Those stupid, college-degreed car engineers who've done thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of miles of testing don't know jack crap. I trust some nameless guy on the interwebz who's trying to sell me something that's better!
Oil Catch Cans - another danger...
- Thread starter FlyPenFly
- Start date
- Status
I dunno, bean counters have been known to screw up many a good design.
Didn't we just have a long thread about how the new Ranger needs to have a wheel removed in order to change the oil filter was asinine? Bet engineers were involved there (and yes, I know it was later determined to be faulty--but there was plenty of side notes about other poorly designed setups that would dump oil all over something).
[For the record, I'm an electrical engineer, so I'm hardly dumping on engineering. The aftermarket sometimes does have to fix a design mistake. And sometimes it has fixes for things that were deliberate--think most emissions delete items--those items are getting pulled from setups that are required equipment yet failure prone.]
Didn't we just have a long thread about how the new Ranger needs to have a wheel removed in order to change the oil filter was asinine? Bet engineers were involved there (and yes, I know it was later determined to be faulty--but there was plenty of side notes about other poorly designed setups that would dump oil all over something).
[For the record, I'm an electrical engineer, so I'm hardly dumping on engineering. The aftermarket sometimes does have to fix a design mistake. And sometimes it has fixes for things that were deliberate--think most emissions delete items--those items are getting pulled from setups that are required equipment yet failure prone.]
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Those stupid, college-degreed car engineers who've done thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of miles of testing don't know jack crap. I trust some nameless guy on the interwebz who's trying to sell me something that's better!
This sums up pretty much every car forum
Those stupid, college-degreed car engineers who've done thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of miles of testing don't know jack crap. I trust some nameless guy on the interwebz who's trying to sell me something that's better!
This sums up pretty much every car forum
Originally Posted by novadude
Originally Posted by Patman
Catch cans are a waste of money, and here's yet another reason to avoid them.
Ever notice that most of the people extolling the virtues of catch cans on internet forums are usually involved with the sale or manufacture of catch cans? Yes, people install them and collect "stuff" in the can. Big deal. That same stuff would pass through the engine intake tract with no ill-effects like it has for years if you weren't forcing it to condense in a can.
Cans don't address the other source of oil contamination on intake valves. Valve stem seals always have a controlled leak so that guides stay lubricated. With vacuum in the port, where does that oil go? How ya' gonna trap that stuff?
We ran a GDI turbo 2.0 Ecotec regal well beyond 100k miles with no "necessary" catch can, and it ran like new when we traded it. As OP indicated, they can cause more problems than they solve (not to mention making your wallet lighter).
I've never seen convincing arguments one way or the other. However, you do make a good point about the junk caught in the can being more of a visual bias confirmation. PCV is routed to the intake purely for emissions reasons as far as I know, and things did not always used to be like that.
If I had a GDI car that was known for deposits I would probably run one. I don't see running a catch can as any sort of liability, especially if it is attached to a modified engine.
Originally Posted by Patman
Catch cans are a waste of money, and here's yet another reason to avoid them.
Ever notice that most of the people extolling the virtues of catch cans on internet forums are usually involved with the sale or manufacture of catch cans? Yes, people install them and collect "stuff" in the can. Big deal. That same stuff would pass through the engine intake tract with no ill-effects like it has for years if you weren't forcing it to condense in a can.
Cans don't address the other source of oil contamination on intake valves. Valve stem seals always have a controlled leak so that guides stay lubricated. With vacuum in the port, where does that oil go? How ya' gonna trap that stuff?
We ran a GDI turbo 2.0 Ecotec regal well beyond 100k miles with no "necessary" catch can, and it ran like new when we traded it. As OP indicated, they can cause more problems than they solve (not to mention making your wallet lighter).
I've never seen convincing arguments one way or the other. However, you do make a good point about the junk caught in the can being more of a visual bias confirmation. PCV is routed to the intake purely for emissions reasons as far as I know, and things did not always used to be like that.
If I had a GDI car that was known for deposits I would probably run one. I don't see running a catch can as any sort of liability, especially if it is attached to a modified engine.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by maxdustington
I've never seen convincing arguments one way or the other. However, you do make a good point about the junk caught in the can being more of a visual bias confirmation. PCV is routed to the intake purely for emissions reasons as far as I know, and things did not always used to be like that.
If I had a GDI car that was known for deposits I would probably run one. I don't see running a catch can as any sort of liability, especially if it is attached to a modified engine.
