Pat Goss Opine on Blowby on DI Engines

Status
Not open for further replies.
edit: this video is a bit off topic so I apologize in advance.

This video explains a bit about the pre-ignition issue and why direct injection gasoline engines have excessive fuel in the motor oil. It's a rather interesting view.
 
This is the same Pat Goss who many on this forum claim to be in the pockets of sponsors and is only a sounding board for their agenda.

RIGHT?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: CKN
This is the same Pat Goss who many on this forum claim to be in the pockets of sponsors and is only a sounding board for their agenda.

RIGHT?
Nope .....he's infallible.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: CKN
This is the same Pat Goss who many on this forum claim to be in the pockets of sponsors and is only a sounding board for their agenda.

RIGHT?
Nope .....he's infallible.



smile.gif
eek.gif
 
Catch can technology and usage is well established in the HO V8 world having been developed in the drag racing industry. I have a catch can on my LS3 Camaro. Since GM ventilates crankcase fumes back into the fresh air intake system, it is common sense that you’re going to have oil in the intake manifold. This is why car dealers are always suggesting a “fuel system cleaning” which should include a solvent cleaning of the intake manifold to remove these oily contaminants.

The thread posted by Wemay reveals a real lack of knowledge about catch cans on this forum. Try Camaro5 instead. And oilpsi2high is right in that this is not simply an injection type issue but rather how the engine builder chooses to deal with crankcase ventilation.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Catch can technology and usage is well established in the HO V8 world having been developed in the drag racing industry. I have a catch can on my LS3 Camaro. Since GM ventilates crankcase fumes back into the fresh air intake system, it is common sense that you’re going to have oil in the intake manifold. This is why car dealers are always suggesting a “fuel system cleaning” which should include a solvent cleaning of the intake manifold to remove these oily contaminants.



This topic has been talked to death here on BITOG. For the average owner a catch-can is not cost effective. The average owner is much better off to pay for an occasional maintenance than trying to remember to empty a catch can.
 
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Catch can technology and usage is well established in the HO V8 world having been developed in the drag racing industry. I have a catch can on my LS3 Camaro. Since GM ventilates crankcase fumes back into the fresh air intake system, it is common sense that you’re going to have oil in the intake manifold. This is why car dealers are always suggesting a “fuel system cleaning” which should include a solvent cleaning of the intake manifold to remove these oily contaminants.



This topic has been talked to death here on BITOG. For the average owner a catch-can is not cost effective. The average owner is much better off to pay for an occasional maintenance than trying to remember to empty a catch can.

A good catch can costs about the same as a single “fuel system cleaning” at a dealer. So your definitive statement of its cost effectiveness is dubious. Does the “average” owner get his fuel system cleaned on a regular basis? I doubt it.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Catch can technology and usage is well established in the HO V8 world having been developed in the drag racing industry. I have a catch can on my LS3 Camaro. Since GM ventilates crankcase fumes back into the fresh air intake system, it is common sense that you’re going to have oil in the intake manifold. This is why car dealers are always suggesting a “fuel system cleaning” which should include a solvent cleaning of the intake manifold to remove these oily contaminants.



This topic has been talked to death here on BITOG. For the average owner a catch-can is not cost effective. The average owner is much better off to pay for an occasional maintenance than trying to remember to empty a catch can.

A good catch can costs about the same as a single “fuel system cleaning” at a dealer. So your definitive statement of its cost effectiveness is dubious. Does the “average” owner get his fuel system cleaned on a regular basis? I doubt it.


Cost is one part of the equation. The other is the average owner emptying it. Like that's going to happen. Tell mister "Average Driver" he needs this catch can for say $300.00 (installed ballpark) and then tell him he needs to pop open the hood and empty it.

Lack of attention is why we have TPMS, "Service brake system soon" messages and other idiot lights. Again-the average owner is better off to PAY for a system cleaning.

