular seals in question are referred to as "washer, sealing", but the seal for the internal piece in the early filter is called "O-ring". I don't see that David or anybody else should have a problem finding an O-ring that fits the groove and seals against the can sides.

There's a possible further point of confusion. Early Magnettes had an even earlier "Purolater" filter, which used a rigid element with different locaters etc; and, there was an AC filter also used, but I have no pictures of that one. Also, the Magnettes at first used a bypass filter system; these two early filters are for the bypass setup. This will have a metering hole drilled in the center bolt, and does not use the long snout adapter in the block where the pipe attaches. That adapter blocks the main oil passage and routes the oil through the newer full flow filter. Mixing these parts up could be a problem, and these odd bits may be floating around from Magnettes, or A40/Metropolitan etc.

>>>>And you always use the part that fits!<<<<

Fletcher R Millmore

Am I right in thinking that if you have an oil cooler fitted (as I have), you cannot fit a conversion unit to take modern spin on filters?
Graham M V

I measured mine and think that McMaster-Carr p/n 4061T31 should work. It is a square seal that has an inside diameter of approx. 2 5/8" and a thickness of 3/16. I'm going to try and source one locally to see. Maybe Barney or someone can verify my measurements.

S Jackson

Thanks Steve, I'll check here to see if one is available at the parts counters.
David Holmes

Barney mentions (links above) that some conversions work with some of the OE alloy filter/pipe adapters and some do not. You'll have to measure and compare. (And tell us what the number on yours is and if it has a narrow or a wide groove!)

Fletcher R Millmore

An oil filter can be fitted with any setup of original filter or spin-on adapter. The cooler hoses connect in place of the original external steel pipe.
Barney Gaylord

This thread was discussed between 30/07/2010 and 05/08/2010

MG MGA index

This thread is from the archive. The Live MG MGA BBS is active now.