Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-12-2012, 01:00 PM   #21 (permalink)
EcoModding Minded
 
Chris D.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 667

Lunar Mist - '02 Toyota Tacoma SR5
90 day: 25.31 mpg (US)

Silver Streak - '08 Toyota Corolla S
90 day: 38.25 mpg (US)
Thanks: 67
Thanked 25 Times in 12 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Chris D.
Those sealed ebay catch cans have no internal filter or baffels, I wouldn't run a sealed catch can..
Make your own or pony up for a properly filtered baffeled catch can..

That silver one is the spitting image of the one I had, when I installed it, I cleaned everything and used all new hose, in 2 months time, I had to do plugs and when removing it, I saw there was oil moisture in the out hose of the catch can..

I swabbed it with a q-tip and it wasn't good.
I read how the oil is pretty much vaporized within the system..
So filteration is the key..

My catch can was mounted lower than the pvc, intake ports, nothing was able to run "downstream"

__________________


  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-12-2012, 01:03 PM   #22 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,761

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,548 Times in 2,215 Posts
I have vehicles with 160k and more on them too, and they all lack catch cans. The logic of preventing pollutants with one of these eludes me. We are talking about water, blow-by, and crankcase oil vapors that, in a normal pcv system, are then routed to the combustion chambers for incineration AND after-treatment. Has anyone ever stopped to consider they are CREATING more condensate by virtue of slowing down the flow of untreated vapors in a cool, low-flow container?

I can see the logic of having catch-cans in some racing applications but for the street I think they are ricer junk.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 12:29 AM   #23 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mwebb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 513

no nickname , it's just a car - '04 volkswagen golf tdi
Thanks: 2
Thanked 101 Times in 74 Posts
good

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
I have vehicles with 160k and more on them too, and they all lack catch cans. The logic of preventing pollutants with one of these eludes me. We are talking about water, blow-by, and crankcase oil vapors that, in a normal pcv system, are then routed to the combustion chambers for incineration AND after-treatment. Has anyone ever stopped to consider they are CREATING more condensate by virtue of slowing down the flow of untreated vapors in a cool, low-flow container?

I can see the logic of having catch-cans in some racing applications but for the street I think they are ricer junk.
it appears they do not know how the PCV system functions , so that it is easy for them to fall prey to the
quacks and thieves that promote "catch Cans" as a solution to
a non existent problem or as a fix for bad piston rings

so no
i do not think that
"anyone has stopped to consider " that they are being cheated by the thieves that promote this nonsense

except for Frank
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 01:51 AM   #24 (permalink)
EcoModding Minded
 
Chris D.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 667

Lunar Mist - '02 Toyota Tacoma SR5
90 day: 25.31 mpg (US)

Silver Streak - '08 Toyota Corolla S
90 day: 38.25 mpg (US)
Thanks: 67
Thanked 25 Times in 12 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Chris D.
There isn't an engine out there that doesn't emit oil from the pvc system to some extent..
I've built plenty of engines to know that an oil catch can is a decent mod..

I built an engine and ran it for around 20k till I decided to pull the head and use some arp head studs, no other changes.. There was a small amount of carbon buildupon the pistons..

I cleaned them off, prepped the deck, and finished the install..
While I was waiting for suspension parts, I made a catch can after reading something on a solo2 site.. It didn't seem like a bad idea and it couldn't hurt anything..

Once it was buttoned up, I did a cold and hot compression test and all was consistant..

I ran the engine for about 40k this way before I did a cam swap (sohc) I messed up and dropped a valve so I pulled the head and the pistons looked great, next to no buildup with twice the mileage...

It could be the engine wasn't broken in completley, donno..
I file fitted the rings when I built it and even today with 110k on it after doing a cometic hg swap, it looks great today.

If your freugal on your setup, thats fine, diy faq's are out there and it can cost you next to nothing to do..

I know all about Bob and his studies, makes for some great reading imho..

I run a catch can, could care less on what it looks like and don't pop the hood to show anyone anything because I don't care..

I got results, yours may vary, believe the hype or go the other way with it, makes me no difference
__________________


  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chris D. For This Useful Post:
j12piprius (05-27-2018), Olympiadis (01-22-2012)
Old 01-13-2012, 09:02 AM   #25 (permalink)
Definately a Modder!
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Port St. Lucie, Florida
Posts: 94
Thanks: 5
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RH77 View Post
I understand your concerns regarding the PCV system, but I have a few follow-up questions, statements, and a respectful difference of opinion in some situations...

