Dodge Challenger Forum banner

441 - 460 of 462 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
Nice !
I wonder if I should add one to my 2016 Jeep Wrangler with the 3.6 ?
I never see them discussing it on the Jeep forum. Maybe i need to stir them up ?
Have a good one !
 

·
Registered
2018 Scat Pack SHAKER in Plum Crazy
Joined
·
1,167 Posts
Nice !
I wonder if I should add one to my 2016 Jeep Wrangler with the 3.6 ?
I never see them discussing it on the Jeep forum. Maybe i need to stir them up ?
Have a good one !
<opinion>
That is because Jeep people don't worry about oil fumes, and dirt. They live for it. If you want to stir it up, that is the place for it I bet, you will get very opposite responses is my guess. If a $5 part like a catch can (that is all they are worth if mass produced with the vehicle) would measurable extend the life of an engine while under the high mile warranty, they would include it from the factory. Especially when they were offering lifetime powertrain a while back. They would make it a 1 quart plastic container, that was down low, out of sight, and part of oil change procedure would be to drain it into waste oil. Cars have been sucking down crankcase vapors since the 1960s when the "road tube" went away.
</opinion>
 

·
Registered
2015 RT 5.7 M6
Joined
·
6,167 Posts
So I am pretty surprised how clean the piston tops are off my RT. I bought the car and drove it for until ~18kmiles with no catch can. I installed a supercharger and the A2 speed valve covers (originally installed a catch can for maybe 3kmiles of run time) with built in oil separation and drove it like this until about 26kmiles. Although I wonder if running a SC and 93 octane with conservative fueling is helping more than the oil separator setup.
978230


Here is what my JGC 5.7 pistons looked like with no catch can at 75kmiles.
Not exactly apples to apples comparison but kinda surprised me.

 

·
Registered
2015 SRT392 A8 in white pearl coat
Joined
·
1,329 Posts
Nice !
I wonder if I should add one to my 2016 Jeep Wrangler with the 3.6 ?
I never see them discussing it on the Jeep forum. Maybe i need to stir them up ?
Have a good one !
"If I should add one," you said. A catch can is going to do its job on any engine that it's installed on. It will separate oil vapors out of the PVC system. The only real question is: does this matter to you? We already know that they work, and though they work better on some cars than they do on others for obvious reasons (more oil passing through them = more oil "caught"), they will indeed work on any engine.
 

·
Registered
2015 SRT392 A8 in white pearl coat
Joined
·
1,329 Posts
So I am pretty surprised how clean the piston tops are of my RT. I bought the car and drove it for until ~18kmiles with no catch can. I installed a supercharger and the A2 speed valve covers (originally installed a catch can for maybe 3kmiles of run time) with built in oil separation and drove it like this until about 26kmiles. Although I wonder if running a SC and 93 octane with conservative fueling is helping more than the oil separator setup.
View attachment 978230

Here is what my JGC 5.7 pistons looked like with no catch can at 75kmiles.
Not exactly apples to apples comparison but kinda surprised me.

You've shown two pictures here. But not exactly sure what the second one is, or why it's different than the first.
 

·
Registered
2015 RT 5.7 M6
Joined
·
6,167 Posts
You've shown two pictures here. But not exactly sure what the second one is, or why it's different than the first.
The second pic was from the piston top of my 2013 5.7 JGC I showed in the copied thread that I referenced. The JGC had 75kmiles on it with no sort of catch can or oil separator installed. Like I said it is not a direct comparison as the challenger has less miles and it is supercharged so fueling is slightly rich compared to stock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
https://auto.howstuffworks.com/positive-crankcase-ventilation-system.htm

This should help in understanding why a Catch Can is a great addition to your engine, and why the sooner you get one installed the better, especially on a brand new engine.

Some have questioned why are they not factory installed, and the reasons are pretty simple, #1 production money, #2 They really don't want your car engine to last forever, they want to eventually sell you a new car, #3 it is not a maintenance free item! If you do not dump it regularly as it collects, and allow it to overflow, the end results will be 100 times worse than not having one!

If you add one to your engine, you also take on the responsibility of inspecting it for the oil collected and dump it as needed, you can more than likely dump it with each oil change.

Unless you're running a supercharged engine as it may fill quicker with a supercharger.

