Jump to content

Long Term Carbon Deposits

Back in a Bowtie
 Share

Recommended Posts

JONBLARC7 Enthusiast

JONBLARC7

Posted
Posted (edited)

Just to add fuel to the fire here are my 120k mile valves no catch can.  I just took my heads off my 6.2 for a DOD delete and cam.  They don’t look that bad.

 

Like I said before nobody has put up a picture of a 130k mile engine with a catch can on it for, let say 100k miles.  Show me it looks better and I’ll believe you.

 

17AAB907-6B1D-47CA-8CD0-696E89EC85A5.jpeg

Edited by JONBLARC7
  • Like 1
  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

CombsL83
CombsL83

So nobody with a catch can wants to post pictures of their valves but are 100% positive that theirs are in better condition than non catch can engines. Got my laugh in for the day 

Jacoby
Jacoby

Those look like shit. 

3tspapat
3tspapat

Looks aren't everything. That is why the world is full of ugly people still. 

Posted Images

Doublebase Enthusiast

Doublebase

Posted
Posted
On 5/25/2019 at 3:01 PM, Grumpy Bear said:

 

5.) Looking forward to the results of your study. Very much interested indeed. I LOVE data...you know that. :thumbs:

 

 

 

Yelp...there won't be any results to my study, tried to fish my Autel camera into that intake...impossible to get it in there deep enough to get a look at those valves. Only way that's happening is to remove the intake, which I'm not ready to do. I'll be living in mystery until that intake comes off. Lol. 

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, JONBLARC7 said:

Just to add fuel to the fire here are my 120k mile valves no catch can.  I just took my heads off my 6.2 for a DOD delete and cam.  They don’t look that bad.

 

Like I said before nobody has put up a picture of a 130k mile engine with a catch can on it for, let say 100k miles.  Show me it looks better and I’ll believe you.

 

17AAB907-6B1D-47CA-8CD0-696E89EC85A5.jpeg

 

6 hours ago, Doublebase said:

Yelp...there won't be any results to my study, tried to fish my Autel camera into that intake...impossible to get it in there deep enough to get a look at those valves. Only way that's happening is to remove the intake, which I'm not ready to do. I'll be living in mystery until that intake comes off. Lol. 

Let's just use his. :rolleyes: 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
CombsL83 Enthusiast

CombsL83

Posted
Posted

So nobody with a catch can wants to post pictures of their valves but are 100% positive that theirs are in better condition than non catch can engines. Got my laugh in for the day :D

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
rah7777777 Enthusiast

rah7777777

Posted
Posted

I'm not saying a can is a complete waste, but i'm my head, for a stock truck like mine, I do not think the benefits are there. 

And I say that knowing i'll be keeping this truck for atleast 12 years and then giving it to my (currently) 4 year old son to drive through high school and college. 

(You know, assuming nothing major happens along the way)

 

 

FishinDVM Enthusiast

FishinDVM

Posted
Posted

Ok... dont beat on me too much here for all the things I didnt do and should have done. But... I have a 2014 GMC Sierra at 80k and I have NEVER done anything to the intake valves, no CRC, no seafoam, no BG GDI, nothing. I have done full synthetic oil changes at appropriate times, techron fuel cleaner here and there, new air filter, MAF and throttle body cleanings, etc.... but not the intakes. Anyhow, truck has been SLIGHTLY slower, using a little more oil, SLIGHTLY more vibration at idle, and last few weeks I have gotten a "cold start rough idle" code, and a random misfire code, on/off (it happened twice). Mechanic friend down the street who I trust and have used forever found nothing specific but recommended I had the valves decarbonized. 

