What have you done to your CX-5 today?

[Chris_Top_Her]

Received as a late Christmas present the JBR catch can. http://www.jamesbaroneracing.com/sh...ct_info&cPath=333_341_448_451&products_id=888

Getting feedback on adding a check valve to it to vent positive pressure once I'm boosted (or + pressure anytime). I'm thinking somewhere on the return line add a T with a check valve + breather. I figure if I put it on the drain side, s*** might blow out if it ever VTA'd LOL.

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

idle through fuel cutoff and high load driving
.5 lb of boost lol. (COMEQR = lambda)

 

[MikeM.]

Received as a late Christmas present the JBR catch can. http://www.jamesbaroneracing.com/sh...ct_info&cPath=333_341_448_451&products_id=888'

How can the present be considered "late" when you posted this on Christmas Eve? I thought Christmas was Dec. 25th?


In any case, that oil catch can is unnecessary. The advertising copy at the JBR website is hilarious! It says, "During everyday engine operation, blow-by gases, as well as oil vapor from the engines rotating assembly, pass through the PCV valve and are routed into the intake for the engine to burn off. Before ever making it into the cylinders, some of that oil mist and other contaminates adhere to the backside of the hot intake valves. Over time a thick crust forms significantly reducing performance and potentially leading to a costly cleaning or repair. This is especially a problem for the 2.0 and 2.5L motor because, there's no fuel (Direct Injection) passing over the valves to wash and keep them clean. This is why an OCC is a must have for the Mazda SkyActiv motor."

The reason this is complete BS, is because all Skyactiv G engines come with a very effective oil separator mounted to the upper engine block. How do we know the OEM oil separator is effective? Because EPA emissions standards are quite strict and any significant amount of oil that was not caught by the OEM oil separator would cause the engine to fail the emissions tests.

We also know the sales pitch above is snake oil because we would have seen a rash of problems with crusty, leaky exhaust valves and plummeting MPG figures as these engines age if an oil catch can was necessary to prevent such problems. These are very sophisticated engines and there is no credible evidence the engineers failed to design an effective oil separator. In fact, even vehicles going to markets that don't need to meet EPA emissions get the same oil separator and PCV.

 

[paris1]

MikeM.=the Grinch that stole Christmas...

 

[MikeM.]

MikeM.=the Grinch that stole Christmas...

HoHoHo! That depends on whether you are a glass half full or glass half empty kinda person...

I bring peace and joy to the 99.9% of CX-5 owners who have not fitted an oil catch can to their engines! The Grinch is the scary person at JBR racing products who has invented the nightmare that all of us with "unprotected" engines are on the road to crusty valve deposits and expensive repairs.

Be joyous and merry this holiday season and sleep peacefully, confident that you don't need a $180 accessory to save your engine from itself.

H! Ho! Ho!

 

[paris1]

HoHoHo! That depends on whether you are a glass half full or glass half empty kinda person...

I bring peace and joy to the 99.9% of CX-5 owners who have not fitted an oil catch can to their engines! The Grinch is the scary person at JBR racing products who has invented the nightmare that all of us with "unprotected" engines are on the road to crusty valve deposits and expensive repairs.

Be joyous and merry this holiday season and sleep peacefully, confident that you don't need a $180 accessory to save your engine from itself.

H! Ho! Ho!

Every forum I have ever been on, two things are guaranteed to come up eventually. Oil catch cans and the value of pumping an engine full of a solution like "Seafoam" periodically an order to produce billowing clouds of exhaust smoke. It always seems amazing to me that car manufacturers don't equip their vehicles with the former and don't recommend the latter in their maintenance schedules. This type of corporate negligence are just intolerable!

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

How can the present be considered "late" when you posted this on Christmas Eve? I thought Christmas was Dec. 25th?


In any case, that oil catch can is unnecessary. The advertising copy at the JBR website is hilarious! It says, "During everyday engine operation, blow-by gases, as well as oil vapor from the engines rotating assembly, pass through the PCV valve and are routed into the intake for the engine to burn off. Before ever making it into the cylinders, some of that oil mist and other contaminates adhere to the backside of the hot intake valves. Over time a thick crust forms significantly reducing performance and potentially leading to a costly cleaning or repair. This is especially a problem for the 2.0 and 2.5L motor because, there's no fuel (Direct Injection) passing over the valves to wash and keep them clean. This is why an OCC is a must have for the Mazda SkyActiv motor."