Once you realize what the Catch Can actually does, and what it is collecting, it should be a No-Brainer that you would not put that back into your oil system.

Ry
 

·
Registered
2015 SRT392 A8 in white pearl coat
Joined
·
1,329 Posts
One day I was researching this subject and came across a fella who'd taken a picture of the inside of his intake manifold and the intakes of his cylinder heads before he installed a catch can. Wish I would have documented that website page. Duhhhh. But there it was, with all the oil EVERYWHERE. I think he was replacing his intake with an aftermarket one. He also wanted to install a catch can at that time. Some time later, the intake was off again and I forget why.
More pictures. He was talking about performance and the intake manifold, but I was focused on something else. There it was: the evidence I had been looking for. What stood out to me was not what was there, but what was NOT there. The direct comparison was amazing and there was significantly less oil everywhere the lens could see. The catch can had done it's job. I don't even remember which brand it was. Sadly, meathead here just kept perusing the web that day without documenting WHERE I saw that. But trust me, the evidence was there.
It's not really surprising, we KNOW CC's actually work. What amazed me was how well it worked. There was still some oil in that new intake manifold he'd installed, but very little compared to the mess he'd removed--shown in the earlier pictures.

On another note, consider this: to those who argue that there is no hard evidence that CC's actually prevent power loss, I'm reminded that we're not very good at providing evidence. All of us collectively are to blame here. For example, in researching front rotor wear on SRTs the question was, do ceramic pads prevent rotor wear more so than factory pads? It was nearly impossible to find anybody that measured their rotors to determine wear. Guys just don't do this and who could blame them? We got better things to do :) We are car enthusiasts, not scientists. The evidence was there, but it just didn't get posted on forums. Now that I measured my rotors, wrote down the numbers, changed out the pads to Powerstop Z23's, and drove it some more, I HAVE the evidence I need. The ceramic pads are considerably less aggressive on my rotors than the factory pads were. But are you ready for this? I myself am guilty of not posting it up on this forum as I've been too busy doing other things. No excuse, but just making a point. Finding evidence online is brutal because guys like me who actually have the evidence don't take the time to post it.

Back to catch cans. One forum member was talking to a tuner who does this day in and day out. The tuner told him that he "just doesn't record (or post) his findings." But he added that it is crystal clear to him and the evidence is conclusive that catch cans work and they make a difference in performance over time. I read that on THIS forum. But again, no HARD evidence. MY point: the evidence is there, but the guys who could provide it seem to be too busy to post it. Some could say I'm making excuses. Fine. But I'm just making an observation here. Wouldn't that be great if that same tuner, and others like him, would read this post, hear our plea for some serious evidence, join the forum and post up something for us? Guess we can add it to our wish list. But until then, I'm convinced. Ha, and even if I'm wrong, it just feels good to dump that junk out when I empty my CC. We've all spent a lot more to gain a lot less on other stuff through the years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,078 Posts
Actual evidence would be performance impact caused by the deposits. ;)

Cars will have deposits, but when rebuilding boosted 4cyl cars, the same tune could be run on a fresh rebuild as a 100k car with deposits without marked KR reduction. The catalyst in KR, and these were old school "gooey" knock sensors mind you, was never deposits/blowby.

Could it happen? Sure. Does it to the degree, and with the aggressiveness you need to modify your PCV? No.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
https://auto.howstuffworks.com/positive-crankcase-ventilation-system.htm

This should help in understanding why a Catch Can is a great addition to your engine, and why the sooner you get one installed the better, especially on a brand new engine.

Some have questioned why are they not factory installed, and the reasons are pretty simple, #1 production money, #2 They really don't want your car engine to last forever, they want to eventually sell you a new car, #3 it is not a maintenance free item! If you do not dump it regularly as it collects, and allow it to overflow, the end results will be 100 times worse than not having one!

If you add one to your engine, you also take on the responsibility of inspecting it for the oil collected and dump it as needed, you can more than likely dump it with each oil change.

Unless you're running a supercharged engine as it may fill quicker with a supercharger.

Once you realize what the Catch Can actually does, and what it is collecting, it should be a No-Brainer that you would not put that back into your oil system.

Ry
great theory;) still no EVIDENCE of detriment from said oil vapor on an NA motor.

