TonyViv

Hello all,
I have searched but cant find an answer to this specific question...
In my 99 TA ls1
I had a small oil leak that got worse so I thought to check the pcv valve, which turned out to be completely gummed closed. When I did i of course ripped the rubber elbow that houses the pcv.
Having nothing to modify and they dont sell it, So I called a heavy equip mechanic I know and asked him what he thought... He said to cap it off at the thottle body and just run a tube from where the pcv should be down to the ground
I did that and it is running fine with no check engine light and no oil seepage from that line.

Question..... other than the emisions issues is it safe and ok to run it like this? It seems ok crankcase still has plenty of venting area and there is no more oil going into the throttle body.. ??

Any ideas of the pros/cons to running this way??
Or even skipping the pcv all together and running from the hard line right to the throttle body
I am a long time lurker with few posts and thanks for your help..

Tony

LS6427

iTrader: (2)

There's nothing wrong with capping off the vacuum lines on the intake and just having the crankcase vented. I have a filter vent on my drivers side valve cover and one on my valley cover port. Then I suck gases from the passengers valve cover.
I have a PCV valve in-line going from the passenger valve cover to the vacuum port on the intake.......but I put a needle valve in it and it barely pulls any vacuum out of the passenger valve cover because I keep it almost closed.

I've ran for 6 months with just the two filters.......and absolutely no vacuum sucking anything from the crankcase. Zero oil going into the intake. It was identical. Oil at oil changes was identical to oil with the PCV, no difference at all.

PCV systems are unnecessary, as long as the crankcase is vented with filters.

Here's two pictures of mine. Not to confuse......
In one picture you see the filter on my valley cover port...the other picture you see my PCV vacuum line with the needle valve in it.
I use both of these together now.
Plus, the vent shown on my drivers side valve cover.
Thats it......not a drop of oil has been in my intake in years.

.

LS6427

iTrader: (2)

If you change your oil every 3,000 miles there will be zero damage done to the engine. People who leave oil in for 6,500 miles are ridiculous. I'm passing 165,000 miles, my engine is still purring like a kitten and will keep doing so for another 100,000. But I'm pulling it out for a new one soon.

Too much talk and BS about PCV systems. YES, evacuation of crankcase gases is a good thing, but having oil going into the intake is plain stupid. The vacuum strength needs to be cut in half or less, and then vent the crankcase, period.

Just do what I did and it'll be perfect. It costs about $10.00.

.

LS6427

iTrader: (2)

Or go to Summit and use the PCV set up they sell that uses the exhaust pipes to pull crankcase gases. It works.

.

TonyViv

I toatally understand both points of thought. Here is my predicament either way, if that rubber elbow wouldnt have ripped I would have just put the pcv in and forgot about it. Since it did and you cannot buy one, I needed a quick modification.

Basically I just capped off the intake and ran a line from where the pcv was to the inner fender so I could easily see what was coming out of it. So each side isnt being vented, seems like 1 side should really do it. Maybe I should put some kind of filter on the end so at a time of vacuum it wont suck anything in?
LS what filter is that on the end of the tube? Do you really think the drivers side one is necessary?
Maybe I should consider just coming up with a way around that rubber elbow they dont sell.... anyone have any ideas?
Call me crazy but the car seems to run better this way. It has a 123k on it and I just want to be good to it and make it last

LS6427

iTrader: (2)

I went to the auto parts store and started playing with parts and opening filter boxes. Those two filters I use are fuel filters for some car.

The way I have it...fresh air is sucked into the drivers side filter (I confirmed that by holding a cigarette near it and it sucks the smoke right in at idle). That fresh air flows across the engine over to the vacuum line I have on the passengers valve cover port, which is connected to the vacuum port on the intake. But again......I have that needle valve so the strength of vacuum is cut way down to a level where its not sucking in oil from that valve cover. Its perfect. I have crankcase gases being evacuated, without oil being sucked up.

You cant ask for a better set-up.

I took some pictures of some of the parts I used to make this stuff....check it out. But you just have to go play around with things at the store. Rubber fittings, filters and grommets. The grommet in the picture is the one that was stuck in my drivers side valve cover, I just drilled a hole in it and stuck the rubber tube I found in it and stuck the filter on it. Its very sturdy and its been there for years.

.

joecar

LS6427,

In your first pic, I think it would work better if you put the filter on the passenger side valve cover, and route the valley plate to the intake manifold, i.e. the opposite of what you have.

$0.02

LS6427

iTrader: (2)

I actually tried that for a couple months.....too much oil burn. It pulled the oil mist right out of the crankcase. Pulling from the valve cover keeps the pull of vacuum out of any oil mist, its just crankcase air. Pulling from the pass valve cover is when oil burn stopped and its when there was never a drop of oil in the intake again.

Also....now I have a needle valve to regulate the vacuum pull. pic below.....

THis is the perfect system now....at least for my engine.
.

ZForce1

I had the same problem, the factory rubber tubing is very thin and weak. I ripped off the factory rubber tubing and put a 4" length of 3/8 fuel line. Serves the same function.

joecar

Ok, I see.