Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The kit will come with enough hose to make the connections as well as a bag containing a number of fittings and stuff you don't need for the install. I think they must package a generic part kit and ship it with all their kits. They don't provide written instructions either, however there is a video listed on the site for an install on a 2014 6.3L engine. If you have a 6.3 in your truck you're good to go. If you have the 5.3L, the non-throttle body connection to the catch can is located over the valve cover on the left side of the motor. Someone posted a very good explanation in this thread of where the connection is for the 5.3L.

One last thing. It appears that RX builds to order (should you choose to buy from them). You might wait 3 weeks before they ship. That's how long I waited. For me it was worth it. I feel the quality of the can and the parts provided are very good. Good luck.

Posted

I've been trying to respond with details to your question, but for some reason the post doesn't go. PM fails too. I'm going to try to send it in multiple small posts:

 

RX does, but it's not obvious when you order the kit. When I ordered mine, they did not list the 2014 Sierra in the drop down. Others suggested picking something similar from the drop down. I believe I picked Camero. Then when you advance to the next page, there is a place where you tell them the exact application. You can also select the color of the can. I selected black as they didn't list Sonoma Red.

 

 

 

Yes this is how I did it except I selected 2015 Tahoe. My comment got cut off though and RX emailed me to verify what I was trying to communicate in the comment section and I specified my exact make, model, and engine. I just did the RX install yesterday and they supplied all of the necessary nuts, bolts, hoses, a zip tie to secure a hose if you need it, and extra barb couplers to help with routing your hose if you need to make any splices or bends in your set up.

Posted

The kit will come with enough hose to make the connections as well as a bag containing a number of fittings and stuff you don't need for the install. I think they must package a generic part kit and ship it with all their kits. They don't provide written instructions either, however there is a video listed on the site for an install on a 2014 6.3L engine. If you have a 6.3 in your truck you're good to go. If you have the 5.3L, the non-throttle body connection to the catch can is located over the valve cover on the left side of the motor. Someone posted a very good explanation in this thread of where the connection is for the 5.3L.

One last thing. It appears that RX builds to order (should you choose to buy from them). You might wait 3 weeks before they ship. That's how long I waited. For me it was worth it. I feel the quality of the can and the parts provided are very good. Good luck.

Thanks again for the detailed info. It helps alot. I will look at their website and hopefully choose one. Do I need the single or dual check valve model?

Posted

Thanks again for the detailed info. It helps alot. I will look at their website and hopefully choose one. Do I need the single or dual check valve model?

 

Single

Posted

Single

Thanks. Also, do you recommend the optional clean side seperator and optional breather fill cap?

Posted

Thanks. Also, do you recommend the optional clean side seperator and optional breather fill cap?

I don't know much about the breather filler cap. For the 5.3L I don't recommend the clean side separator based solely on the fact that my air box and throttle body were completely dry and clean and it only solves the driver side clean line but there is no solution yet for the passenger side. When they come up with something for the passenger side, I may look into getting them both for peace of mind but in my experience it doesn't seem necessary. I just did the RX can by itself.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted

Normally the breather is for supercharged applications

 

 

Ryan

Posted

I have installed the Norris Oil Catch can on the brake booster. No problems. No vibrations. No issues, just lots of crap being caught,.

Posted

Thanks. Also, do you recommend the optional clean side seperator and optional breather fill cap?

I like the others didn't install the clean side separator. My air box and throttle body were clean too.

Posted

 

Here you go check out post #153: http://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/topic/154204-oil-catch-can/page-11

 

The lines you are taking pictures of are the clean side lines of your valve covers. RX makes a clean side separator for the driver's side line (pictured above) but they do not have a solution for the passenger side line (your second photo). According to what I've read on this forum and other internet research, the catch can will catch 99% of the crap going into your intake and caking up on the valves. The clean side separator will help even more, but again there's no solution yet for the passenger side. I installed my RX can yesterday and I checked both of these clean side lines. They had some oil in them but the airbox was pretty much dry and clean and my throttle bottle was spotless. I have the 5.3L V8. If you have the 6.2L V8, your throttle body will have oil on it because the inlet for the PCV system is on top of the throttle body rather than on top of the intake manifold like on the 5.3L engine (see pictures in post #153 I linked to above).

That's a great link. Thanks. It answered my questions.
Posted

Lots of interesting info in here. IMO adding a catch can obviously wont hurt anything but long term I really don't think its all that much benefit. If you search around the internet all these new direct injection motors (foreign and domestic) have this carbon build up and oil blow by, its just the nature of the beast. I think the hype is a bit over blown.

Posted

Lots of interesting info in here. IMO adding a catch can obviously wont hurt anything but long term I really don't think its all that much benefit. If you search around the internet all these new direct injection motors (foreign and domestic) have this carbon build up and oil blow by, its just the nature of the beast. I think the hype is a bit over blown.

For someone who plans to put 100,000+ miles on and doesn't add a catch can, what are possible issues? I'm torn whether to add or not. I didn't even know what a catch can was a week ago. I do like to take every precaution to try and prevent failure.