Except in this case, where it was a liability - a very expensive one.
The convincing argument for not having one is the millions of car that go to the junkyard with healthy engines - and no arftermarket catch can installed.
I'd sooner dump PCV to atmosphere before installing a catch can.
I've never seen convincing arguments one way or the other. However, you do make a good point about the junk caught in the can being more of a visual bias confirmation. PCV is routed to the intake purely for emissions reasons as far as I know, and things did not always used to be like that.
If I had a GDI car that was known for deposits I would probably run one. I don't see running a catch can as any sort of liability, especially if it is attached to a modified engine.
Except in this case, where it was a liability - a very expensive one.
The convincing argument for not having one is the millions of car that go to the junkyard with healthy engines - and no arftermarket catch can installed.
I'd sooner dump PCV to atmosphere before installing a catch can.
Originally Posted by novadude
Originally Posted by FlyPenFly
These things have almost no impact on intake valve deposits on DFI engines. No reason to run them.
What he said.
They may or may not have an impact on valve deposits, it will keep the intact track clean with no build up in the ports.
Originally Posted by FlyPenFly
These things have almost no impact on intake valve deposits on DFI engines. No reason to run them.
What he said.
They may or may not have an impact on valve deposits, it will keep the intact track clean with no build up in the ports.
When I have the plennum off the Caravan for spark plugs at 100K I will put my boroscope down the intake and look at the valves and take some pictures... At the rate I'm packing on the miles I should have this in 2 years.
I'd argue it's $1500 in repairs because of the PCV system design. Blown out RMS? Timing and VC gaskets? That's a little much for a single-point PCV failure.
Any self-respecting PCV system has to include a crankcase fresh air vent that leads from the valve cover to the post-filter air intake tube. It'd be hard to believe the engineers failed to provision in case of a blocked PCV. Not sure what these guys are doing with their VW catch cans or what pipes they're tapping into, but if PCV ever got blocked on any normal system, crankcase pressure would simply be diverted in reverse through the fresh air tube into the intake stream. Under load there would be lots of oil smoke indicating that there was a problem. I don't get how the controlled-flow-rated PCV valve which operates only during manifold vacuum, is the only free opening to the crankcase in this engine, where a simple blockage of such results in everything blown out.
Any self-respecting PCV system has to include a crankcase fresh air vent that leads from the valve cover to the post-filter air intake tube. It'd be hard to believe the engineers failed to provision in case of a blocked PCV. Not sure what these guys are doing with their VW catch cans or what pipes they're tapping into, but if PCV ever got blocked on any normal system, crankcase pressure would simply be diverted in reverse through the fresh air tube into the intake stream. Under load there would be lots of oil smoke indicating that there was a problem. I don't get how the controlled-flow-rated PCV valve which operates only during manifold vacuum, is the only free opening to the crankcase in this engine, where a simple blockage of such results in everything blown out.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by Sunnyinhollister
Originally Posted by novadude
Originally Posted by FlyPenFly
These things have almost no impact on intake valve deposits on DFI engines. No reason to run them.
What he said.
They may or may not have an impact on valve deposits, it will keep the intact track clean with no build up in the ports.
If the engine doesn't have through the intake EGR or some other method of dirtying up the intake perhaps. A lot of the time intact tract deposits are from EGR though.
Originally Posted by novadude
Originally Posted by FlyPenFly
These things have almost no impact on intake valve deposits on DFI engines. No reason to run them.
What he said.
They may or may not have an impact on valve deposits, it will keep the intact track clean with no build up in the ports.
If the engine doesn't have through the intake EGR or some other method of dirtying up the intake perhaps. A lot of the time intact tract deposits are from EGR though.
Originally Posted by supton
[For the record, I'm an electrical engineer, so I'm hardly dumping on engineering. The aftermarket sometimes does have to fix a design mistake. And sometimes it has fixes for things that were deliberate--think most emissions delete items--those items are getting pulled from setups that are required equipment yet failure prone.]
The reliability of many modern diesel engines increases exponentially when certain failure prone items are removed.
[For the record, I'm an electrical engineer, so I'm hardly dumping on engineering. The aftermarket sometimes does have to fix a design mistake. And sometimes it has fixes for things that were deliberate--think most emissions delete items--those items are getting pulled from setups that are required equipment yet failure prone.]
The reliability of many modern diesel engines increases exponentially when certain failure prone items are removed.
