Jump to content

Catch Can Skeptic

CSI-WALLEYE
 Share

Recommended Posts

'17 Sierra Enthusiast

'17 Sierra

Posted
Posted

I agree that it would be nice to see a study on this. I'm a believer, I have an E2 on mine. The question is how much of the oil in the crankcase vapors is actually caught with a catch can. It might look like a lot but that question has never been answered. That milky substance that many seem to think is REALLY bad for the motor, isn't. That is just condensation that's mixed with the oil that hasn't been heated enough to evaporate yet. Moisture won't hurt anything once it's in the combustion chamber and once the oil heats up enough, the condensation just evaporates, burns in the CC and goes down the line and out the pipe.

  • Like 1
  • Replies 196
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

L86 All Terrain
L86 All Terrain

GM installs catch cans on all boosted V8's, and perhaps even the LT1 cars if I am not mistaken. All LT4/5 cars are equipped with catch cans from what I have been told. So they have done the research,

MaverickZ71
MaverickZ71

Just think about all of this crap today.  Back in the day, a simple valve cover breather used to take care of everything.  But that's against the law now.  The more mankind 'progresses', the more we m

Nitrousbird
Nitrousbird

Or use simple logic.  If oil isn't hitting the valves, what would be building up on them?  Exactly.     If you reduce the amount of oil hitting the valves, common sense would tell you that y

Posted Images

15 Z71 Senior Enthusiast

15 Z71

Posted
Posted

I say just drive it. Lots of people with these 14 and newer trucks with no problems and no cans. I work with a couple of people that have over a 100,000 and 0 issues. Dont think it matters either way.

CSI-WALLEYE Enthusiast

CSI-WALLEYE

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, '17 Sierra said:

I agree that it would be nice to see a study on this. I'm a believer, I have an E2 on mine. The question is how much of the oil in the crankcase vapors is actually caught with a catch can. It might look like a lot but that question has never been answered. That milky substance that many seem to think is REALLY bad for the motor, isn't. That is just condensation that's mixed with the oil that hasn't been heated enough to evaporate yet. Moisture won't hurt anything once it's in the combustion chamber and once the oil heats up enough, the condensation just evaporates, burns in the CC and goes down the line and out the pipe.

This is an example of how the fact oil is found in a can could be misinterpreted.  If the can preferentially removed water as compared to oil, then the can could make deposits worse.  Because theoretically, the water could soften deposits and if the can removed the water it could actually concentrate the oil being delivered to the valves.  I don't think this is happening but the fact is that you don't know unless you perform the experiment.

  • Like 1
M-Wheeler Enthusiast

M-Wheeler

Posted
Posted

Best way to see if a catch can really works is to install 2 of them. Have one dump to the other. If the 2nd one is collecting anything, then you know the first can is not working like it should....

 

Anyhow, with that being said, I empty mine every 1,000miles and have about an ounce of crap each time.

 

Also, PRIOR to every oil change (5K) I do the DI/Turbo intake clean. I made a special fitting on CAI after my MAF, spray in 1-2 second bursts at 2000rpm, let soak for an hour, run it down freeway for 10-20 miles. dump oil/filter, rinse repeat. 

 

35K, runs like a top!

  • Like 1
Jacoby Enthusiast

Jacoby

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, M-Wheeler said:

Best way to see if a catch can really works is to install 2 of them. Have one dump to the other. If the 2nd one is collecting anything, then you know the first can is not working like it should....

 

Anyhow, with that being said, I empty mine every 1,000miles and have about an ounce of crap each time.

 

Also, PRIOR to every oil change (5K) I do the DI/Turbo intake clean. I made a special fitting on CAI after my MAF, spray in 1-2 second bursts at 2000rpm, let soak for an hour, run it down freeway for 10-20 miles. dump oil/filter, rinse repeat. 

 

35K, runs like a top!

Let me see this fitting you made. That’s a great idea. 

 

Ive done the cleaning once so far and just sprayed it in the pcv inlet on the side of the intake

  • Thanks 1
Gagliano7 Enthusiast

Gagliano7

Posted
Posted (edited)

I think the best thing to do is clean the valves once a year with the CRC spray or sea foam. I have seen videos where this works. I think the catch can is a waste of money but i know on here i am in the minority.  Think about how many gm trucks and suv's with these motors don't have a catch can. Probably 99% of them on the road which is millions.

