Catch Can

[apexanimal]

I didn't say "Mazda knows best" but they do know more about their engines and the possibility of carbon deposits than your neighborhood "performance" shop. My point was simply that if the engine had a carbon deposit issue that could be fixed with a more efficient oil catch system that would cost practically nothing, don't you think they would have adopted it by now?

And, no, not every engine would benefit from an aftermarket oil catch system. In fact, most cars would show zero benefit. I have a long history of cars that did not have any aftermarket OCS and did not suffer any adverse effects from not having it.

Adverse effects? Did you ever tear your engine down? Rebuild your heads?

Yes, of course you don't have to have one... This isn't about having to have one, but it's about the benefits if you do install one - which there are... And for $30 it's not a bad idea - I could think of a lot worse things I could do to my car for $30...


And briefly about the engineers... Have you been reading up on the oil issues in the diesel models? Still a great engine, but prone to issues...

 

[apexanimal]

The issue of carbon build up on direct injection engines is a BIG issue with Turbocharged engines. Up To this point, I have not seen much of an issue with normally aspirated engines. Unless there was some proven performance benefit of catch cans, I would not worry about carbon build up with our cars.

Forced induction cars def need it more than n/a... That's for sure.

Here is what I'm saying: if you don't want one - fine. If you dont think they're worth the money - fine. There is a benefit however, and if someone wants to spend their money on it (however much or little that is) - let them.

.02

 

[dad of jon]

And briefly about the engineers... Have you been reading up on the oil issues in the diesel models? Still a great engine, but prone to issues...

to be fair I think the engineers are caught between a rock and a hard place.

changing regulations over the composition of diesel (in the uk a %age has to be bio fuel which evaporates less) coupled with increased emissions regs from the EU have led to rising fuel levels in the oil. (oil dilution)

Mazda haven't taken the more expensive route of a separate fuel injection into the exhaust manifold to increase temps that lets the dpf filter burn deposits rather than injecting fuel into the engine on the post combustion stroke. They would be more uncompetitive given the strength of the yen and their insistence (or pressure from the Japanese government) to build in Japan. They are attempting to sort this out, their chief hope being alterations to the DPF regens by means of software changes, and a new dipstick - lol

In the USA you have a lower minimum standard for fuel than in Europe, which is why you only have a 13:1 compression ratio in Europe the engine does 14:1 and gives 165ps. i'm not sure how widespread ULSD is in the states but we've had it mandatory in the EU for a number of years now.

politics tends to screw things up , not engineers!

 

[SmurfaceWarfare]

I agree that engineers do their best. But a car manufacturer needs to make a profit. So there is a big gap between what the engineer wants and what the manufacturer wants. There are always compromises made in the end on both parts. Even if an engineer wants something like a catch can, there is no way a manufacturer would include it. Unless it was maintenance free or needed very little maintenance, which no one has designed yet as far as I can tell. The general population never turn a wrench on their own cars. So they pay for all their maintenance and adding a catch can would turn a lot of people towards another brand. Not to mention the factory warranty is only 5/60,000 miles. I doubt anyone will have issues within 60,000 miles. Now the big question, that no one can really answer, is will there be any problems at 90k. This thread should show or debate the pro's and con's of using a catch can so everyone can make their own decision.

My personal view is this so far. It couldn't hurt the engine, and it is fairly cheap at $160. Most peoples cell phone bills are more than that. I think I will throw one on, not 100% yet tho.

 

[Mistersix]

The problem lies in the EGR valve operation. It recirculates exhaust gases back into the intake manifold to reduce the amount of NOx the combustion generates. The OCC goes in between it and the intake manifold and basically filters the oily vapors via a medium inside the the can. This can reduce the amount of gunk that builds up inside the intake manifold and on the valves. Particularly in D.I. engines where there is no washing effect as is with a port injection engine. Most OCC cans have a removeable plug on the bottom for draining.

I've been running an OCC on my turbo car for years now. It is easily drained during regular oil changes and it always release's some gunk. Gunk that i am glad is not being recycled back into my engine while still allowing proper emissions function. There is a check valve that is used in line to control pressurization from backing up into the can.