Originally Posted by FlyPenFly
... It seems that there is increased water vapor concentrations with the catch can setup. When emptied there is no oil to stop freezing.
Why would anyone expect a layer of oil floating on the water would depress the freezing point? Whatever soluble junk is in the water might depress the freezing point slightly, but it isn't antifreeze or alcohol.
There's just as much moisture in the blowby gas in warm weather, but most of it stays in vapor form and is harmlessly inhaled by the engine before it can condense in a cold can.
... It seems that there is increased water vapor concentrations with the catch can setup. When emptied there is no oil to stop freezing.
Why would anyone expect a layer of oil floating on the water would depress the freezing point? Whatever soluble junk is in the water might depress the freezing point slightly, but it isn't antifreeze or alcohol.
There's just as much moisture in the blowby gas in warm weather, but most of it stays in vapor form and is harmlessly inhaled by the engine before it can condense in a cold can.
Last edited:
So, since we're talking about it...I'm not Audi expert, by any stretch, but it seems that the kits they are mostly talking about in that Audi thread block, or cap off the intake manifold portion of the PCV system, and the complaint is that you don't get the vacuum from the manifold pulling fresh air through the crank case?
What about a system that is inline, and maintains the OEM function of the PCV system?...a setup like from Mishimoto, or Radium Engineering?
https://www.mishimoto.com/engineeri...ct-fit-catch-can-rd-part-1-stock-review/
https://www.mishimoto.com/engineeri...r-direct-fit-catch-can-part-2-prototype/
https://www.mishimoto.com/engineeri...t-fit-catch-can-rd-part-3-blow-verified/
Now, certainly you could still end up with situation where the hose might freeze from waper vapor? But this type of setup should function much closer to the OEM intention rather than capping off the intake manifold like they are talking about on those Audi setups?
What about a system that is inline, and maintains the OEM function of the PCV system?...a setup like from Mishimoto, or Radium Engineering?
https://www.mishimoto.com/engineeri...ct-fit-catch-can-rd-part-1-stock-review/
https://www.mishimoto.com/engineeri...r-direct-fit-catch-can-part-2-prototype/
https://www.mishimoto.com/engineeri...t-fit-catch-can-rd-part-3-blow-verified/
Now, certainly you could still end up with situation where the hose might freeze from waper vapor? But this type of setup should function much closer to the OEM intention rather than capping off the intake manifold like they are talking about on those Audi setups?
IDK about promoting products, but agree that 'capping off' anything is a terrible decision
The Damond aftermarket air/oil separation system on my Fiesta ST taps directly into the PCV system, and even uses the factory Ford connectors on the hose ends.
It has decent capacity (about a pint or so), and a convenient drain valve/hose.
I also have a CFM ball check valve type oil fill cap breather, so in an emergency situation, that will vent the pressure to atmosphere if needed, but only under positive pressure.
Since Ford does NOT have any currently approved, or warranty friendly methods of cleaning the intake valves on their TGDI engines (save for replacing the WHOLE head assembly!
), I must do every little thing possible, even if it seems 'futile', to keep those deposits out of the intake.
(I already use ONLY top tier fuel, Shell V-Power with occasional dosing of Red Line SI-1, will change out the plugs every 15K miles, and use ONLY D1G2 oils.)
I eventually will add a piggybacked, aftermarket, PORT fuel injection system as well, especially if I go to a bigger turbo setup in the future, after the warranty is gone.
It has decent capacity (about a pint or so), and a convenient drain valve/hose.
I also have a CFM ball check valve type oil fill cap breather, so in an emergency situation, that will vent the pressure to atmosphere if needed, but only under positive pressure.
Since Ford does NOT have any currently approved, or warranty friendly methods of cleaning the intake valves on their TGDI engines (save for replacing the WHOLE head assembly!
(I already use ONLY top tier fuel, Shell V-Power with occasional dosing of Red Line SI-1, will change out the plugs every 15K miles, and use ONLY D1G2 oils.)
I eventually will add a piggybacked, aftermarket, PORT fuel injection system as well, especially if I go to a bigger turbo setup in the future, after the warranty is gone.
these 200to 300 000 mile Toyotas - do they have a catch can
or not
or not
Again, these don't work to prevent carbon intake build up so it's pointless to run them.
I wonder how this happened. It seems plausible but several things confuse me:
1. The pressure was strong enough to blow the rear main seal but not enough to push the ice? I guess if it's located near a kink or sharp curve this is probably harder than it sounds.