Edited by Gagliano7
  • Like 1
Jacoby Enthusiast

Jacoby

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Gagliano7 said:

I think the best thing to do is clean the valves once a year with the CRC spray or sea foam. I have seen videos where this works. I think the catch can is a waste of money but i know on here i am in the minority.  Think about how many gm trucks and suv's with these motors don't have a catch can. Probably 99% of them on the road which is millions.

When u can get one on eBay for $50 bucks I’d hardly say it’s a waste of money. That’s cheap insurance

  • Like 1
TRKLGND Enthusiast

TRKLGND

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, Jacoby said:

When u can get one on eBay for $50 bucks I’d hardly say it’s a waste of money. That’s cheap insurance

The $50 ebay cans are not the one the guys here are installing.  Most of what I see recommended start at around $200.

diyer2 Senior Enthusiast

diyer2

Posted
Posted

It can't hurt  anything so I see no reason not to have one.

I put one on my 2012 that does not have GDI.

Cheaper than an insurance payment probably.

 

:)

  • Like 2
Jacoby Enthusiast

Jacoby

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, paracutin said:

The $50 ebay cans are not the one the guys here are installing.  Most of what I see recommended start at around $200.

I agree. My point was that there are cheap cans out there that provide the same function as the more expensive ones. Therefore it being so cheap doesn’t mean it’s a waste of money. 

TRKLGND Enthusiast

TRKLGND

Posted
Posted
Just now, Jacoby said:

I agree. My point was that there are cheap cans out there that provide the same function as the more expensive ones. Therefore it being so cheap doesn’t mean it’s a waste of money. 

They absolutely do not!  Most of the $50 ebay cans are simply an empty can.  No baffling, no screens, nothing to keep whatever comes in from going right back out.  
Disclaimer: I do not use a catch can so I have no dog in this fight but I have see the results from many test, unscientific as they may be, that show the cheap cans collect almost nothing compared to the $200+ cans.
Since you seem to think that $50 is cheap and not a waste of money I have a case of empty beer cans (catch cans) you can buy.  Only $10 each.  Quite a deal! :D

CSI-WALLEYE Enthusiast

CSI-WALLEYE

Posted
  • Author
Posted
53 minutes ago, paracutin said:

They absolutely do not!  Most of the $50 ebay cans are simply an empty can.  No baffling, no screens, nothing to keep whatever comes in from going right back out.  
Disclaimer: I do not use a catch can so I have no dog in this fight but I have see the results from many test, unscientific as they may be, that show the cheap cans collect almost nothing compared to the $200+ cans.
Since you seem to think that $50 is cheap and not a waste of money I have a case of empty beer cans (catch cans) you can buy.  Only $10 each.  Quite a deal! :D

Just out of curiosity, you seem to be knowledgeable about the cans but do not use one.  Would you be willing to share your reasoning? 

TRKLGND Enthusiast

TRKLGND

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, CSI-WALLEYE said:

Just out of curiosity, you seem to be knowledgeable about the cans but do not use one.  Would you be willing to share your reasoning? 

Absolutely.
1st: As you pointed out in your OP, there is no proof they actually lessen intake valve deposits.  

2nd: It gets pretty cold in the winter where I live.  I have seen several instances where folks report mail seal failure due to over-pressurization.  The dealer and or mechanics attributed this to the catch can freezing.  This brings me to number 3.

3rd: Depending on your dealer, this type of modification can cause them to deny warranty coverage for most anything engine related.  Someone is going to quote the Mag-Moss Warranty Act and that the dealer or GM has to prove that your mod caused the issue they are refusing to warranty.  This is all true.  However, depending on the issue, I may not have the funds to pay for the repairs out of pocket while fighting with GM over the warranty.  I also own only one vehicle so I can't afford to be without mine for an extended period.   I'm not a gambler by nature and certainly not with a $50k truck.

There are other reasons but we'll start with those.