In the case of Josh8loop's TDI, it appears that a reasonable collection system was designed to remove a nominal amount of oil from the turbo bearing seal and then from the crankcase. If a pressure guage were to be applied to the capillary tube, I expect a very small reading of negligible, intermittent pressure. I would imagine that losing small amount of oil is typical for a turbo, with the speed, temperature, and pressure of the application? Also, turbochargers in consumer applications tend to fail at the 100K mile mark (on the average) without proper cooldown during the life of the component. Timed idling before shutdown (not advised for FE) or light driving before shutdown, has demonstrated a preservation approach to turbo longevity, as you probably know.

To demonstrate the amount of emissions from this system on a larger scale, take a look at a large, rear-engined tour bus. Since a closed PCV system is not required for large vehicle applications, a vent tube generally exhausts the vent directly into the atmosphere. If one looks underneath while the vehicle is at idle, the downward-pointed tube is often clearly visible, and vents quite a bit of contaminants. If left stationary and idle for a while, a greasy/oily spot can be seen on the pavement where this tube vents.

These vehicles are designed to run 100's of thousands of miles, and typically vent a considerable amount when relatively new. Would diesel engines have more blow-by due to the higher compression and a larger supply of oil? In our small, closed PCV systems, we simply want to condense and collect the discharge before it can potentially degrade downstream components or senselessly be burned and released into our air.

My personal goal (and likelly that of others) is to remove airborne pollutants, contaminants, and whatever blow-by occurs in normal engine operation -- and especially as engines accumulate more hours and inevitably wear out their piston rings. The system has existed for a reason (for decades), and can account for significant air quality issues if not maintained. For those strapped for cash, it can be an inexpensive addition to prevent costly and inefficient operation later.

Further, despite the closed nature of the sytem, I would expect condensation and warm-up evaporation to be a factor on cold starts and/or humid days, increasing the vapor amount.

I applaud Josh's collection of intercooler contaminants, through carefully constructing a relatively non-invasive setup. Whether or not the turbo is significantly leaking, collecting over 5 oz. of comtanimants over 50K miles establishes the "every little bit helps" rule, and thus far, has not been reported to be a detriment.

As for me, I plan to continue my usual maintenance routine, involving the use of high-quality oil / filter changes, Seafoam cleanse directly into the intake, and the catch can. So far, 50K miles later, it sill runs smoothly and efficiently at 160K total miles.

RH77


Thanks for the kind words. This system I have adapted is similar to what the LandRover Diesel guys have installed as factory equipment on their vehicles with one exception. I added the lower IC bleed to somewhat passively address the lower IC buildup of oil which is perfectly normal for these vehicles. So the technology is not new, and I cannot take credit for it-I've just massaged it to meet my needs on this particular vehicle.

I'm not sure exactly what the comparison would be from an equivalent displacement of a gasoline engine and a diesel engine in terms of CCV flow. My guess would be that the diesel(due to higher compression) would have more. I know that if the diesel engine is equipped with a mechanical vacuum pump which vents into the crankcase then that does increase total CCV flow.

As you mention condensation can become an issue and to prevent that my design goal was to use short direct runs of piping to keep the CCV gasses hot so I don't drop out the water vapor and leave it in vapor form. I live in Florida, so I have more flexibility in this aspect. Others that are in the colder climates would want to keep things short, direct, insulated, and close to engine heat radiating components(just like BMW did on the X5 engine with this separator) to ensure little or no water vapor condensation happens.


I also use high quality oils to help keep the engine component life maximized, especially since I am running my "Hybrid" 205 Deg F thermostat. My car was designed for 195 F operation, and so I had to fabricate my own thermostat for it. So far 3-4 MPG increase from the higher temps, and from recent lower and upper end inspection no adverse effects have been noted.
__________________
2002 VW Jetta TDI 5-speed(completed 01M-5-speed swap at 155K miles) 45 MPG City with the 01M, 5-speed 60+ MPG City. Nokian Entyre Low RR Tires. Experimenting with the "Hybrid" 205 Deg F T-stat:

http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread...=306799&page=4

..

Last edited by Josh8loop; 01-22-2012 at 08:29 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2012, 02:34 AM   #26 (permalink)
Depends on the Day
 
RH77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kansas City Area
Posts: 1,761

Teggy - '98 Acura Integra LS
Sports Cars
90 day: 32.74 mpg (US)

IMA - '10 Honda Insight EX
Team Honda
90 day: 34.76 mpg (US)

Tessie - '06 Acura TSX Base
90 day: 28.2 mpg (US)
Thanks: 31
Thanked 41 Times in 35 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris D. View Post
I run a catch can, could care less on what it looks like and don't pop the hood to show anyone anything because I don't care..