You are right about a fuel system cleaning. It does get done when drivability problems creep up-however to give some Dealers credit-it is a recommended service at certain millage intervals.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Catch can technology and usage is well established in the HO V8 world having been developed in the drag racing industry. I have a catch can on my LS3 Camaro. Since GM ventilates crankcase fumes back into the fresh air intake system, it is common sense that you’re going to have oil in the intake manifold. This is why car dealers are always suggesting a “fuel system cleaning” which should include a solvent cleaning of the intake manifold to remove these oily contaminants.



This topic has been talked to death here on BITOG. For the average owner a catch-can is not cost effective. The average owner is much better off to pay for an occasional maintenance than trying to remember to empty a catch can.

A good catch can costs about the same as a single “fuel system cleaning” at a dealer. So your definitive statement of its cost effectiveness is dubious. Does the “average” owner get his fuel system cleaned on a regular basis? I doubt it.


Cost is one part of the equation. The other is the average owner emptying it. Like that's going to happen. Tell mister "Average Driver" he needs this catch can for say $300.00 (installed ballpark) and then tell him he needs to pop open the hood and empty it.

Lack of attention is why we have TPMS, "Service brake system soon" messages and other idiot lights. Again-the average owner is better off to PAY for a system cleaning.

You are right about a fuel system cleaning. It does get done when drivability problems creep up-however to give some Dealers credit-it is a recommended service at certain millage intervals.

I don’t disagree with any of this. I would only observe that getting the “average driver” to pay for a cleaning will be no easier than getting them to empty a CC every six months or so.

You mention the reason for all of this-driveability. The drag race engine builder that taught me about crankcase ventilation was concerned about that oily mist being reintroduced into the combustion chamber, suppressing the octane of the combustion mix and costing his driver a hundredth of a second. It is amazing to me that manufacturers try to get rid of it this way. I will attest that a good catch can is a very cost effective way to greatly reduce this problem.
 
having a turbo charged VAG volkswagen auto group this topic comes up a lot, + it seems turbo'd engines are more prone to this as well as carbon issues with GDI. auto manufacturers are always looking for the cheapest + not the best solution to issues + NEVER admit design flaws so they do not get hit by recalls $$$$
 
Originally Posted By: Indydriver

A good catch can costs about the same as a single “fuel system cleaning” at a dealer. So your definitive statement of its cost effectiveness is dubious. Does the “average” owner get his fuel system cleaned on a regular basis? I doubt it.


And yet those cars live long and productive lives without the cans. They serve no purpose on a daily driver other than to drain pockets in the name of junk science. Those "deposits" have been there since the sealed PCV system was mandated in the 50's or 60's. They don't harm performance in a daily driver and are of little consequence even to a DI engine as even with a can, certain engines still get high levels of deposits (VW/AUDI, BMW).
 
Last edited:
Catch cans are not an open and shut case, but hardly junk science, given all of the OEM applications of them, and hardly drain anyone's pockets.

A turbocharged car can be pretty bad, because the oil can get into the intercooler, reducing its efficiency. When that oil pools inside of a rubber charge air hose, it will have an early failure as the oil softens it up.
 
Moroso exhaust evacuation is infinitely better than any other method, device or scenario in this thread.

Don't want the inconvenience of emptying a catch can?
Don't want the extra weight of a catch can?
Don't want to have to pay for a catch can?
Want less knock and less knock retard on 87?
Want a clean inlet tract that does not require 'fuel system cleaning'?
Want to increase ring seal and crankcase depression?
Have an inherent dislike for vacuum leaks? (wether metered or unmetered)

There's only one solution, and its not a PCV valve or a catch can.
 
I guess the insistence on catch cans for all is to be expected here.

They are hardly necessary, as proven by the MILLIONS of cars that do not have one. Every single car and truck with a sump and PCV has oil in the intake. Every one. yet somehow they run fine.

One of our trucks was sold here with over 500k miles on the original engine. It didn't smoke, it didn't leak, and it didn't consume oil. Yet it had never had a catch can.

How can this be?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top