One day I was researching this subject and came across a fella who'd taken a picture of the inside of his intake manifold and the intakes of his cylinder heads before he installed a catch can. Wish I would have documented that website page. Duhhhh. But there it was, with all the oil EVERYWHERE. I think he was replacing his intake with an aftermarket one. He also wanted to install a catch can at that time. Some time later, the intake was off again and I forget why.
More pictures. He was talking about performance and the intake manifold, but I was focused on something else. There it was: the evidence I had been looking for. What stood out to me was not what was there, but what was NOT there. The direct comparison was amazing and there was significantly less oil everywhere the lens could see. The catch can had done it's job. I don't even remember which brand it was. Sadly, meathead here just kept perusing the web that day without documenting WHERE I saw that. But trust me, the evidence was there.
It's not really surprising, we KNOW CC's actually work. What amazed me was how well it worked. There was still some oil in that new intake manifold he'd installed, but very little compared to the mess he'd removed--shown in the earlier pictures.

On another note, consider this: to those who argue that there is no hard evidence that CC's actually prevent power loss, I'm reminded that we're not very good at providing evidence. All of us collectively are to blame here. For example, in researching front rotor wear on SRTs the question was, do ceramic pads prevent rotor wear more so than factory pads? It was nearly impossible to find anybody that measured their rotors to determine wear. Guys just don't do this and who could blame them? We got better things to do :) We are car enthusiasts, not scientists. The evidence was there, but it just didn't get posted on forums. Now that I measured my rotors, wrote down the numbers, changed out the pads to Powerstop Z23's, and drove it some more, I HAVE the evidence I need. The ceramic pads are considerably less aggressive on my rotors than the factory pads were. But are you ready for this? I myself am guilty of not posting it up on this forum as I've been too busy doing other things. No excuse, but just making a point. Finding evidence online is brutal because guys like me who actually have the evidence don't take the time to post it.

Back to catch cans. One forum member was talking to a tuner who does this day in and day out. The tuner told him that he "just doesn't record (or post) his findings." But he added that it is crystal clear to him and the evidence is conclusive that catch cans work and they make a difference in performance over time. I read that on THIS forum. But again, no HARD evidence. MY point: the evidence is there, but the guys who could provide it seem to be too busy to post it. Some could say I'm making excuses. Fine. But I'm just making an observation here. Wouldn't that be great if that same tuner, and others like him, would read this post, hear our plea for some serious evidence, join the forum and post up something for us? Guess we can add it to our wish list. But until then, I'm convinced. Ha, and even if I'm wrong, it just feels good to dump that junk out when I empty my CC. We've all spent a lot more to gain a lot less on other stuff through the years.
I myself am guilty as well , as I have had the chance to run data logs with and without a can when my engine was still a 392. My logs showed ZERO difference in stkr/ltkr/stft/ltft between all of my runs. With (surprise) zero difference in performance. The problem was I never posted them and they’ve been lost since. Mind you , this was on a mostly stock na 392. When I get a chance I will run it again on the now ported heads/cam/426. I’d be willing to bet I have the same results. In conclusion , is a CC bad , no , but is a CC needed (on a non direct port inj na motor) again, no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,059 Posts
There was about 3/8" of very nasty smelling oil and "stuff" in there at 2K since it was last emptied, so I can go about 6K without worrying about it. That's still probably being very conservative and emptying it early. I might drive it very aggressively for a couple of days and see what's in it.

On my old '10 Challenger R/T, I would have about an inch in 3000 miles, so every engine is different. My '08 Charger had less in it most of the time.
 

·
Registered
2015 SRT392 A8 in white pearl coat
Joined
·
1,329 Posts
great theory;) still no EVIDENCE of detriment from said oil vapor on an NA motor.



I myself am guilty as well , as I have had the chance to run data logs with and without a can when my engine was still a 392. My logs showed ZERO difference in stkr/ltkr/stft/ltft between all of my runs. With (surprise) zero difference in performance. The problem was I never posted them and they’ve been lost since. Mind you , this was on a mostly stock na 392. When I get a chance I will run it again on the now ported heads/cam/426. I’d be willing to bet I have the same results. In conclusion , is a CC bad , no , but is a CC needed (on a non direct port inj na motor) again, no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ronan:
Appreciate you honesty and your feedback here. When it comes to comparing before and after, and comparing things like data logs, we have very little evidence to go by. However it is my belief that it's not the actual presence of the oil in the intake that causes the problem, as your data logs revealed; but rather the accumulation of deposits over time. All engines suffer from this, and some more than others. I believe that the presence of all this oil leads to additional deposits and that it's the deposits that cause the problems. However, it seems to me that this takes a long time, and therein lies the problem. How do ya chart this stuff over long periods of time: the kinda time it takes to develop deposits? That's exactly what that tuner (that I quoted above) had to say, that "they (catch cans) make a difference in performance over time."

