Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys

Just a question out of curiosity.

Just for fun to see what it sounded like, I took off and blocked the vacuum line to the BOV to see what it noise would come out. But all i got was the standard gush noise through the pod filter. Last few cars i did this with I got the "fully sick VL turbo flutter" :P.

What does this actually mean? If there a leak or issue somewhere? Stupid topic, i know but got me wondering.

thanks!!

Removing the vacuum line will help keep the valve closed. Whether it leaks is another matter.

no the pressure in the intake pushes the valve open because it is greater then what's above it

Actually they're not that bad, a bit of molly lube on the stem of the valve helped my stock rb20 recirculation valve hold close to 30 psi

I've had a few, i noticed it on all. I tried a few things like what turbosmart suggest.

I am using an automatic, so it could be more pronounced because of this.

Removing the vacuum line will help keep the valve closed. Whether it leaks is another matter.

Nope. Boost pressure from the manifold helps keep it closed.

Removing the line makes it leak on boost, meaning the turbo has to work harder.

Oh shit I have, bruh youse need to take off ya stock bov, cut up your favourite aluminium can and make a blanking plate using that. Then drill two holes and sandwich it between your BOV and BOV 2x bolt flange.

Fully sick ulleh, dose for days and make betches drop their panties

no the pressure in the intake pushes the valve open because it is greater then what's above it

I understand what you're saying, but the vacuum created when the throttle plate closes acts against the spring in the valve to open it, remove the vacuum line and the spring pressure alone is enough to keep the valve closed, or should be.

When I replaced my turbo I made up a pvc plug and pressure tested the intake, after I lubed the stem it easily held 20 psi

gallery_89296_5394_36839.jpg

Edited by Missileman

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

    • Version 1 aluminium airbox is.......not acceptable No pics as I "didn't like the look.....alot" Even after all my "CAD", and measurements, the leg near the fusebox just didn't sit right as it ended up about 10mm long and made the angle of the dangle look wrong, the height was a little short as well, meh, I wasn't that confident that Version 1 was going to be an instant winner I might give Version 2 another go, there's plenty of aluminium at work, but, after having in on and off a few times, and laying in the old OEM airbox without the new pod filter and MAF, there may be an option to modify the OEM air box and still use the Autoexe front cover and filter.... maybe This >  Needs to fit in here, but using the panel, and not the pod, the MAF will need to fit in the airbox though> I'm thinking as the old OEM box and Autoexe cover that is sitting in the shed is just sitting around doing nothing, and they are relatively abundant and cheap to replace if I mess it up and need another, it may well fit with some modifications to how the Autoexe brackets mounts to the rad support, and some dremiling to move it get in there, should give me some more room for activities, as I don't want to move the MAF and affect the tune Sealing the hole it requires to stick it in the air box is simple, a tight fit and some pinch weld will seal it up tight  I am calling this a later problem though
    • and it ends up being already priced in as though you're just on 91RON without any ethanol. Car will lose a bit of economy as the short and long term fuel trims bring down the AFR back to stoich or whatever it is for cruise/idle for the engine.  
    • Oh, you are right. But, in Australia E10 is based on 91RON fuel and ends up being 94RON. Hence it being the cheaper option for economy cars. The more performance oriented cars go for the 98RON fuel that has no ethanol mixed in. The only step up we have left then at some petrol stations is E85.
    • There is a warning that "this thread is super old" but they ignore that anyway...
    • With 10% Ethanol, we're talking 2-3% fuel consumption difference. The emissions reductions and octane boost in my opinion far outweigh this almost non existent loss.    My tanks sitting at 80%. Luckily that should go down fast as I'm on vacation again for the next two weeks. 
×
×
  • Create New...