Catch Can Skeptic

[TXGREEK]

Actually, What you see from cold and hot climates is different appearances .  Nothing more the percentage of oil in the can is same at the very.very,very most 10%  The rest is liquid and byproducts!

Asked a few mechanic buddies of mine at a performance center, install superchargers and all sorts of goodies, told me approximately 30-60% will be oil and even 15% will actually cause carbon buildup with time but depending on how you drive it they still recommended having one. I wouldn’t like what SS502 has shown in his recent Pyrex bowl to get back into my engine and get on my valves etc. to each their own, professional mechanics work on these multiple times throughout the day and they’ve highly recommended them but again I don’t feel like dealing with them and also having to remember to take it off before going into service. I’ve got 100k mile extended warranty that I need to keep lol. So, if professional mechanics that work on very high dollar cars recommend them I’m sure it’s for a reason.


Sent from above

[dieselfan1]

1 hour ago, Jacoby said:

It’s not because they’re not beneficial. It’s because the other 4.4 million probably don’t know what a catch can even is. I bet over a million of those truck owners have never even thrown anything in the bed. This very forum is full of people that turn their trucks into badass rock crawling mud bogging trucks and never even get em dirty. What is that about lol. 

I'm sure you are correct. I asked the service writer at the Chevy dealer when I was getting a free oil change about catch cans . I asked if they could void the warranty?

He said " what's a catch can?" 

Another time I was there with my other truck for a free oil change I asked another guy about the Range AFM Disabler and if it voids the warranty. Again this doofus said

"What's a Range AFM Disabler?"

The other part about the mall crawlers I get that .

You gotta be cool you know.

 

[CSI-WALLEYE]

13 hours ago, BigBlueLB756 said:

I surely don't want to die from lung cancer so I just added a second catch can in series to be safer!  Whew!

 

Where did you get the fittings attach it to the motor?  Did you have to take them from the the original connector?

[CSI-WALLEYE]

3 minutes ago, dieselfan1 said:

I'm sure you are correct. I asked the service writer at the Chevy dealer when I was getting a free oil change about catch cans . I asked if they could void the warranty?

He said " what's a catch can?" 

Another time I was there with my other truck for a free oil change I asked another guy about the Range AFM Disabler and if it voids the warranty. Again this doofus said

"What's a Range AFM Disabler?"

The other part about the mall crawlers I get that .

You gotta be cool you know.

 

That really is surprising!  There is so much information out there you would think every mechanic would know about it.  

[dieselfan1]

51 minutes ago, CSI-WALLEYE said:

That really is surprising!  There is so much information out there you would think every mechanic would know about it.  

 I'm talking about the dumbasses that write up your service order when you pull your truck into the service area. They aren't too bright.

[BigBlueLB756]

?  The red one is attached to the fender liner; the blue one is attached to the fender-firewall brace.

[CSI-WALLEYE]

35 minutes ago, BigBlueLB756 said:

?  The red one is attached to the fender liner; the blue one is attached to the fender-firewall brace.

sorry my fault.  meant the hose connections.  GM has those special connectors.  did you canibalize the the original connecting hose to get the fittings or did you by new ones.

[SS502]

14 minutes ago, CSI-WALLEYE said:

sorry my fault.  meant the hose connections.  GM has those special connectors.  did you canibalize the the original connecting hose to get the fittings or did you by new ones.

Try looking at Mighty Mouse Solutions, they used to carry them but I can't access them from work...if they still do please post up the site.

[Silverado-Hareek]

On 3/29/2019 at 3:22 PM, CSI-WALLEYE said:

Don't you think that GM would care if their vehicles failed right after warranty?  It would not do much for sales.

 

On 3/29/2019 at 3:26 PM, SS502 said:

No I do not.

Agreed I don't think they care.  Their primary focus is selling vehicles and turning a profit.  Keep in mind, most manufacturers are using DI engines and none are using catch cans except in rare instances of high performance vehicles.  GM isn't going to spend the money on a catch can if their competitors aren't.  Again, the primary issue is that it requires the user to drain the can which most people don't even know how to pop their hoods much less drain an oil catch can and monitor the differences between cold weather and warm weather and how full the can is getting and so on.  And if someone forgets and the can fills up too much and the contents gets sucked back into the intake manifold, GM is on the hook for that design.  No, if GM (and all other manufacturers except Toyota) can get the DI engine to last past the warranty period, they're off the hook and they'll gladly sell you an engine cleaning service at that point as part of "routine maintenance."  I don't really blame the manufacturers completely.  This is evolving technology in response to regulations that mandate fuel economy.  However, now that manufacturers like Toyota are coming up with a fix or rather a design update to the platform, I do blame the manufacturers that don't follow suit and keep selling DI engines with this inherent design flaw.