Here's another thought: I assume that an engine loses a small percentage of its power due to carbon and contaminate buildup. When an intake valve becomes loaded with crust and contaminants, does this not affect engine performance? Isn't this why we clean these things so carefully when we rebuild a set of heads? But anyway, the way we measure THIS issue is on a dyno. This is not the sort of thing that most of us have access to or keep careful records of. And even when we do post our data from a trip to the dyno, this is not the sort of thing that we document over time as deposits accumulate.

This is why I believe it's so hard to provide factual data on the subject of catch cans (and their ability to prevent performance loss) on a forum like this.
 

·
Registered
2016 Scat Pack Shaker
Joined
·
586 Posts
I have no data however, I have a photo. Something tells me the oily substance on the intake valve and the sticky goo on the intake runner are not a good thing even though I have no idea how much of a bad thing it is or how long this condition needs to compound before it becomes a problem of some sort. This photo is of an engine that has a catch can, imagine what it would look like without one.
978546
 

·
Registered
2018 Scat Pack SHAKER in Plum Crazy
Joined
·
1,167 Posts
... This photo is of an engine that has a catch can, imagine what it would look like without one.
My guess, the same. It is a shame that none of these engines are dual throttle body, like my old 3.5 Intrepid, you could hook one up to 1 side or another and maybe see what the actual change was internally. And those engines would probably benefit more than most (assuming there is a benefit). One of the problems they had was idle emission failures due to valve buildup causing sealing issues. One of the causes was basically, older drivers. The car had plenty of torque for mild driving, and they would never wind it up enough for the valve rotators to kick in, and help self clean the valve seats.
Moral of the story, use it or lose it, blow it out or blow it up, run what ya brung… That type of thing.
 

·
Registered
2015 SRT392 A8 in white pearl coat
Joined
·
1,329 Posts
Thanks Rob. Since that's an intake valve, couldn't help but notice how clean the valve itself is. How many miles? Looks like it would after a valve job. In the pic, I see contaminants sticking to the bottom of the runner. What did the combustion chambers look like? Anything significant?
You asked about how much these contaminants affect an engine. Years ago, my job was to remove barnacles from the bottom of boats. I was a diver, and it involved a lot of scraping and I was always getting cuts. Those rascals are razorblades. But this was important to anybody that cared about gas mileage and top speed. Many argued that it made no difference because they didn't travel that fast. But those barnacles indeed caused a great deal of increased drag. Same basic thing happens with deposits in the intake port. Though not to the same degree, those deposits can become quite a factor when they get bad.

And also, appreciate that, Pioneer. You bring some interesting info to this table. Never heard of a "valve rotator" that kicks in. Always thought this was something that just happened naturally in all engines. Could ya shed some more light on this, especially concerning our HEMIs?
 

·
Registered
2016 Scat Pack Shaker
Joined
·
586 Posts
Thanks Rob. Since that's an intake valve, couldn't help but notice how clean the valve itself is. How many miles? Looks like it would after a valve job. In the pic, I see contaminants sticking to the bottom of the runner. What did the combustion chambers look like? Anything significant?
Gary, Engine had between 3 and 4K miles when photo was taken. Catch can was installed at 2K miles. Did not inspect the combustion chamber. Port injection keeps the back of the valve amazingly clean. Apparently this crap doesn't hurt performance, the car has run 11.55 and I expect it to go 11.4X if and when this heat wave stops.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
put my JLT on with right under 400 miles on the odometer. Just checked it on a whim 850 miles later and poured out 25ml of oil. Mine is working just as I expect it to. Figure I will check it again in 850 just as a reference and see if there is any more or less oil recovered. If not then I plan on doing every 2000 miles roughly
 
441 - 460 of 462 Posts
Top