oil catch can install

[Grimsta]

Actually, yes, some OEM's do install catch cans from the factory...

Of course there are some, I cant think of any off the top of my head and whichever there are, are very few models. Now if you're talking about Honda for example and the little box on the back of the block, those arent actually catch cans. Nitpick much on a quick comment designed to not go into paragraphs of explanation?

The accordian see's minimal vaccum it's more the venturi effect pulls vapor in with a positive pressure push from crankcase blowby, if you're seeing vaccum there it's time to clean or replace the aircleaner..

Up to you Ingy, the way I did mine worked very well I can't really comment on your layout as I haven't tried it.

at idle there'd be very minimal vacuum, how about a WOT when that hungry compressor would suck a pigeon in from out side the engine bay
Also depends what kinda mods we got going on and all that jazz though

 

[IJ.]

Of course there are some, I cant think of any off the top of my head and whichever there are, are very few models. Now if you're talking about Honda for example and the little box on the back of the block, those arent actually catch cans. Nitpick much on a quick comment designed to not go into paragraphs of explanation?

at idle there'd be very minimal vacuum, how about a WOT when that hungry compressor would suck a pigeon in from out side the engine bay
Also depends what kinda mods we got going on and all that jazz though

I had a MAP sensor there on the 6.0L Chev/T04z combo and saw minimal vaccum under any conditions to the point I saw the Sensor as useless and removed it.

I had a very free flowing filter with a LOT of surface area though so it may be different if a restrictive filter is used.

 

[Inygknok]

The accordian see's minimal vaccum it's more the venturi effect pulls vapor in with a positive pressure push from crankcase blowby, if you're seeing vaccum there it's time to clean or replace the aircleaner..

Up to you Ingy, the way I did mine worked very well I can't really comment on your layout as I haven't tried it.

To be frank, I see a flaw with my way. If I placed the can in the same place (route wise) as I drew it in my diagram, wouldn't vapors come out and go into the accordian? They would come out from the valve covers and get attracted to the accordian due to vaccuum, right? The vapors would go "left", away from the can.

 

[MarkIII4Me]

^

Just T off the line that runs from the intake manifold (or TB) and run it to the accordian hose. Problem solved.

 

[Inygknok]

^

Just T off the line that runs from the intake manifold (or TB) and run it to the accordian hose. Problem solved.

That would just make a mess then. IJ's routing would be better then.

 

[hatchet9mm]

does any one know the part number for the jdm charcoal canister? I was going to put a catch can where mine is, but you can't really get rid of the charcoal canister, so no catch can until I have a new smaller charcoal can.

 

[Grimsta]

IJs routing is the way any catch can on any car should go. If you have a 2 port can you want your oil lines going to 1 port and vacuum on the other, whether you have to lines into one of those ports depends on how you personally want to set it up. But if you have a 3 port then you can run individual oil lines to the can and then 1 vacuum source, or T 2 oil lines into 1 port and use 2 vacuum sources. On my S13 for example we have a 2 port, so I have a source from the intake and the plenum T'ed together w/ a valve on the plenum hose going to 1 port, and then I have the block hose Ted into the head port (for the oil line) and going to the other port on the can. So I have a T on each side- vacuum and oil.

On my Supra, I just have the valve cover lines megered into 1 going to 1 port of my catch can and the other side ran to my intake tube (Weapon R intake), since this thing is pretty much bouncing off the rev limiter all day long, the vapors will naturally push themselves out easily, aided by a little suction from the intake tract.

IJ, i was talking about revving with NO FILTER
It had ALOT of suction, almost sucked my hand in! I've got a Master Power T57 T3 with the 4" inlet, but the 4" inlet tapers down to the compressor wheel so it creates a monster venturi

 

[IJ.]

Dude be careful please!
(memories of that guy that lost fingers a few years back to the 100,000 rpm blender)

 

[Inygknok]

On my Supra, I just have the valve cover lines megered into 1 going to 1 port of my catch can and the other side ran to my intake tube (Weapon R intake), since this thing is pretty much bouncing off the rev limiter all day long, the vapors will naturally push themselves out easily, aided by a little suction from the intake tract.

