Looks like I need a catch can. Which one to buy?
12-21-2009, 09:42 PM
#41
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the absence of such thorough testing, we can only use research papers as scientific guidelines as to what type of system works best.
Currently, the most efficient separator is called an electric cone stack separator. It spins up to 10,000 rpm and is 99.9% efficient for volume flows up to 100 l/min. needless to say, this system is extremely expensive.
Every other type of catch can is far less efficient, so please don't be fooled into believing that a $150 catch can is 100% efficient.
Another thing to consider is that filterless systems have been tested against those that contain specific types of filter media. From a highly respected organization's white paper we learn that the right type of filter media-equiped separator can double the efficiency of a simple cyclone or impaction-only system.
Keep this in mind before thinking that any one system is efficient enough to eliminate all oil in blowby gasses.
12-22-2009, 06:13 AM
#42
None of the catch cans on the market can eliminate 100% of the oil in blowby gasses, but eliminating enough to result in a dry intake manifold & no more excess carbon buildup on pistons & valves is what the 2 brands do. The testing has been with the same car known to have an issue, and clean white inline filters used after the cans to judge the residual exiting the cans. Same car, same RPM's, for the same amount of time on a chassis dyno showed which were the most effective. The goal for a cost effective solution to a widespread issue and that is where they come in.
By the way, the only way to know this is to have an air/oil separator test house compare various systems under well-controlled (automotive engine-specific) test parameters. Unfortunately, this type of testing runs into the thousands of dollars and it is unlikely any catch can manufacturer or distributor has had this done.
In the absence of such thorough testing, we can only use research papers as scientific guidelines as to what type of system works best.
Currently, the most efficient separator is called an electric cone stack separator. It spins up to 10,000 rpm and is 99.9% efficient for volume flows up to 100 l/min. needless to say, this system is extremely expensive.
Every other type of catch can is far less efficient, so please don't be fooled into believing that a $150 catch can is 100% efficient.
Another thing to consider is that filterless systems have been tested against those that contain specific types of filter media. From a highly respected organization's white paper we learn that the right type of filter media-equiped separator can double the efficiency of a simple cyclone or impaction-only system.
Keep this in mind before thinking that any one system is efficient enough to eliminate all oil in blowby gasses.
In the absence of such thorough testing, we can only use research papers as scientific guidelines as to what type of system works best.
Currently, the most efficient separator is called an electric cone stack separator. It spins up to 10,000 rpm and is 99.9% efficient for volume flows up to 100 l/min. needless to say, this system is extremely expensive.
Every other type of catch can is far less efficient, so please don't be fooled into believing that a $150 catch can is 100% efficient.
Another thing to consider is that filterless systems have been tested against those that contain specific types of filter media. From a highly respected organization's white paper we learn that the right type of filter media-equiped separator can double the efficiency of a simple cyclone or impaction-only system.
Keep this in mind before thinking that any one system is efficient enough to eliminate all oil in blowby gasses.
12-22-2009, 09:19 AM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A true "real world test" would include varying speeds and engine load conditions as well as alternating flow and pressures, both positive and negative. This is what that testing house does and does very well. They use SAE standards that cover a large range of vehicle operating parameters. But this is why their testing is so expensive.
It looks like your test involved one vehicle only. While you may be able to say your catch can is effective at those test conditions and time duration parameters, it is in no way indicative of conditions encountered by all other types of vehicles - even those that use the same engine.
There really are so many variables when it comes to conditions - flow rates, temperatures, pressures, etc, that no single dyno test can qualify a catch can as being effective in such a broad sense of the word.
There's a good reason you see the statement "Your results many vary." everywhere. Few manufacturers can test their product under all possible conditions. I have an LS1 engine and my catch can works very well as part of its PCV system. As I mentioned previously, location of the air/oil separator is an integral part of the formula. Mounting the can directly to an incredibly hot cylinder head is not advantageous to catching as much oil as possible, at least using my engine as a test mule.
It looks like your test involved one vehicle only. While you may be able to say your catch can is effective at those test conditions and time duration parameters, it is in no way indicative of conditions encountered by all other types of vehicles - even those that use the same engine.
There really are so many variables when it comes to conditions - flow rates, temperatures, pressures, etc, that no single dyno test can qualify a catch can as being effective in such a broad sense of the word.
There's a good reason you see the statement "Your results many vary." everywhere. Few manufacturers can test their product under all possible conditions. I have an LS1 engine and my catch can works very well as part of its PCV system. As I mentioned previously, location of the air/oil separator is an integral part of the formula. Mounting the can directly to an incredibly hot cylinder head is not advantageous to catching as much oil as possible, at least using my engine as a test mule.