 

So... the question is... AT THIS LATE STAGE OF THE GAME... 80K MILES... what would you do? I fear the CRC or Seafoam thing would create more problems with the large deposits coming off. I have called a few places looking for the BG GDI cleaning, but all the places BG lists only offer a fuel system cleaning and NOT the back of the intake valves directly. I called the dealership who of course would do it manually, but they want $600. Does anyone have a suggestion for how to do this? I feel this is above the DIY job for me. In the future, sure, I'll do a seafoam or crc in the intake just prior to oil changes and maybe do a catch can as well, but AT THIS POINT, what would you do? Thanks, Chris

Doublebase Enthusiast

Doublebase

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, FishinDVM said:

Ok... dont beat on me too much here for all the things I didnt do and should have done. But... I have a 2014 GMC Sierra at 80k and I have NEVER done anything to the intake valves, no CRC, no seafoam, no BG GDI, nothing. I have done full synthetic oil changes at appropriate times, techron fuel cleaner here and there, new air filter, MAF and throttle body cleanings, etc.... but not the intakes. Anyhow, truck has been SLIGHTLY slower, using a little more oil, SLIGHTLY more vibration at idle, and last few weeks I have gotten a "cold start rough idle" code, and a random misfire code, on/off (it happened twice). Mechanic friend down the street who I trust and have used forever found nothing specific but recommended I had the valves decarbonized. 

 

So... the question is... AT THIS LATE STAGE OF THE GAME... 80K MILES... what would you do? I fear the CRC or Seafoam thing would create more problems with the large deposits coming off. I have called a few places looking for the BG GDI cleaning, but all the places BG lists only offer a fuel system cleaning and NOT the back of the intake valves directly. I called the dealership who of course would do it manually, but they want $600. Does anyone have a suggestion for how to do this? I feel this is above the DIY job for me. In the future, sure, I'll do a seafoam or crc in the intake just prior to oil changes and maybe do a catch can as well, but AT THIS POINT, what would you do? Thanks, Chris

Have you changed your spark plugs? I'd do that first, if not.

 

As for the valve cleaning, if the dealer is going to charge you $600 to manually clean them, why not take it to a trusted independent that would probably charge less than that? It can't be hard to remove that intake, it's right there on top...I understand you maybe think you can't do it but it'd be a piece of cake for a tech.

 

I would personally not suggest any cleaners like Sea Foam or CRC at this point...you have 80k miles...if there is carbon there, those cleaners aren't goi to do squat at this point. I'd definitely say a manual cleaning is your best option (if actually needed).

 

I've also read there is a butterfly valve in the intake manifold that can get carboned up and hinder performance (these valves direct different patterns of air turbalance depending on low speed/high speed situations).

  • Like 1
Paintor Enthusiast

Paintor

Posted
Posted
On 5/28/2019 at 8:30 PM, Grumpy Bear said:

 

Let's just use his. :rolleyes: 

Err I put K&N breathers on my valve covers and get Zero carbon. Still complies with GM’s PCV emission patent/EPA...bad stuff aint supposed to come up from valve cover breathers since the PCV valve on the intake is suckin IN

 

To doubt such defeats GM’s Patent and EPA Regulations.

Jacoby Enthusiast

Jacoby

Posted
Posted
On 5/28/2019 at 8:14 PM, CombsL83 said:

100% positive that theirs are in better condition than non catch can engines. 

I’m 100% positive

On 5/30/2019 at 2:06 PM, FishinDVM said:

Ok... dont beat on me too much here for all the things I didnt do and should have done. But... I have a 2014 GMC Sierra at 80k and I have NEVER done anything to the intake valves, no CRC, no seafoam, no BG GDI, nothing. I have done full synthetic oil changes at appropriate times, techron fuel cleaner here and there, new air filter, MAF and throttle body cleanings, etc.... but not the intakes. Anyhow, truck has been SLIGHTLY slower, using a little more oil, SLIGHTLY more vibration at idle, and last few weeks I have gotten a "cold start rough idle" code, and a random misfire code, on/off (it happened twice). Mechanic friend down the street who I trust and have used forever found nothing specific but recommended I had the valves decarbonized. 