Posted

Lots of interesting info in here. IMO adding a catch can obviously wont hurt anything but long term I really don't think its all that much benefit. If you search around the internet all these new direct injection motors (foreign and domestic) have this carbon build up and oil blow by, its just the nature of the beast. I think the hype is a bit over blown.

 

Tell that to the ecoboost guys

 

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2014/12/induction-service-cleaners-can-damage-ford-ecoboost-engines.html

 

Another benefit of a catch can is on forced induction engines the oil mist coats the intercoolers reducing their effectiveness.

 

 

As our trucks are not Fords, nor do they come factory with forced induction, adding a catch can probably does help with engine longevity, but it is equally mental longevity too.

Posted (edited)

 

Tell that to the ecoboost guys

 

 

I'm not denying carbon build up. I'm saying carbon build up isnt that big a deal. It robs power for sure but like I said its part of the package with all these direct injection motors. They have had this issue for 7-8 years. Trust me, I know. Ive had my Audi "carbon cleaned" 3 times in 4 years and it costs about 800$ each time. I consider it cost of ownership. The only way to do it is open the motor up and scrub the valves manually or with a walnut blaster. Catch can does nothing, cleaners do nothing, its been proven over and over and over. Its just now that the domestic companies are starting to use this technology more frequently these debates are starting to come back up again.

 

My Audi at its first carbon cleaning, just for reference:

 

IMAG1136.jpg

 

fotor_1347028987933.jpg

Edited by Flying Tomatoes

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined
  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 2,829 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • So I'm in the middle of a DOD AFM delete on my 6.2 L86 Sierra. I had a pick holding the tensioner but after I got the Cam phaser gear off I was cleaning off all the rtv and apparently I didn't have the pick seated far enough in. I bumped it and the tensioner sprang forward.  I think everything is good but I want a second opinion. The top of the tensioner is just a looped piece of plastic that rides in that channel right? There is no spring or anything is there? I got the gear and chain back on and it seems tight and everything looks right. I'm hoping nothing fell out.
    • My 2015 1500 LTZ Silverado suddenly won't go into 4 x 4 low. It will go into 4 x 4 high.
    • Yep, just a quick reference point.    My main point being I’d do a thousand other things before I’d pay 10k for a transmission.    Speaking in ignorance cause I don’t look at these trucks, what is it worth? 20k?
    • I think users are going to want to pick their monitored parameters, which parameters they want to see first.    It should probably start with baseline at a minimum and adjust to learned, but be able to overlay baseline for comparison.   A simple severity level would be able to determine what type of alerting is appropriate or user selectable.    Why not use the OBD port though?   I think a phone connection would be a good idea, push notifications type deal.   Number 1 issue is having data is useless if you don’t know what the data should be under normal conditions. 
    • I thought I would use your thread and add to it as I just did my first longer drive with my truck in the last couple of days. I drove from the Grande Prairie area of Alberta down to Edmonton and most of where I drove in the city was the ring road so fairly free flowing but a bit of stop and go as well in the city. Stayed the night and returned home and not too many stops along the way each way but every restart and certainly every cold start sets it back for fuel mileage. Why I say that is I see some people will cherry pick a fuel mileage leg after the vehicle had been warmed up driveline wise before hand and its a forgiving ( easy rolling drive leg for example ) and call that their fuel mileage which can give a false perception of reality. I was not heavily loaded at all but never the less the flip bak cover, rubber bed mat, various tools etc and extra jerry cans of fuel all way up to a few hundred pounds of dead weight so its not an empty truck. The cold inflation tire pressures are set more near the freezing point so once they are warmed up driving I was showing 45 front and over 40 rear and realize high inflation pressures would help a little in fuel mileage but certainly not the ride on our crap sections of highway. The weather was good so was not raining as that can really drag mileage down, in fact I had a bit of a tail wind on average driving home. Most people on here would never have driven on that freeway to visualize it but its got a fair bit of rolling type of landscape with numerous river valleys. For the most part I had it on cruise set to 62 although kicking it off if I caught it in time before it started down shifting and self braking going down the grades. Most of the more substantial grades its shifting into 7th I believe as 8th just doesn't have it. Total distance round trip was 643 miles and my overall average and I did refuel three times in all, figured out to 17.65 miles per US gallon. My best fuel mileage section refuel within all of this figured out to 18.46 and these are all hand calculated figures. I find if anything that the trucks computer can be over optimistic, sometimes its pretty close but other times its stretching it. On paper persay in theory the truck would have just about made it on fumes for that whole drive without refueling once.    Which made me think of the topic thread of the wonder if these trucks could do 20 mpg and that is a good question, certainly would have to be on an easy going flat highway, no head wind, the right temperature, not packing around a bunch of dead weight and puttering along even slower than I was I would suspect and going steady and not stopping to smell the flowers or take a piss !. It probably is possible but not without effort to attain that with the wind resistance and weight of these trucks. Of course on my drive most people are passing me if they have the power as per loaded highway tractors, never mind a lot of speedy vehicles but the speed limit is 68 and most are at or well over that. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...