The reason this is complete BS, is because all Skyactiv G engines come with a very effective oil separator mounted to the upper engine block. How do we know the OEM oil separator is effective? Because EPA emissions standards are quite strict and any significant amount of oil that was not caught by the OEM oil separator would cause the engine to fail the emissions tests.

We also know the sales pitch above is snake oil because we would have seen a rash of problems with crusty, leaky exhaust valves and plummeting MPG figures as these engines age if an oil catch can was necessary to prevent such problems. These are very sophisticated engines and there is no credible evidence the engineers failed to design an effective oil separator. In fact, even vehicles going to markets that don't need to meet EPA emissions get the same oil separator and PCV.

Because it was ordered then, I haven't received it yet. Yes the very effective oil separator that lets enough oil vapor through to coat the inside of the intake manifold; not that you ever actually looked. And what the **** are you talking about oil not being caught by the separator failing emissions? One of the feature of the PCV is to recirculate blowby to be recombusted to reduce emissions. You just make generalizations without actually having examined how effective it actually is. You have a 2+ year old car with low miles; I drive my car way more often/miles than you do (my 13 had 55k traded, at 40k on the 15 so in 3+ years 85k miles) A catch can is not a new part and they are used on performance applications to reduce the blow by going through, from an NA street car like mine, to top fuel dragsters and everything in between. From the a Honda forum through a BMW forum you will find the same type of performance parts being used. Oil entering the intake lowers octane for one; when I am at WOT on 93 with the engine is advancing timing, I don't want my octane lowered when I wot shift because this causes timing to be pulled giving me a momentary power loss.

 

[dergibog]

Lol! (loser)
Some things change.
Some things stay the same.

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

Also the OEM oil separator isn't drainable, whatever falls out of suspension in it eventually end up back into the system. Presumably it's designed to remove a certain amount of blow by from suspension "at a time" (perhaps enough to comply with emissions).

 

[yugrus]

I'd be really interested to see how much stuff you'll be draining out of there, Chris. PCV system is the engine killer in 5.3L GM trucks. I have two stage catch can system that I drain quite a bit from every week. At least my intake valves get washed with fuel. It really concerns me with Mazda's SkyActiv, as it is GDI.

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

I'd be really interested to see how much stuff you'll be draining out of there, Chris. PCV system is the engine killer in 5.3L GM trucks. I have two stage catch can system that I drain quite a bit from every week. At least my intake valves get washed with fuel. It really concerns me with Mazda's SkyActiv, as it is GDI.

Disi motors with catch cans can pull a lot of material during their monthly/bi monthly drain

 

[MikeM.]

Because it was ordered then, I haven't received it yet. Yes the very effective oil separator that lets enough oil vapor through to coat the inside of the intake manifold; not that you ever actually looked. And what the **** are you talking about oil not being caught by the separator failing emissions? One of the feature of the PCV is to recirculate blowby to be recombusted to reduce emissions.

Chris, there are two different systems under discussion here:

1) Crankcase ventilation
2) Oil separator

The crankcase ventilation system reduces pollution by recycling crankcase gases back into the combustion process. This is a good thing except at full honk it might also send some of the crankcase oil back into the intake. This would increase emissions unacceptably if it were to occur (think black smoke from burning oil). Because very small amounts of oil being burnt would cause the vehicle to fail emissions, Mazda thoughtfully engineered a very effective oil separator into the crankcase ventilation system. So, in a stock engine, the oil catch can marketed by JBR is redundant.

Oil entering the intake lowers octane for one; when I am at WOT on 93 with the engine is advancing timing, I don't want my octane lowered when I wot shift because this causes timing to be pulled giving me a momentary power loss.

Your car is not stock, the valve timing, ignition timing and fueling have all been altered and this WILL affect the way it breathes. A stock engine won't see any benefits from this catch can but that is exactly who it's marketed to. I have no idea if your tune has messed up the gas flow enough to benefit or not, my original comments were aimed at the scary sounding marketing hype that all 2.0L and 2.5L Skyactiv engines need this product. That is not the case. When you start messing with valve timing, etc., all bets are off.

