Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

]Well got around to installing my catch can on the weekend and i went with this set up. Can any one tell me if this is correct way of doing it and if its working properly ? Any thoughts would be great. Car seams to be running fine but has a miis under boost but i think that due to plugs or coil packs cause just went on the dyno and had boost turned up . post-78172-0-11146500-1295788660_thumb.jpg

post-78172-0-04231900-1295788690_thumb.jpg

post-78172-0-31144800-1295788729_thumb.jpg

Yeah that's got the PCV catered for, but you can also run the valve cover breathers to it too.

It's prob better for the engine to vent it to air instead of back into the intake, but it's not very legal that way...

Pretty sure that won't work. You still have it set up so that oil and oil vapour can be sucked into the intake side of the turbo, particularly under boost (high load) conditions. And that is exactly when you don't want it to happen.

The PCV valve only opens under high vacuum (low load) and detonation from the oil vapour isn't a problem.

  On 23/01/2011 at 8:38 PM, blind_elk said:

Pretty sure that won't work. You still have it set up so that oil and oil vapour can be sucked into the intake side of the turbo, particularly under boost (high load) conditions. And that is exactly when you don't want it to happen.

Yeah but then you have to vent it to atmo which is not legal.

How is that different to how hes done it, still has the PCV and plumbed into the intake?

edit: my bad I thought he had done it like you had, you are right that is the better way to do it. When on boost it sucks the gasses via the catch can, when on vac it sucks straight out the cam covers avoiding oil in the turbo.

His is the opposite, when on vac it sucks via the catch can, when on boost it sucks the oil straight out of the cam covers into the turbo.

Edited by Rolls

thought i might of f#!!ked it. So what u have done is plumbed the catch can between the cam cover and the pvc taking out that pipe all togeather? did u notice a difference? will hook it up ur way just means bigger pipe and larger barb ends on the catch can witch will be a bitch to find. Thanks for the pics mate.

  On 24/01/2011 at 6:51 AM, blind_elk said:

No you don't!

Here's mine, stil complying with the requirement to have a fully sealed system not venting to atmosphere:

post-269-0-43814200-1295851834_thumb.jpg

post-269-0-26760300-1295851848_thumb.jpg

and you always run those hoses that close to the fan????

Thats better, you'll pass an epa/defect inspection with it set up like that as well.

I would have used black hose under the intake piping personally, but its functional at least.

Edited by Rolls
  On 24/01/2011 at 9:30 AM, 75coupe said:

and you always run those hoses that close to the fan????

I was thinking the same thing

that crazy close man.... i get scared by looking at the picture

  On 24/01/2011 at 9:30 AM, 75coupe said:

and you always run those hoses that close to the fan????

It's just the angle of view. If it were a problem, I would have done something different.

post-269-0-41304800-1295940050_thumb.jpg

nup still to close for my liking, I especially like the black electrical tape holding it in its 'safe' position... come on really you couldnt find a safer place to have them or is that all the hose you could afford...

  On 25/01/2011 at 6:45 AM, Rolls said:

Thats better, you'll pass an epa/defect inspection with it set up like that as well.

I would have used black hose under the intake piping personally, but its functional at least.

yeah i know it stands out a bit just a quick install got to fly out for work tomorrow so got some hose and fittings on order for when i get home plus don't really like the brass fitings i used. It won't stand out so much then. thanks for the advice guys.

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I've got the rear ones, they're certainly beefy. I need to take them to my driveshaft guru to check over, he's very fussy about the quality of components so I'll let you know if they are made of cheese by a blind man.   Are you in Australia? A mate just had a set of EN26 shafts made for his K20 Lotus by our fabricator which were quite cheap (compared to Driveshaft Shop) so if you can procure the CV's and draw what you need he'd make them for ~$800 for the pair.
    • Had I known the diff between R32 and R33 suspension I would have R33 suspension. That ship has sailed so I'm doing my best to replicate a drop spindle without spending $4k on a Billet one.
    • OEM suspension starts to bind as soon as the car gets away from stock height. I locked in the caster and camber before cutting off the kingpin. I then let the upright down in a natural (unbound) state before re-attaching it. Now it moves freely in bump and droop relative to the new ride height. My plan is to add GKTech arms before the car is finished so I can dial camber and caster further. It will be fine. This isn't rocket science. Caster looks good, camber is good, upper arm doesn't cause crazy gain and it is now closer to the stock angle and bump steer checks out. Send it.
    • Pay careful attention to the kinematics of that upper arm. The bloody things don't work properly even on a normal stock height R32. Nissan really screwed the pooch on that one. The fixes have included changing the hole locations on the bracket to change the angle of the inner pivot (which was fairly successful but usually makes it impossible to install or remove the arm without unbolting the bracket from the tower, which sucks) and various swivelling upper arm designs. ALL the swivelling upper arm designs that look like a capital I (with serifs) suck. All of them. Some of them are in fact terribly unsafe. Even the best one of them (the old UAS design) shat itself in short order on my car. The only upper arm that works as advertised and is pretty safe is the GKTech one. But it is high maintenance on a street car. I'm guessing that a 600HP car as (stupidly, IMO) low as you are going is not going to be a regular driver. So the maintenance issues on suspension parts are probably not going to be a problem. But you really must make sure that however your fairly drastically modded suspension ends up, that the upper arms swing through an arc that wants to keep the inner and outer bolts parallel. If the outer end travels through an arc that makes that end's bolt want to skew away from parallel with the inner bolt, you will build up enormous binding and compressing forces in the bushes, chew them out and hate life. The suspension compliance can actually be dominated by the bush binding, not the spring rate! It may be the case that even something like the GKTech arm won't work if your suspension kinematics become too weird, courtesy of all the cut and shut going on. Although you at least say there's no binding now, so maybe you're OK. Seeing as you're in the build phase, you could consider using R33/4 type upper arms (either that actual arm, OEM or aftermarket) or any similar wishbone designed to suit your available space, so alleviate the silliness of the R32 design. Then you can locate your inner pivots to provide the correct kinematics (camber gain on compression, etc).
    • The frontend wouldn't go low enough because the coilover was max low and the upper control arm would collapse into itself and potentially bottom out in the strut tower. I made a brace and cut off the kingpin and then moved the upright down 1.25" and welded. i still have to finish but this gives an idea. Now I can have a normal 3.25" of shock travel and things aren't binding. I'm also dropping the lower arm and tie rod 1.25".
×
×
  • Create New...