Jacoby Enthusiast

Jacoby

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, paracutin said:

They absolutely do not!  Most of the $50 ebay cans are simply an empty can.  No baffling, no screens, nothing to keep whatever comes in from going right back out.  
Disclaimer: I do not use a catch can so I have no dog in this fight but I have see the results from many test, unscientific as they may be, that show the cheap cans collect almost nothing compared to the $200+ cans.
Since you seem to think that $50 is cheap and not a waste of money I have a case of empty beer cans (catch cans) you can buy.  Only $10 each.  Quite a deal! :D

Dude back in the day all the cans were empty.  All guys did was fill it with a steel scouring pad to use as a filter.  Open up a $200 catch can and they use the same thing.  Youre just paying extra for them to include it in their design.  These engines don't produce enough vacuum to suck up fluid from the bottom of the can.  Theres tons of folks using cheap cans and collecting just as much fluid as the more expensive ones.  Im not advocating someone buying a cheaper can Im just saying that the design is simple.  Crankcase fumes go in one side and out the other.  Its as simple as that.  And don't make me out to be some **** by saying $50 isn't a lot of money.  That's not what I said.  But $50 is way less than $200.  That's just basic math

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Chuck FB
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      Which has made me wonder with the various engine failures of a few brands in the last few years, is it sub par materials such as lifters etc causing failures, or bearing clearances on the crank etc or perhaps bad designing of an engine physically or causing too much load on the components due to the hp/torque they can push out of them. Or is the oil viscosity and additive package of current oils or a lack of oil flow by an oil pump not able to supply sufficient oil at idle or under high load at low rpm. Or is it every item I listed that combined together has pushed the limits so far to the left that there is hardly a margin of safety left and add in some fuel dilution and too long of an OCI and premature engine failure is the result ?. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      He is not saying that an SAE *W20 will have more viscosity than a *W40 due to MORE VII polymers. He is saying that although multiple *W40 may post in the PDS the same or similar 100 C and 150 C viscosities that the blenders choice of modifier TYPE and AMOUNT to get his chosen base to grade will not give identical real world viscosities in shear and at temperature. All will pass the SII test but not all will pass the 100 C HTHS (unpublished value) testing the blender does and relies on to get the required by law "percentage improvement' referenced to his last great work.    Tis the problem with the lie. Once told others are required to support it. 
    • PunchT37
      Parking Brake - Automatic Engagement Questions

      By PunchT37 · Posted

      I have a `25, 1500 that auto sets on incline. Never knew that at first. I have the electronic shifter. Just think if it didn`t do that? Unlike a mechanical shift that you can muscle out of park, how would you get this thing out? That would be a problem.   What I found out later is, I don`t have to push the button to release. Just put it in gear.   Setting parameters? Don`t know if it`s possible.
    • SoCal Angler
      Parking Brake - Automatic Engagement Questions

      By SoCal Angler · Posted

      2023 GMC 3500 HD, SLE, 6.6L Gas, 4x4, 6 Spd Options:  SLE Convenience Package; Driver Alert Package 1; Spray on Bedliner; X31 Off Road Package; TRAILERING MIRRORS, HEATED POWER -ADJUSTABLE, AUTO DIMMING, WITH TURN INDICATORS WHEELHOUSE LINERS, REAR INC. REAR AXLE - 3.73 RATIO INC. GVWR, 11,350 LBS. (5148 KG) INC. FRONT AND REAR PARK ASSIST, INC. ULTRASONIC     I have been launching my new boat and noticed some things related to the parking brake.. I usually set the parking brake (habit) when on flat ground for typical driving.    When backed down on the launch ramp to launch the boat and I place gear selector into Park, the parking brake activates automatically. My second nature is to set parking brake manually and noticed I was turing the parking brake off.  The parking brake appears to be setting itself automatically.   I looked all over my owner's manual and only found references to being on an incline and manually setting parking brake, or at times parking brake will be auto engaged, but nothing specific to my situation.    When is the parking brake automatically engaged?  Under what specific circumstances?  Can the auto set parameters be changed?     I like the auto set feature.  It would be nice if always engaged when shifted into Park and released when shifted out of Park (like my wifes 2025 RAV4).   Thanks!    
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...