Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest INASNT
Originally posted by dabigbolf

inasnt whered u get yours how much?  and is having it venting to atmosphere better or worse.  as i see yours dont have the filter on top.  still looks neat though.

i actually bought it off some1 on here!

if u want to vent it to atmosphere then all u gotta do is drill a hole in the top and insert a filter on top.

hehe,

i'd think not.

from what i have gathered it just makes the air go out easier.

some just have a little hole, but the venting one, vents more.

i think heard someone say they lost a litre of oil due to one, on track day on the vl turbo forums.

but that would have been fullstick non stop for 5 or 10 minutes of laps.

The difference between a catch can, and an oil/air seperator is that a catch can simply collects the crankcase fumes, grabs the oil out of it, and lets the air go. It would theoretically fill up with oil eventually and need to be emptied. An oil/air seperator is the same thing, except that it has an oil drain back into the sump, thus reducing the maintainance level, and ensuring that you don't run low on oil in situation where the crankcase may be breathing heavily ie. track use.

For both devices, the vented air can be routed back into the intake (where it originally went anyway) as it should now be free of oil, and this will eliminate any possible legal issues with emissions etc. At minimum a filter should be fitted because a) the catch can/seperator won't be 100% efficient, so there will still be *some* oil vapour in the air, and B) the crankcase can breathe both ways, and you don't want to be drawing unfiltered air into the crankcase.

Hope that clears it up a bit.

Belly_up - thanks for distinguishing the difference between a catch can and an oil/air seperator. I've been looking into buying one & I didnt think that there was a difference - now I know. I guess the oil/air separator would be more 'acceptable' to EPA as it is plumbed back?

Either of them can have the *air* outlet plumbed back, and thats what the EPA would be worried about.

The advantage of the oil / air seperator is that you keep your oil in the sump rather than collecting it in the catch can. As i said above, it's really only going to be a issue for prolonged high RPM use, not so much on the street.

And when shopping, the two names are used interchangeably by most people (and rightly so, because a "catch can" is acting as an oil/air seperator), so check for whether the particular item has an oil drain fitting, to determine whether it is what you want or not.

This is from the Autospeed article "Pots and Cans... Step-by-step fabrication of swirl pots and catch cans/oil-air separators..."

ASE offers two different products to prevent blow-by oil entering your engine's air intake - a catch can and an oil-air separator. What's the difference, you ask? Well, a catch can receives blow-by oil and allows fumes to vent to atmosphere after being filtered. On the other hand, an oil-air separator internally filters the blow-by oil and allows only clean air to enter the car's induction system. This is the favoured approach from an emissions and legality perspective, but it doesn't look as siik when you pop the bonnet
  • 2 weeks later...
Originally posted by DennisRB30

If you get rid of the PCV system your engine will build up harmfull acidic gases which contaminate the oil reducing engine life.

I just got rid of my PCV and vented it straight to the Atmosphere. Is this bad? or is it only bad when you block it of completely. I'm finding alot of oil and shite in the intake. Never really known about the PCV, lol.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • You're making my point for me. 95 is not "premium". It is a "slightly higher octane" version of the basic 91 product. The premium product that they want people to buy (for all the venal corporate reasons of making more profit, and all the possibly specious reasons of it being a "better" fuel with nicer additive packages) is the 98 octane stuff. 95 is the classic middle child. No-one wants it. No-one cares about it. It is just there, occupying a space in the product hierarchy.
    • 98 and 95 have to meet the same national fuel standards beside the actual RON.  91 has lower standards (which are quite poor really), so 95 is certainly not 91 with some octane booster. It would be an easier argument to claim 98 is just 95 with some octane boosters. Also RON doesn't specify 'quality' in any sense, only the octane number.  Anything different retailers decide or not decide to add to their 95 or 98 is arbitrary and not defined by the RON figure.
    • Anyone know alternatives to powerplus tungsten? Can't find an alternative online. 
    • 95 is just a scam outright. 98 is the real "premium" with all the best detergents and other additive packages, and at least historically, used to be more dense also. 95 is just 91 bargain basement shit with a little extra octane rating. Of course, there's 91 and there's 91 also. I always (back in the 90s early 2000s) refused to put fuel in from supermarket related fuel chains on the basis that it was nasty half arsed shit imported from Indonesia. Nowadays, I suspect that there is little difference between the nasty half-arsed shit brought in by the "bargain" chains and the nasty half-arsed shit brought in by the big brands, given that most of it is coming from the same SEAsian refineries. Anyway - if there's still anything to that logic, then it would apply to 95 also. 98 is only made in decent refineries and, as I said, is usually the "premium" fuel, both in terms of octane rating and "use this because it's good for your engine because it's got the unicorn jizz in it!".
    • Yeah since those first 2 replies I actually went and put some 98 in it and tbf it's already doing much better than the 95 (which is weird and makes my inner tinfoil hat wearer think the 95 was a crap batch), getting 8ish around town. Again, wonder if it takes a while to stabilize if the fuel is changed a couple of times. I swear cars used to just either run "well" or "s**t* in my 20s, none of this fuel optimisation business haha 
×
×
  • Create New...