IJ has the 2 lines from the valve covers, 1 line into the intake pre-turbo and one line going to the intake manifold though.

 

[MarkIII4Me]

That would just make a mess then.

You obviously aren't understanding what I'm saying.

Here's my setup. IJ says that the check valve to the accordian is pointless, but I already have it installed so I don't see any harm in keeping it there.

 

[Poodles]

does any one know the part number for the jdm charcoal canister? I was going to put a catch can where mine is, but you can't really get rid of the charcoal canister, so no catch can until I have a new smaller charcoal can.

Where the CC is is not a good place for a catch can as you're trying to get the oil vapor to condense, which won't happen sitting right next to a hot ass turbo...

 

[Inygknok]

You obviously aren't understanding what I'm saying.

Here's my setup. IJ says that the check valve to the accordian is pointless, but I already have it installed so I don't see any harm in keeping it there.

You were obviously vague with your previous description. I find the T for the valve covers a bit pointless as you could have a straight tube that runs directly over both valve covers and run into one single tube towards the catch can. But yes, I can see what you're trying to get at. Kind of a simpler routing when compared to IJ's now that you actually explain it; through a drawing, but an explanation nonetheless

 

[ValgeKotkas]

IJ has the 2 lines from the valve covers, 1 line into the intake pre-turbo and one line going to the intake manifold though.

Why do I see only 3 lines, 2 of which are T'd into one at the catch can (ACC/TB)?

 

[MarkIII4Me]

You were obviously vague with your previous description. I find the T for the valve covers a bit pointless as you could have a straight tube that runs directly over both valve covers and run into one single tube towards the catch can. But yes, I can see what you're trying to get at. Kind of a simpler routing when compared to IJ's now that you actually explain it; through a drawing, but an explanation nonetheless

I'm actually using the the PCV pipe from a 7MGE flipped around for the valve covers.

I made it look like a T to avoid further confusion. If you actually understood how the PCV system works, my initial explanation would have sufficed. And running a tube across the valve covers looks like crap compared to running it back and behind them in my opinion. But to each his own.

 

[Inygknok]

Why do I see only 3 lines, 2 of which are T'd into one at the catch can (ACC/TB)?

Sorry, counted the colored PCV line as a 4th line for some reason.

I'm actually using the the PCV pipe from a 7MGE flipped around for the valve covers.

I made it look like a T to avoid further confusion. If you actually understood how the PCV system works, my initial explanation would have sufficed. And running a tube across the valve covers looks like crap compared to running it back and behind them in my opinion. But to each his own.

I found the very first explanation vague. Note how everyone else offers quite a few sentences even they all know what they're talking about. I never said I wouldn't try to somehow hide (or make it look tidy) with my method. I just rather have a straight line that then bends towards the firewall instead of having it exactly like you do.

 

[CyFi6]

I wouldn't use filters on the valve covers. The PCV system needs the vac to pull vapor out of the crankcase. The biggest combustion byproduct is water...you also have fuel vapor, how much depends on the condition of the rings. Neither has a good effect on your oil. The whole idea is for the oil to get up to ops temp and vaporize both so they can be pulled in to the plenum. You're not going to have sufficient delta P unless vac is present at the cam covers.

This confused me a bit. You say "The PCV ststem needs the vac to pull vapor out of the crankcase." but in reality even the OEM system does not provide this. Under no condition in the stock system is the crankcase under vac. There is simply a slight airflow over to two valve cover ports, either towards the throttle body or towards the accordion depending on driving conditions (boost or no boost). Under a 0 PSIG (in the manifold) condition in fact there is no flow and PCV vapors must push their way into the accordion/ throttle body, though this is a rare/intermittent condition. PCV vapors still have to "push" their way out of the PCV ports, in order to get swept up by the flow and carried into the engine(throttle body or accordion), right? I assume the amount of flow over the ports is not nearly enough to draw a vacuum simply from a venturi effect.
During idle and low load, any airflow pulled through the throttle body restriction is going to flow strait from the large opening in the accordion instead of pulling any kind of vacuum on the PCV pipe/ports (path of least resistance), considering the restriction on the throttle body is much smaller than any kind of restriction the PCV pipe may cause.