I got results, yours may vary, believe the hype or go the other way with it, makes me no difference
Well said! If people don't like it (or their research shows otherwise), they don't have to have one. As for me, it seems like an easy decision to have one, and it doesn't look fancy in the least.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh8loop View Post
Thanks for the kind words. This system I have adapted is similar to what the LandRover Diesel guys have installed as factory equipment on their vehicles with one exception. I added the lower IC bleed to somewhat passively addres the lower IC buildup of oil which is perfectly normal for these vehicles. So the technology is not new, and I cannot take credit for it-I've just massaged it to meet my needs on this particular vehicle.

I'm not sure exactly what the comparison would be from an equivalent displacement of a gasoline engine and a diesel engine in terms of CCV flow. My guess would be that the diesel(due to higher compression) would have more. I know that if the diesel engine is equipped with a mechanical vacuum pump which vents into the crankcase then that does increase total CCV flow.

As you mention condensation can become an issue and to prevent that my design goal was to use short direct runs of piping to keep the CCV gasses hot so I don't drop out the water vapor and leave it in vapor form. I live in Florida, so I have more flexibility in this aspect. Others that are in the colder climates would want to keep things short, direct, insulated, and close to engine heat radiating components(just like BMW did on the X5 engine with this separator) to ensure little or no water vapor condensation happens.


I also use high quality oils to help keep the engine component life maximized, especially since I am running my "Hybrid" 205 Deg F thermostat. My car was designed for 195 F operation, and so I had to fabricate my own thermostat for it. So far 3-4 MPG increase from the higher temps, and from recent lower and upper end inspection no adverse effects have been noted.
It's clear that you have done your homework with other designs and adapted them to your own application. This is exactly what EcoModding is about: Research, Implementation, and Reporting.

I have a warmer thermostat as well. Over the course of ~80K miles with the mod, I haven't observed any ill-effects either. With higher intake temps and advanced timing (and perhaps, in addition to the hotter coolant), the use of premium fuel has been needed to eliminate detonation.

With ambient temps that range from -5 to 105F, the extra 10-degrees help in the colder months (especially with an efficient cooling system -- a radiator block is very much needed this time of year as well). Otherwise, the car is aging well, but needs some extra maintenance to keep things running efficiently, like any older vehicle.

My main concern has been with the (still original) automatic transmission experiencing higher temps. As a result, I did invest in a fully synthetic fluid flush/replace. Even with it hacked to shift the torque converter manually, it still has a firm shift with no excessive slippage or shudder (knock on wood).

Best of luck with your mods and research -- I look forward to any results to share

RH77
__________________
“If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research” ― Albert Einstein

_
_
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to RH77 For This Useful Post:
Olympiadis (01-22-2012)
Old 01-22-2012, 10:34 AM   #27 (permalink)
Renaissance Man
 
Formula413's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: In the Northeast dreaming of the Southwest
Posts: 596

Aegean C - '17 Honda Civic LX
90 day: 39.42 mpg (US)
Thanks: 20
Thanked 31 Times in 24 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RH77 View Post
My main concern has been with the (still original) automatic transmission experiencing higher temps. As a result, I did invest in a fully synthetic fluid flush/replace. Even with it hacked to shift the torque converter manually, it still has a firm shift with no excessive slippage or shudder (knock on wood).
Not to threadjack but if you are running a warmer thermostat you would probably be well advised to add a transmission cooler (maybe you already did?). Since the trans fluid shares the radiator with the now warmer coolant it is most likely actually being warmed by passing through there. I would bypass the cooler in the radiator and run an external cooler, and put it somewhere where it will get good airflow.
__________________

  Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2012, 03:43 PM   #28 (permalink)
Definately a Modder!
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Port St. Lucie, Florida
Posts: 94
Thanks: 5
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Formula413 View Post
Not to threadjack but if you are running a warmer thermostat you would probably be well advised to add a transmission cooler (maybe you already did?). Since the trans fluid shares the radiator with the now warmer coolant it is most likely actually being warmed by passing through there. I would bypass the cooler in the radiator and run an external cooler, and put it somewhere where it will get good airflow.


