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

    • It's interesting seeing everyone talk about what level of risk they are happy to tolerate.  Building a GTR always has a level of risk, you could be that lucky guy that drops 20k on the engine build alone and still has the thing go pop on the dyno. Life is fun like that.  The way I see it, the thing is a toy to be enjoyed. I'd be happy to turn up the power on stock motor and limit the risk with sensible tuning and engine protection. If it still goes pop, it is what it is. The car isn't a daily driver so it can happily sit while a plan is made to sort it out.  Given this thing will be a street car only, I really feel it's worth the (relatively small if managed well) risk to turn the power up to around 350KW on e85.  I don't think anyone getting into the skyline game now is doing it out of logic. Surely it is a purely emotional decision so I'm not sure how important it is to think about the engine build logically. The heart wants what it wants.  @joshuaho96 little note for Josh, I run my 525 pump flat out all the time and through the factory lines without any issues. (excluding the melting connectors, that's sorted now. we'll pretend it never happened lol)
    • But the Nexus S3 is very expensive and won't be as purpose-built for the application as a separate electronic boost controller :^) More seriously my pet issue here would be that the Walbro 525 running at 100% duty cycle is going to require more FPR than the stock setup can handle. I'm also pretty sure from what I've seen elsewhere you might want to slow down the pump regardless unless you're going to come up with some way of upsizing the fuel lines coming from the fuel tank. Factory 8mm fuel line doesn't actually flow very much if you want to keep pressure drop down between the fuel pump outlet and FPR. If you really want to "keep it simple" I would run only as much pump as you need and source a fuel pump controller to slow down the pump in the vain hope of being able to run stock-style FPRs which are pretty dinky. Or just use the HICAS lines and it should be mostly fine. OP should also really think hard about what profile they'd want out of the turbo. My pet choice here would be the G1 profile rather than anything higher power but YMMV. I already think ~stock turbo lag is pretty bad so I don't want to make it worse. In "gentle canyon cruising" I found that I spent a lot of time around 4-4.5k RPM. I also recommend DIYing labor if you're detail-oriented enough. Costs are high for labor + if you do it yourself you can be your own quality control.
    • GTSBoy is again on the money. My actual advice? Sell the car. (really). For what it's worth as is, you can sidegrade into something much better. If you care about function then this is the actual move. If you want a Skyline to perform, set aside about $100K to do it. This is NOT a typo. You will see right away these are two very different mindsets. Realistically we're talking full restomod for any Skyline still kicking around. Have an honest think about which one you are.. and what you want to do, and how much you want to invest in this (with no return).
    • I promise there will be no chance of replacing the rad support....  It is barely twisted and it's way more likely to just be driven around with a slightly twisty support. As long as the headlight can be bolted in there then no harm no foul lol. The reo may need to be un-bent a little but truth be told if it all somewhat lines up and is hidden when the car is assembled the level of f**ks will be 0.0 
    • this thread delivers, once again Skyline owners, our cars spend more time off the road than on the road  
×
×
  • Create New...