The reason, i believe, OEM's do not incorporate OCC's on automobiles is cost and additional regular maintenance. Does a car need one to survive? No. But you should see the stuff that it filters out. The stuff in the bottle's on Corksport's page is exactly what comes out. http://www.corksport.com/blog/product-release-corksport-oil-catch-can-development-and-release-notes/

Rather or not a N/A D.I. engine would benefit from and OCC is unclear to me, however.

 

[SmurfaceWarfare]

The problem lies in the EGR valve operation. It recirculates exhaust gases back into the intake manifold to reduce the amount of NOx the combustion generates. The OCC goes in between it and the intake manifold and basically filters the oily vapors via a medium inside the the can.

The OCC goes between the PCV and the intake, not the EGR. There should be no oil coming out of your EGR. Only exhaust gases.

 

[Mistersix]

While you are correct, i agree with the majority that in this position your catching nothing. Putting the OCC between the egr and intake mani is the most effective spot for it. Your right, oil does not come out of the egr. Spent exhaust gasses do. Which carry lots of useless crap along with NOx. A properly designed OCC setup will filter out the crap, preventing it from caking up the manifold, valves and ports.

Any occ that is not baffled, contains no medium and is meant to be put between the Valve cover vent and intake is a joke. That's the gimic that Mike was pointing out earlier in the thread. The problem lies in the crap the EGR recirculates back into the engine. Its for emissions purposes and works effectively at reducing NOx emissions. However with and unfortunate side effect.

An egr valve that is stuck closed or stuck open is a very common issue with older cars. P0401 is a code that has plagued many cars that i and others i know have owned. This happens due to tens of thousands of miles of gunk flowing out of the valve and throws a CEL. The valve can be removed and cleaned, or just replaced. My six and Miata have both had "insufficient exhaust gas flow" codes that needed to be addressed.

Bit of helpful info on the topic here:http://engine-codes.com/p0401_mazda.html

 

[SmurfaceWarfare]

Yes the OCC should be baffled, if not its just a hollow space and longer path to the intake. I don't see the need for it to go between the EGR and intake. Modern engines are so efficient there should be almost no unburnt fuel or oil, it should only be hot gasses that are already in the atmosphere just different amounts.

 

[IHeartGroceries]

Boy, I am glad I'm not naive. Otherwise, my Speed6 would be man's greatest achievement.

Mazda engineered a real gem with the Speed6, carbon deposits and all. (rolleyes) While I agree the OCC necessity is far greater on FI DI engines, the problem doesn't simply go away, nor will any subtle work around w/ VVT completely resolve the issue. All it takes mileage. The carbon will be there. Good luck to those who foolishly turn a blind eye.

 

[rcs914]

I found this over at a Mazda3 forum. They OP used a scope and looked at his valves at 20k miles or so. I am coming from the VW community which is why I started looking into it. The reviews are mixed so far, some are for and some against.

http://mazda3revolution.com/forums/...ctiv-owners-beware-intake-valve-deposits.html

I think it is worth noting here that this was specifically a Skyactiv engine in this particular 3. I won't weigh in on the plus and minus otherwise, just that we are comparing apples to apples here.

 

[MikeM.]

Does a car need one to survive? No. But you should see the stuff that it filters out. The stuff in the bottle's on Corksport's page is exactly what comes out. http://www.corksport.com/blog/product-release-corksport-oil-catch-can-development-and-release-notes/

I should see the stuff it filters out? LOL!

First, I'll point out that Corksport's test was done on a modified engine, not stock. The engine has a short ram air intake, larger diameter down pipe, larger diameter exhaust pipe, intercooler, boosted turbo pressures and who knows what else. So, yes, if you screw up the breathing characteristics of an engine enough you can get it to burn dirty, cause water condensation in the crankcase and generally foul everything up. The test vehicle is so loaded up with unrefined Corksport mods it's no wonder it doesn't burn cleanly. Besides, the test vehicle was a Mazdaspeed3 turbo - not exactly Skyactiv technology we're talking about here - apples to oranges comparison in all respects.

