Oil Consumption
08-07-2011, 08:05 PM
#21
08-07-2011, 08:16 PM
#23
I just played around with it over a 2-3 week period till I found the setting where my oil consumption through my PCV stopped and when I kept checking for oil in my intake...there was zero......and I mean zero.
.
08-07-2011, 08:20 PM
#24
Its been like this for about 5 years now. My crankcase has plenty of evacuation suction without any oil going through. No need for a catch can.
Also....that line from that vacuum intake port is sucking crankcase gasses from my passenger side valve cover port, I have my LS6 valley cover capped off. The LS6 valley cover is TERRIBLE. It allows way too much mistified crankcase oil to be sucked up though that vacuum line. The valve cover is much better because the oil in there is flowing, not a mist.
.
08-07-2011, 08:35 PM
#25
Its an off the shelf plastic "T" fitting...then I put a torx screw into it that would screw all the way in and close off the flow. Then I backed it out till I started to feel suction get higher and higher.......then I played with it till I was happy and my engine was happy.
Its been like this for about 5 years now. My crankcase has plenty of evacuation suction without any oil going through. No need for a catch can.
Also....that line from that vacuum intake port is sucking crankcase gasses from my passenger side valve cover port, I have my LS6 valley cover capped off. The LS6 valley cover is TERRIBLE. It allows way too much mistified crankcase oil to be sucked up though that vacuum line. The valve cover is much better because the oil in there is flowing, not a mist.
.
Its been like this for about 5 years now. My crankcase has plenty of evacuation suction without any oil going through. No need for a catch can.
Also....that line from that vacuum intake port is sucking crankcase gasses from my passenger side valve cover port, I have my LS6 valley cover capped off. The LS6 valley cover is TERRIBLE. It allows way too much mistified crankcase oil to be sucked up though that vacuum line. The valve cover is much better because the oil in there is flowing, not a mist.
.
08-07-2011, 08:46 PM
#26
OH..............I also did away with my factory system and just put an air filter on my drivers side valve cover. So I get fresh air sucked into the drivers side valve cover and that fresh air gets sucked all the way through the crankcase and up into the passengers valve cover......then into the intake.
But still...to keep the factory PCV system the way it is.....that vacuum strength needs to be cut in half from that vacuum port.
.
But still...to keep the factory PCV system the way it is.....that vacuum strength needs to be cut in half from that vacuum port.
.
08-09-2011, 08:00 PM
#27
12 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually I guess you are blind cause the OP said 1500 miles and 1 quart of oil. SSSOOOOO if he has a heavy foot, as the supporting document states, he will burn up more oil than the acceptable rate of 1 quart per 2000 miles. That means every 500 miles is 1/4 quart, break that down to the 500 miles missing to get him to 2000 miles ( as he stated he is at 1500 ) he is consuming 1/3 quart per 500 miles. Which would in fact be within the peramitters (spelling
) of the supporting document if he has a heavy foot. So you may not be blind or stupid, you just cant read and then you try to bash me when I present black and white fact. We don't know his driving habits, we can only assume from the numbers he gave us to fill it into the equations presented by GM's document and go from there. COULD there be something else going on?? Sure, but why have somebody waste their time and money throwing "suggestion" parts into the car. Have a machanic properly diagnose the car and see what you find instead of playing the guessing game, it may just indeed boil down to normal consumption. Also keep in mind that if he has an M6, the supporting document also states that if he drives aggressively ( i.e. engine breaking and rpms 3000 to redline) that he can consume 1 quart per 500 miles!!!! Well holy sh&t, lets change your PCV system, all your gaskets, your oil pump, pull your TB, hell rebuild that whole ***** ***** just to find out there was nothing wrong. Well YEE HAW!!!!! (sorry for the rant lol) Not trying to be an *** but read the whole document before you "rebuff" me as you put it. Its all there in plain ole black and white.
) of the supporting document if he has a heavy foot. So you may not be blind or stupid, you just cant read and then you try to bash me when I present black and white fact. We don't know his driving habits, we can only assume from the numbers he gave us to fill it into the equations presented by GM's document and go from there. COULD there be something else going on?? Sure, but why have somebody waste their time and money throwing "suggestion" parts into the car. Have a machanic properly diagnose the car and see what you find instead of playing the guessing game, it may just indeed boil down to normal consumption. Also keep in mind that if he has an M6, the supporting document also states that if he drives aggressively ( i.e. engine breaking and rpms 3000 to redline) that he can consume 1 quart per 500 miles!!!! Well holy sh&t, lets change your PCV system, all your gaskets, your oil pump, pull your TB, hell rebuild that whole ***** ***** just to find out there was nothing wrong. Well YEE HAW!!!!! (sorry for the rant lol) Not trying to be an *** but read the whole document before you "rebuff" me as you put it. Its all there in plain ole black and white.