[KARNUT]

I think manufactures care about longevity, they mention it in their ads. As I mention in another thread, I wonder why they don't push a intake valve cleaning as part of routine maintenance. Like they do with fuel injection cleaning. Even if they had to do it every 15K miles, it's more money for them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CSI-WALLEYE]

1 hour ago, Silverado-Hareek said:

 

Agreed I don't think they care.  Their primary focus is selling vehicles and turning a profit.  Keep in mind, most manufacturers are using DI engines and none are using catch cans except in rare instances of high performance vehicles.  GM isn't going to spend the money on a catch can if their competitors aren't.  Again, the primary issue is that it requires the user to drain the can which most people don't even know how to pop their hoods much less drain an oil catch can and monitor the differences between cold weather and warm weather and how full the can is getting and so on.  And if someone forgets and the can fills up too much and the contents gets sucked back into the intake manifold, GM is on the hook for that design.  No, if GM (and all other manufacturers except Toyota) can get the DI engine to last past the warranty period, they're off the hook and they'll gladly sell you an engine cleaning service at that point as part of "routine maintenance."  I don't really blame the manufacturers completely.  This is evolving technology in response to regulations that mandate fuel economy.  However, now that manufacturers like Toyota are coming up with a fix or rather a design update to the platform, I do blame the manufacturers that don't follow suit and keep selling DI engines with this inherent design flaw.

You may be correct here.  I may be thinking everyone else is thinking like I am.  I usually keep my vehicle as long as I can and maintain them well.  I bought a 95 Ford Taurus (a Consumer Reports best by!) that was an unreliable POS.  It was not just bad luck.  That was a bad design.  It turned me off Ford forever.  Alternatively, I also had a 1997 GMC Safari.  It was not perfect but lasted for 17 years and 250K KMs.  I sold it and it was still going strong.  That build brand loyalty (in me anyways).  However, if most consumers are only keeping vehicles until the warranty expires, it would make sense for manufacturers to aim for that goal (sad).  On the brighter side I do know two people who manage fairly large fleets of trucks.  One is comprised of GM, FORD and RAM.  in this fleet the GMs are the most reliable and require 30% less expenditure on repairs vs the other two.  I believe RAM was the worst.

[Jacoby]

2 hours ago, CSI-WALLEYE said:

sorry my fault.  meant the hose connections.  GM has those special connectors.  did you canibalize the the original connecting hose to get the fittings or did you by new ones.

Just use fuel line.  You don't have to reuse the oem connectors

[SS502]

31 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

I think manufactures care about longevity, they mention it in their ads. As I mention in another thread, I wonder why they don't push a intake valve cleaning as part of routine maintenance. Like they do with fuel injection cleaning. Even if they had to do it every 15K miles, it's more money for them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I believe that if they did that they would be admitting there is an inherent issue with DI engine design that has been shown to have problems with carbon or whatever you want to call it. I am not saying a catch can is a cure all fix all, done going there but if any manufacturer is pushing an intake cleaning they are admitting they need to be cleaned. With injectors, they can recommend it to every single customer because they can't control what type of gasoline you put in it. Valve "coking" will or could (there I covered my butt) occur with any oil from AMSOIL to Walmart to Jiffy Lube special of the day.

[KARNUT]

I believe that if they did that they would be admitting there is an inherent issue with DI engine design that has been shown to have problems with carbon or whatever you want to call it. I am not saying a catch can is a cure all fix all, done going there but if any manufacturer is pushing an intake cleaning they are admitting they need to be cleaned. With injectors, they can recommend it to every single customer because they can't control what type of gasoline you put in it. Valve "coking" will or could (there I covered my butt) occur with any oil from AMSOIL to Walmart to Jiffy Lube special of the day.

I was just throwing it out there to complete the debate. I have a 8 year old 100K mile car with DI. So far still runs great. I’m only interested in modifying to increase HP. I do understand people who want to keep their vehicle past 200K doing these types of mods. I’m not one of those. Even my 92 only has 110K miles on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jacoby]

28 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

I’m only interested in modifying to increase HP.

I feel the same way but at the same time Im trying to mod to decelerate the loss of horsepower.