Under boost, there is ~0PSIG in the accordion, and slight positive pressure in the crankcase (has to push the vapors out the ports). Slight amount of airflow from the manifold through the throttle body port pushes air from the manifold into the accordion, dragging along any vapors that decided to push their way out of the PCV ports- still no negative pressure on the crankcase.

Grimsta, the ability to evacuate water is massively increased under vacuum due to the lowering of its boiling point. You want the crankcase under vacuum, especially under winter street conditions where water accumulation is an issue.

I am assuming you are speaking of an aftermarket system where vacuum is actually pulled on the crankcase (not stock 7mgte system)? How much vacuum do you really want in the crankcase? If there is too much, will it start to draw liquid oil?

 

[Flateric]

Besides all the previously suggested ways of doing this I have been reading up on what could potentially be the best way yet of creating good vacuum and eliminating the catch can AND all possible oil contamination due to blowby.

Here it is on a 2jz.





Here is the kit with check valves, weld in pipes.



The blowby that occurs will happen when under higher boost, and with this system this is also when you will see the highest vacuum. Unlike a TB setup where you see no vacuum under boost.

Another benefit of this setup is you never see the fumes coming back to the motor to be reburned and possibly contaminating the intake mani, oil, etc.

Eliminates the catch can and all the plumbing to some extent. You of course still have to route to the exhaust weld in's. Also install a one way valve system to still maintain vacuum during idle would't be a terrible idea but then brings back the contamination situation again.

Boost is when you really want this vacuum at it's best.

Downsides.....

This is going to mess your emissions up big time, so if your in an area that looks for that then stay away from this.

It is fairly hard to get the weld in's setup correctly so that they provide good vacuum and do not pressurize the system (what the check valves are for). Testing for vacuum presence is essential during setup with a vacuum guage before hooking things up to your crank case.

Here's the text originally with the above images from SF......

"It provides the vacuum for the crank case that would otherwise be tied to your intake on your turbo. To prevent Oil grime on your turbo compressor turbine and in your pipes in intercooler you must run a catch can which is not 100% effective. Using the method pictured above provides the needed vacuum for the crank case. One of the Virtual works crew told me that they saw a nice gain at their power level ~60 hp! It helps the rings seal and keeps you from popping seals especially with the blow-by we can see running over 30 psi." ..... from SF.

So it appears having the high vacuum under boost also provides somewhat of a decent performance increase as well. Although looking at the source....virtualworks and the boost level.......30 PSI.......I would expect smaller gains in power from more reasonable power levels. But clearly the benefits of having a good efficient PCV system should not be minimized for life of engine and apparently power.

And here is an example of what can get blownby and sent back into your intake if you delete the catch can and simple re-burn the fumes.



Nasty.........I personally would much rather send this crap to my exhaust. But I seriously suspect that the car this photo came from has some serious issues as well. Or this is a very high milage example of blowby.

 

[Poodles]

This confused me a bit. You say "The PCV ststem needs the vac to pull vapor out of the crankcase." but in reality even the OEM system does not provide this. Under no condition in the stock system is the crankcase under vac. There is simply a slight airflow over to two valve cover ports, either towards the throttle body or towards the accordion depending on driving conditions (boost or no boost). Under a 0 PSIG (in the manifold) condition in fact there is no flow and PCV vapors must push their way into the accordion/ throttle body, though this is a rare/intermittent condition. PCV vapors still have to "push" their way out of the PCV ports, in order to get swept up by the flow and carried into the engine(throttle body or accordion), right? I assume the amount of flow over the ports is not nearly enough to draw a vacuum simply from a venturi effect.
During idle and low load, any airflow pulled through the throttle body restriction is going to flow strait from the large opening in the accordion instead of pulling any kind of vacuum on the PCV pipe/ports (path of least resistance), considering the restriction on the throttle body is much smaller than any kind of restriction the PCV pipe may cause.

