Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys,

I currently have the PCV blocked off and the catch can vented to atmo.

But I want to plumb the catch can back to the intake system, but am concerned this 'may' be a problem as I have not got the PCV plumbed.

Is it true that as I am running MAP system (PFC D-Jetro) I can run the PCV blocked off and use the intake suction alone to draw fumes through a baffled catch can and into the turbo intake stream?

Thoughts?

Feedback?

Thanks in advance.

Current.jpg

New.jpg

This is a problem.

Why is it blocked off? You are better off with it connected.

The set up on the car is as I bought it, so I am just trying to go over it all and refine where needed.

I am making an assumption the PCV is blocked off as I can't see any pipe work going back to the cam cover?

Where exactly is the PCV?

It's usually screwed into the manifold where your arrow is pointing. The PCV gives you a better headstart to get your crankcase into negative pressure rather than starting from 0. The air going through the turbo drawing air from the cam covers is there from factory also. Both are very important.

The second picture is spot on but it's difficult to get the PCV plumbed back in because you now only have the 90deg fitting there.

If it were mine, I would now run the PCV to the catch can somewhere. It will have the same effect in the end

I've never seen the PCV blocked on a RB26 until now.

mine is blocked off as per ARC catchcan kit instructions, same setup as OP except i have a single hose coming into the catchcan

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p38/60ragtop/Picture110.jpg

I've never seen the PCV blocked on a RB26 until now.

Really? I have seen a lot of catch can set ups where the PCV is blocked, but a lot of them vent to atmosphere.

I am trying to get my head around whether it will be an issue for me to no longer vent to atmosphere and connect to the rear turbo intake instead.

It's usually screwed into the manifold where your arrow is pointing. The PCV gives you a better headstart to get your crankcase into negative pressure rather than starting from 0. The air going through the turbo drawing air from the cam covers is there from factory also. Both are very important.

The second picture is spot on but it's difficult to get the PCV plumbed back in because you now only have the 90deg fitting there.

If it were mine, I would now run the PCV to the catch can somewhere. It will have the same effect in the end

Found it - thanks.

If you look at the picture below you will see a blue anodised metal grub screw in the hole it was once connected to.

Mine was setup exactly like the first pic, all i did to it was hook up the PCV valve (required some new lines/fittings)

Works perfectly

If you had a set up the same as my current one (first pic) where did you plumb the PCV in??

20121025_123924.jpg

I had to get a fitting welded onto the rear breather outlet pipe, thus reusing the stock PCV factory hose, and then 2 lines to catch can

Great,

I think this is what I will do also.

But I wonder if I need to run an equaliser tube between the two cam covers?

So this is how I will set it up (tba on the equaliser)...

untitled.jpg

Interesting to see the Racepace set up blocks the PCV, I will need to have a chat with them, as I am sure they know what they are doing.

So maybe it is not so much of an issue?

018Finishedresult_2.jpg

020Finishedresult_4.jpg

Great,

I think this is what I will do also.

But I wonder if I need to run an equaliser tube between the two cam covers?

So this is how I will set it up (tba on the equaliser)...

untitled.jpg

Wait what? What you are suggesting here is exactly the same as you have it now, all you're doing is adding unnecessary lines. The PCV is part of the cam cover, if you're connecting it to the breather on the cam cover then all you are doing is making a loop that does nothing.

Wait what? What you are suggesting here is exactly the same as you have it now, all you're doing is adding unnecessary lines. The PCV is part of the cam cover, if you're connecting it to the breather on the cam cover then all you are doing is making a loop that does nothing.

No, there are two changes to what I have now.

1) No more vent to artmosphere - the air filter on the can is replaced by a line running to the rear turbo intake

- This will eliminate odurs / smell I currently get from venting atmo

- This is legal as currently vent to atmo is not in Victoria

2) The PCV is re-installed where it currently is blocked off with a grub screw and has the factory line re-fitted that goes from the PCV to the cam cover

(which is where I need a custom fitting that has TWO outlets the same as the factory)

- This means that when the car is idling (thus not making boost) the PCV will create a vacuum to relieve crank case pressure

Just join everything at the catch can. All pressure equalises there. You won't need to get a dual outlet on the cam cover, just run it over next to where the cam cover breathers enter the catch can.

Running the PCV and the air intake together like you have suggested is the absolute best method.

And think of it this way....if you can't get it working, you can always get a job as a graphic artist. Those pics are awesome! :laugh:

Hahaha, LOL....you aint seen nothing yet, check this shit out...

So, I think I have TWO options now.

OPTION 1:

Run PCV to catch can

Will require a new fitting welded on the catch can

OPTION 2:

Run PCV to cam cover

Will require a new fitting on the cam cover

I think I prefer option 2, and as long as the overall consensus is that it will work and is right, I will go in that direction.'

From what I understand, they are both correct and, as you mentioned, the PCV will still equalise pressure, even if done via the catch can.

Revised.jpg

Just run the pcv into a T on one of the other lines. I have a slightly more complicated set up with breathers coming from the sump and two catch cans to try to catch most (hopefully all) of the oil and then replace the catch can breather with a line to the turbo intake (breather on first catch can will go into the second catch can).

I was thinking that.

In theory, this should work just the same?

Yes. Actually you don't need a pcv valve - its just a one way valve and you won't be getting any pressure from the turbo intake so a simple straight through fitting will do. TBH mine is blocked off as it comes from the top of the cam cover (an RB25DET item) very near to the breather pipe and so serves no discernable purpose in my present set up.

Yes. Actually you don't need a pcv valve - its just a one way valve and you won't be getting any pressure from the turbo intake so a simple straight through fitting will do. TBH mine is blocked off as it comes from the top of the cam cover (an RB25DET item) very near to the breather pipe and so serves no discernable purpose in my present set up.

I think I will leave mine blocked off for now and just focus on getting the vent to atmosphere replaced with a recirculating set up.

I have been looking at pictures of RB26's on Google all day and the bulk of upgraded ones all have the PCV blocked off.

I am going to make an assumption that based on the amount of modified RB's I am seeing with it blocked, it should be OK.

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

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...