Little of topic as mentioned, but I was thinking the same thing in regards to tranny temps. When I first experimented with higher temps and had my automatic I wasn't too concerned since I was planning on a manual swap soon anyway. I am sure he is well aware of the potential issue, and is looking for ways to combat ill effects.


..
__________________
2002 VW Jetta TDI 5-speed(completed 01M-5-speed swap at 155K miles) 45 MPG City with the 01M, 5-speed 60+ MPG City. Nokian Entyre Low RR Tires. Experimenting with the "Hybrid" 205 Deg F T-stat:

http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread...=306799&page=4

..
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2012, 07:38 PM   #29 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mwebb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 513

no nickname , it's just a car - '04 volkswagen golf tdi
Thanks: 2
Thanked 101 Times in 74 Posts
SULEV means 1 lb HC emissions per 100k miles

Well said! If people don't like it (or their research shows otherwise), they don't have to have one. As for me, it seems like an easy decision to have one, and it doesn't look fancy in the least.

not well said at all
new cars that meet SULEV emissions for HC Hydro Carbon emit less than 1 lb of HC per 100k miles
your tampering substantially increases your system's HC emissions way beyond that and
provides zero benefit to you

a loose loose modification

the goal here is
improvement of fuel economy without increasing emissions

the goal is not

increasing emissions and reduction of fuel economy ,
which is what your modification does
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2012, 08:05 PM   #30 (permalink)
oldschool
 
Olympiadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 184

White2003Focus - '03 Ford Focus SE 4-door sedan
Team Ford
90 day: 38.53 mpg (US)

White2001S10pickup - '01 Chevy S10 extended cab LR
Last 3: 24.51 mpg (US)

1989DodgeOMNI - '89 Dodge Omni
Last 3: 30.38 mpg (US)

1991ChevyC1500pickup - '91 Chevy C1500
Last 3: 24.03 mpg (US)

White1986Irocz - '86 Chevy Irocz LB9
Last 3: 30.14 mpg (US)

1999 C5 Corvette - '99 Chevy Corvette

2008 Infinity G37 - '08 Infinity G37
Thanks: 21
Thanked 35 Times in 25 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwebb View Post
Well said! If people don't like it (or their research shows otherwise), they don't have to have one. As for me, it seems like an easy decision to have one, and it doesn't look fancy in the least.

not well said at all
new cars that meet SULEV emissions for HC Hydro Carbon emit less than 1 lb of HC per 100k miles
your tampering substantially increases your system's HC emissions way beyond that and
provides zero benefit to you

a loose loose modification

the goal here is
improvement of fuel economy without increasing emissions

the goal is not

increasing emissions and reduction of fuel economy ,
which is what your modification does
Perhaps you should start your own forum where instead of modification and testing, you have a policy of non-tampering, and instead encourage folks to not mess with their vehicles and just take them in for dealer service to restore them back to factory spec.
Imagine how happy you would be then.

You could remain in a world where your members goals were exactly the same as your goals, instead of this horrific world where people are happy doing things differently.

First off you should be embarrassed for being such a know-it-all and bringing such negativity to a forum that should be friendly to posting individuals modifications and results. You have more info to add that might be helpful? fine. I'm sure no one minds that at all.

Second, you give advice in what seems like absolute commands. For instance saying that using a catch-can is bad, period. Perhaps you should offer to fund the engine rebuilds for those who read your post so that what you suggest isn't advocating false economy. If you take an extra minute to imagine, the production of engine replacement parts, engine tear-down and rebuilding, and the acquirement of the funds to do so is about infinitely worse for the environment than filtering out a small amount of contaminants from a PCV line. This is not to mention the fact that not everyone is obsessed with emissions levels and may only be interested in economy, convenience, efficiency, or reliability.

I really didn't want this to be so personal, but this kind of routine is getting very old. Seriously. It is very discouraging.
People posting there exploits here may not be 100% correct about everything every time, but I don't think verbally beating them down is much of a help.

You will no doubt try to defend or counter now. Personally I have no interest whatsoever. Have at it.

  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Olympiadis For This Useful Post:
hat_man (07-16-2013), j12piprius (05-27-2018)
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Civic Block Heater Install TomO DIY / How-to 42 04-04-2012 08:24 PM
DIY: OEM VX PCV and Info TomO DIY / How-to 4 04-02-2011 09:38 AM
PCV Catch Can on Metro? SirKeats DIY / How-to 14 09-27-2009 04:31 PM
DIY: Make a PVC Catch Can for your PCV System TomO DIY / How-to 0 11-14-2007 03:30 PM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com