 

So... the question is... AT THIS LATE STAGE OF THE GAME... 80K MILES... what would you do? I fear the CRC or Seafoam thing would create more problems with the large deposits coming off. I have called a few places looking for the BG GDI cleaning, but all the places BG lists only offer a fuel system cleaning and NOT the back of the intake valves directly. I called the dealership who of course would do it manually, but they want $600. Does anyone have a suggestion for how to do this? I feel this is above the DIY job for me. In the future, sure, I'll do a seafoam or crc in the intake just prior to oil changes and maybe do a catch can as well, but AT THIS POINT, what would you do? Thanks, Chris

Do a Seafoam treatment

kennerz Enthusiast

kennerz

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, 14tungstenLT said:

soooooooo anyone with a can please post a pic for comparative reasons.  This is not a challenge truly curious to see.  

Soon,  I have a 6.2 with a little over 60k on the clock. Ran a basic elite catch can since 3k. I have gaskets ready just in case ( I know they most likely wont be needed).  Just need the time. Within the next couple of weeks I'm gonna pull the intake and take pics/ clean if necessary. The technique I  will use depends on the condition of the valves. If it's mild - carb cleaner and scraping. If it's heavy to me - will assemble a walnut blasting set up and document. Just a time thing at the moment, and I'll need a half/whole day to set aside for the unexpected. 

 

Not doing it to prove anything as I don't know what to expect either way. I'll be happy if I'm wrong about DI and the catch can turns out to be a waste of money because it's a non-issue and everything is clean; and essentially pulled the intake for nothing. If it looks bad, then maybe  the rumors are true. I can already see a moderate oily burnt coating on the inside of the intake behind the throttle body

 

Fact is, we don't have a large enough sample to prove anything, if turns out that it's clean or dirty. Find 30 random members here to pull their intakes and document and note mileage, oil used, catch can or not, etc.. then we might be able to reach a better conclusion.

 

That 130k motor doesn't look horrible, but that's not what I would consider clean  either. I would say, dirty enough to impact performance by some "X" amount vs perfectly clean. If it turns out that it's 1/2 mpg, or 10 HP to me that's something where it should be cleaned, The numbers documented on the corvette forums  on a gen V LT1 were a lot higher than those.

  • Like 1
3tspapat Enthusiast

3tspapat

Posted
Posted

So what i'm getting from this thread is that the small quantity of oil that gets through the PCV and into the intake is perfectly fine for the engine and has absolutely zero effect? Because that is what it seems like OP is saying. 

Sierra Dan Senior Enthusiast

Sierra Dan

Posted
Posted

Many members here do not have a catch can and are well over 100K on their non K2 trucks without issues.

No disrespect to those of you that run a catch can and i encourage anyone to follow with what makes them the most content, but the

question remains. If this carbon buildup is such a problem long term why do automakers not include an Oem engineered Catch Can setup from the factory?

Is it an extra cost issue or that engineers feel a catch can is not a crucial component to the longevity of an engine?

 

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Sierra Dan said:

Many members here do not have a catch can and are well over 100K on their non K2 trucks without issues.

No disrespect to those of you that run a catch can and i encourage anyone to follow with what makes them the most content, but the

question remains. If this carbon buildup is such a problem long term why do automakers not include an Oem engineered Catch Can setup from the factory?

Is it an extra cost issue or that engineers feel a catch can is not a crucial component to the longevity of an engine?

 

Because it can freeze

Mike GMC Enthusiast

Mike GMC

Posted
Posted

I don't know if they still do it, but Porsche was installing what amounted to a factory catch can on the 911's back around 2000 and maybe even earlier.  It was plastic and considered a "serviceable" part that supposed to be replaced every 30k miles.  I would really like to know what they do these days with their DI engines.

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

  • 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   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 2,448 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • B14Sierra
      Cam chain tensioner question

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      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.
    • dna9656
      No low range 4 x 4

      By dna9656 · Posted

      My 2015 1500 LTZ Silverado suddenly won't go into 4 x 4 low. It will go into 4 x 4 high.
    • asilverblazer
      Transmission Woes :-(

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      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?
    • asilverblazer
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      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. 
    • Chuck FB
      summer road trips in the 2026 2500HD

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      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...