So, no, the advertising photo does not convince me that my CX-5 would run better with an oil catch can. In fact, it reminds me of the vacuum cleaner salesman that visited my house as a small child. He put a white piece of filter paper in his vacuum and went around our (very clean) house sucking on the couch cushions, carpets, etc. When he pulled out the (now black) filter paper my mother was horrified and purchased his (very expensive) vacuum on the spot. Of course, his vacuum didn't work any better than our existing vacuum, he just applied the vacuum to a smaller surface area. Who vacuums their entire home two square inches at a time? But it sure made for a nice sales commission for the salesman.

 

[CX-5um]

Carbon deposits? Maybe when a brave soul reaches 50k or so they would SeaFoam their CX-5 and post the results!!!

 

[SmurfaceWarfare]

Carbon deposits? Maybe when a brave soul reaches 50k or so they would SeaFoam their CX-5 and post the results!!!

I was thinking about this also. I have read that sea foam does not do as well as most think. I have never used sea foam myself, so I have no first hand knowledge. I do know it puts on a good smoky show tho.

 

[HandA]

I was thinking about this also. I have read that sea foam does not do as well as most think. I have never used sea foam myself, so I have no first hand knowledge. I do know it puts on a good smoky show tho.

I think the white smoke in the videos is just the sea foam burning, the little blasts of black smoke are the deposits. I lit some sea foam on fire one time and it burned with a white smoke. Like you said it does make for a good show and the people in the videos get awful excited about all the white smoke.

 

[IHeartGroceries]

Seafoam is not effective enough to completely clear caked carbon after many miles of accumulation. The most common, safe and effective solution is blasting it with walnut media.

If I ever have some questions regarding the mysterious, or unknown, like antimatter, black holes, or the space-time continuum, I will be sure to forward them to MikeM. He will most certainly have an irrefutable answer.

 

[MikeM.]

If I ever have some questions regarding the mysterious, or unknown, like antimatter, black holes, or the space-time continuum, I will be sure to forward them to MikeM. He will most certainly have an irrefutable answer.

Sounds like you're still sore that I provided proof that refineries are known to sell gasoline that doesn't meet the minimum specs (contrary to your earlier assertions).

You shouldn't take factual information so personally. To err is human and we can all learn when we maintain an open mind to the facts presented.

 

[IHeartGroceries]

First of all, I never once made any detailed arguments about the industry at the refining level. I do not work at the refining level.
I am not going to have that discussion here. You can be the smartest person on the planet from web searching and reading "facts" on the net. I don't know what you do, but I sell the stuff for a living. So, it doesn't matter how much you try and push your "factual" argument, it isn't changing what I do every day, and what I know about the distribution/wholesale side of the industry.

Anyway, I was just busting your balls. Web forums would be a boring place w/o difference of opinion.

 

[CX-SV]

wtf does this have to do with proof of what refineries are known to do (per what hyperbole was trolledup via google), other than nothing.

Regardless I won't be using sea foam or catch can on my CX-5, no thanks.

 

[MikeM.]

wtf does this have to do with proof of what refineries are known to do (per what hyperbole was trolledup via google), other than nothing.

Nothing.

Except it wasn't hyperbole - it was the test results from the Washington State Department of Agriculture Weights and Measures Division of fuel collected around the state at the three different supply levels (producers, distributors and retailers).

Yes, it is off-topic in this thread. And so was the personal attack on me.

Big deal. Move on.

 

[CX-SV]

Nothing.

Except it wasn't hyperbole - it was the test results from the Washington State Department of Agriculture Weights and Measures Division of fuel collected around the state at the three different supply levels (producers, distributors and retailers).

Yes, it is off-topic in this thread. And so was the personal attack on me.

Big deal. Move on.

That's right nothing, lol. You might try moving along instead of bringing up (again and again) the off-topic hyperbolic "Washington State Department of Agriculture Weights and Measures Division of fuel collected around the state at the three different supply levels (producers, distributors and retailers)" report. NPF, BFD, no big deal, please move-on.