2. The blow by is hot air. How did ice form in lines where blow by is flowing? Also the lines are usually located close to the engine right? I wonder if the catch can or the lines were routed too far away from the engine. Maybe a closer installation (or not using a CC at all) would be better.
Maybe it froze while the car was off after a short drive or something?
1. The pressure was strong enough to blow the rear main seal but not enough to push the ice? I guess if it's located near a kink or sharp curve this is probably harder than it sounds.
2. The blow by is hot air. How did ice form in lines where blow by is flowing? Also the lines are usually located close to the engine right? I wonder if the catch can or the lines were routed too far away from the engine. Maybe a closer installation (or not using a CC at all) would be better.
Maybe it froze while the car was off after a short drive or something?
Originally Posted by FlyPenFly
Again, these don't work to prevent carbon intake build up so it's pointless to run them.
For the sake of conversation, because we can all learn things every day...and for the record I don't run a catch can on my car
- what hard proof do you have that there is zero positive effect?
- while there is plenty of evidence to suggest you can rack up SERIOUS mileage without a catch can and seemingly have no issues, as long as the PCV system still operates as factory intended, I can't really see how removing oil/fuel/water vapors from their air being fed back into intake manifold is inherently a BAD thing
- I can say that after installing an aftermarket intake on my Accord, there was certainly a very light coating of oil on the inside of the factory intake tube...that would be on the CCV side, not the PCV sode of the system on the Honda K20C4 motor, and would be going back through the turbo...again, you may be right in the sense that it might not have any lasting impact on the performance of the motor, but I can't imagine removing that oil from their air would be a bad thing...
Now, that being said...venting the PCV to atmosphere, or running the PCV to a catch can and capping off the return line to the intake manifold, is probably not a good idea...
And even if you are returning the air to the manifold, you could in theory have water vapor freeze inside the can, or in the lines...but if the wter vapor can freeze pre catch can, could it not also in theory freeze in the line without a catch can? If it's freezing post catch can, your catch can isn't doing it's job well enough I would think...
Again, these don't work to prevent carbon intake build up so it's pointless to run them.
For the sake of conversation, because we can all learn things every day...and for the record I don't run a catch can on my car
- what hard proof do you have that there is zero positive effect?
- while there is plenty of evidence to suggest you can rack up SERIOUS mileage without a catch can and seemingly have no issues, as long as the PCV system still operates as factory intended, I can't really see how removing oil/fuel/water vapors from their air being fed back into intake manifold is inherently a BAD thing
- I can say that after installing an aftermarket intake on my Accord, there was certainly a very light coating of oil on the inside of the factory intake tube...that would be on the CCV side, not the PCV sode of the system on the Honda K20C4 motor, and would be going back through the turbo...again, you may be right in the sense that it might not have any lasting impact on the performance of the motor, but I can't imagine removing that oil from their air would be a bad thing...
Now, that being said...venting the PCV to atmosphere, or running the PCV to a catch can and capping off the return line to the intake manifold, is probably not a good idea...
And even if you are returning the air to the manifold, you could in theory have water vapor freeze inside the can, or in the lines...but if the wter vapor can freeze pre catch can, could it not also in theory freeze in the line without a catch can? If it's freezing post catch can, your catch can isn't doing it's job well enough I would think...
Originally Posted by dailydriver
Since Ford does NOT have any currently approved, or warranty friendly methods of cleaning the intake valves on their TGDI engines (save for replacing the WHOLE head assembly!
), I must do every little thing possible, even if it seems 'futile', to keep those deposits out of the intake.
(I already use ONLY top tier fuel, Shell V-Power with occasional dosing of Red Line SI-1, will change out the plugs every 15K miles, and use ONLY D1G2 oils.)
Wow, that's a lot of additional ongoing maintenance activity.
Do others report similar requirements?
Does Ford acknowledge this level of additional requirements??
(V-power fuel, 15k sparkplugs, Redline, etc...)
Since Ford does NOT have any currently approved, or warranty friendly methods of cleaning the intake valves on their TGDI engines (save for replacing the WHOLE head assembly!
(I already use ONLY top tier fuel, Shell V-Power with occasional dosing of Red Line SI-1, will change out the plugs every 15K miles, and use ONLY D1G2 oils.)
Wow, that's a lot of additional ongoing maintenance activity.
Do others report similar requirements?
Does Ford acknowledge this level of additional requirements??
(V-power fuel, 15k sparkplugs, Redline, etc...)
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