12-23-2009, 04:18 PM
#44
A true "real world test" would include varying speeds and engine load conditions as well as alternating flow and pressures, both positive and negative. This is what that testing house does and does very well. They use SAE standards that cover a large range of vehicle operating parameters. But this is why their testing is so expensive.
It looks like your test involved one vehicle only. While you may be able to say your catch can is effective at those test conditions and time duration parameters, it is in no way indicative of conditions encountered by all other types of vehicles - even those that use the same engine.
There really are so many variables when it comes to conditions - flow rates, temperatures, pressures, etc, that no single dyno test can qualify a catch can as being effective in such a broad sense of the word.
There's a good reason you see the statement "Your results many vary." everywhere. Few manufacturers can test their product under all possible conditions. I have an LS1 engine and my catch can works very well as part of its PCV system. As I mentioned previously, location of the air/oil separator is an integral part of the formula. Mounting the can directly to an incredibly hot cylinder head is not advantageous to catching as much oil as possible, at least using my engine as a test mule.
It looks like your test involved one vehicle only. While you may be able to say your catch can is effective at those test conditions and time duration parameters, it is in no way indicative of conditions encountered by all other types of vehicles - even those that use the same engine.
There really are so many variables when it comes to conditions - flow rates, temperatures, pressures, etc, that no single dyno test can qualify a catch can as being effective in such a broad sense of the word.
There's a good reason you see the statement "Your results many vary." everywhere. Few manufacturers can test their product under all possible conditions. I have an LS1 engine and my catch can works very well as part of its PCV system. As I mentioned previously, location of the air/oil separator is an integral part of the formula. Mounting the can directly to an incredibly hot cylinder head is not advantageous to catching as much oil as possible, at least using my engine as a test mule.
Also, NO oil seperator will fix an issue that is deeper (broken ring land, excess cyl wear, valve seal/guide wear.etc.)
Our goal was to come up with an affordable yet extremely effective desigh and it is a hit. Let me know if you want to try one.
12-23-2009, 06:52 PM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the offer, T, but as it is, my current CP/Watts setup doesn't allow any noticable amount of oil to get to my intake. I can't see how I would benefit from trying out your unit. You should be careful when you advertise so as to not make all-encompassing statements without proof to back them up. Saying that your unit is the best, period should mean that you have tested all competitor's models under varying conditions before coming to that conclusion. I'm sure your unit is effective to some degree and that is worth bragging about. I just have to comment when incorrect info about other types of catch cans is posted. I've been researching this topic for quite some time now and have spoken to more than a few experts in the field of air/oil separation.
12-24-2009, 09:44 AM
#46
Thanks for the offer, T, but as it is, my current CP/Watts setup doesn't allow any noticable amount of oil to get to my intake. I can't see how I would benefit from trying out your unit. You should be careful when you advertise so as to not make all-encompassing statements without proof to back them up. Saying that your unit is the best, period should mean that you have tested all competitor's models under varying conditions before coming to that conclusion. I'm sure your unit is effective to some degree and that is worth bragging about. I just have to comment when incorrect info about other types of catch cans is posted. I've been researching this topic for quite some time now and have spoken to more than a few experts in the field of air/oil separation.
Short of an expensive setup like the CP/Watts, I stand behind the statement. We have tested against everyone we see (sub $200 price range) time and again in the real world and have yet to see an equal aside from the Saiko Micchi (excuse the spelling) and it shows app the same effectiveness as ours. We just have a few other features that set it apart. Good dialog though.
12-24-2009, 10:05 AM
#47
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ashland & Lexington, KY
Posts: 1,419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norris Motorsports Catch Can
http://www.mikenorrismotorsports.com...atch_Cans.html
http://www.mikenorrismotorsports.com...atch_Cans.html
http://www.thunderracing.com/catalog...&sid=776#P5920
12-26-2009, 05:55 PM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I listed a link (page 2 of this thread) that takes you to a procedure that shows where and how I mounted my unit (C5 Corvette). I prefer mounting the unit as far away from a heat source as possible. Hot oil droplets are quite a bit "thinner" (viscosity-wise) than cooled-off oil droplets. The less-viscous droplets can dodge filter media and impaction geometry far easier than can cooler (more viscous) droplets.
Here's a schematic version of the hookup:
http://www.conceptualpolymer.com/PCV...ARTICULATE.PDF
Here's a schematic version of the hookup:
http://www.conceptualpolymer.com/PCV...ARTICULATE.PDF