Under boost, there is ~0PSIG in the accordion, and slight positive pressure in the crankcase (has to push the vapors out the ports). Slight amount of airflow from the manifold through the throttle body port pushes air from the manifold into the accordion, dragging along any vapors that decided to push their way out of the PCV ports- still no negative pressure on the crankcase.


I am assuming you are speaking of an aftermarket system where vacuum is actually pulled on the crankcase (not stock 7mgte system)? How much vacuum do you really want in the crankcase? If there is too much, will it start to draw liquid oil?

There's a lot more flow than you think, even at idle...

Besides all the previously suggested ways of doing this I have been reading up on what could potentially be the best way yet of creating good vacuum and eliminating the catch can AND all possible oil contamination due to blowby.

Here it is on a 2jz.

View attachment 48979

View attachment 48978

Here is the kit with check valves, weld in pipes.

View attachment 48977

The blowby that occurs will happen when under higher boost, and with this system this is also when you will see the highest vacuum. Unlike a TB setup where you see no vacuum under boost.

Another benefit of this setup is you never see the fumes coming back to the motor to be reburned and possibly contaminating the intake mani, oil, etc.

Eliminates the catch can and all the plumbing to some extent. You of course still have to route to the exhaust weld in's. Also install a one way valve system to still maintain vacuum during idle would't be a terrible idea but then brings back the contamination situation again.

Boost is when you really want this vacuum at it's best.

Downsides.....

This is going to mess your emissions up big time, so if your in an area that looks for that then stay away from this.

It is fairly hard to get the weld in's setup correctly so that they provide good vacuum and do not pressurize the system (what the check valves are for). Testing for vacuum presence is essential during setup with a vacuum guage before hooking things up to your crank case.

Here's the text originally with the above images from SF......

"It provides the vacuum for the crank case that would otherwise be tied to your intake on your turbo. To prevent Oil grime on your turbo compressor turbine and in your pipes in intercooler you must run a catch can which is not 100% effective. Using the method pictured above provides the needed vacuum for the crank case. One of the Virtual works crew told me that they saw a nice gain at their power level ~60 hp! It helps the rings seal and keeps you from popping seals especially with the blow-by we can see running over 30 psi." ..... from SF.

So it appears having the high vacuum under boost also provides somewhat of a decent performance increase as well. Although looking at the source....virtualworks and the boost level.......30 PSI.......I would expect smaller gains in power from more reasonable power levels. But clearly the benefits of having a good efficient PCV system should not be minimized for life of engine and apparently power.

And here is an example of what can get blownby and sent back into your intake if you delete the catch can and simple re-burn the fumes.

View attachment 48980

Nasty.........I personally would much rather send this crap to my exhaust. But I seriously suspect that the car this photo came from has some serious issues as well. Or this is a very high milage example of blowby.

Highly illegal on a street car, and only works at full throttle. At least you'd never have your exhaust rust from the inside out :rofl: And that last pic looks like bad valve stem seals + PCV + EGR junk on an old engine.

 

[Flateric]

Not highly illegal in my neck of the woods and my findings show that full throttle is best, but vacuum ramps up fairly quickly, consistently right from the get go, yup even decentlt at idle.

But as I did state, will really mess with emissions and for sure cause fail/issues if you live in an area that watches that sorta thing.

 

[CyFi6]

There's a lot more flow than you think, even at idle...

So are you saying that the amount of air rushing past the valve cover ports creates a venturi/pulls a vacuum on the crankcase? Though JJ isn't talking about the valve cover ports, he talks here about the accordion port. At WOT there is a ton of airflow through the accordion, but even that is not enough to pull a vacuum on the PCV pipe. You can see why its hard for me to figure that there is so much airflow through the throttle body restriction and PCV hardpipe that it will draw a vac on the valve cover ports under any conditions.

Unless you've got a garbage bag around your air filter there's maybe a tenth of an inch of water at the PCV port and that's from the effect of the air rushing past it. Think of blowing across the top of a bottle. It doesn't amount to squat. It's true the port goes negative under full boost but it isn't much and exists only because of the restriction posed by the air filter, box, and AFM. But hey, don't take my word for it. Use a manometer and see.