 

[yugrus]

I trust that Mazda's oil separator is very efficient, and I'm very interested how close is it to 100%. The amount of residue in Chris'es catch can will be a tell-tale.
Completely way off topic, but I'm working on the exhaust scavenging/forced vacuum system for crankcase gases evacuation for my Tahoe. This totally eliminates intake contamination. I will be experimenting with various types of venturi tubes, slashed 45 degree tubes, their position in the exhaust pipe, different vacuum pumps, etc.

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

Personally, my main interest in the catch can is maintaining octane during max performance, which isn't one of the selling points mentioned on the JBR (or corksport) website. "Your engine is tuned" is a poor excuse because I don't see anyone else on here posting what they find during routine/non routine maintenance, or what they find just digging around.

 

[MikeM.]

I trust that Mazda's oil separator is very efficient, and I'm very interested how close is it to 100%. The amount of residue in Chris'es catch can will be a tell-tale.

Whatever ends up in Chris's catch can will not tell the owner of a stock CX-5 anything because his engine is not stock.

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

Whatever ends up in Chris's catch can will not tell the owner of a stock CX-5 anything because his engine is not stock.

What do you have to back this statement other than the umption you pulled from your ass? It's a di motor and if any of the other are testament, it will collect (port injection too). If it doesn't then you have some sort of miracle engine and the OEM separator isn't needed either. Again, "it's not stock so it doesn't apply to stock owners" is just a blanket excuse. I can easily say just because one guy looked into his manifold and it wasn't oily doesn't mean it's the same for everyone. Just like my brake pads/rotors haven't worn at 30,000 mi (to include at least one mz3 owner on the m3r forum and mazda6club reports too) like a couple of users have reported even though I have larger wheels, a stiffer suspension , and drive more miles per week than most on here, and most likely drive and brake from a higher speed on a regular basis.

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

I trust that Mazda's oil separator is very efficient, and I'm very interested how close is it to 100%. The amount of residue in Chris'es catch can will be a tell-tale.
Completely way off topic, but I'm working on the exhaust scavenging/forced vacuum system for crankcase gases evacuation for my Tahoe. This totally eliminates intake contamination. I will be experimenting with various types of venturi tubes, slashed 45 degree tubes, their position in the exhaust pipe, different vacuum pumps, etc.

Not sure what you mean by 100%. As in 100% of blow by removed (no way)? The oem separator is not drainable, so whatever is pulled out of suspension is methodically introduced back into the system; how I'm haven't looked it up exactly. It has to be made to remove enough to meet emissions and not adversely affect the motor in most operation, and considering it's contained (and there is not manual suggestion about oil separator draining/cleaning/replacing) I doubt it would be designed to catch as much as possible. My guess it that it's not designed to catch large amounts, or collect the in such a way that they settle, but in a way that reduces the amount passed into the intake mani...

 

[yugrus]

At least Mazda has designed the separator into the motor, huge credit to the company.
I compare the inlet PCV hose on my truck to how oily it was prior to installing the catch cans, and I scratch my head. It is as dry as it could be, providing what goes through it and settles in catch cans. Still not 100%, and it will never be, I agree. This is why I'm planning on experimenting with plugging the inlet PCV and venting the crankcase through exhaust. No oil in intake anymore, and light oily coating of the exhaust internals. I'm sure that would be beneficial, as it would protect exhaust from rusting. Pipes rust from inside, for the most part.

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

At least Mazda has designed the separator into the motor, huge credit to the company.
I compare the inlet PCV hose on my truck to how oily it was prior to installing the catch cans, and I scratch my head. It is as dry as it could be, providing what goes through it and settles in catch cans. Still not 100%, and it will never be, I agree. This is why I'm planning on experimenting with plugging the inlet PCV and venting the crankcase through exhaust. No oil in intake anymore, and light oily coating of the exhaust internals. I'm sure that would be beneficial, as it would protect exhaust from rusting. Pipes rust from inside, for the most part.

I've read about many cases where the placement of the can and lines made the difference of whether it actually caught blow by or not. I was reading about it on DISI motors.

I just want my octane lol. Positive pressure is the best condition for blow by, and at wot is the only time pretty much I am making positive pressure.. meaning a wot high RPM shift is the best time to get blow by recirced into the intake manifold as rpm drops.. and keeps dropping because of the lower octane

 

[yugrus]

You want vaccuum in the crankcase at wot, about 10", according to many sources. The benefits are numerous. It just doesn't have to suck in all the seals...
The stock PCV gives you completely opposite. At wot there is very little vaccuum in the intake, so the blow-by gases almost force their way out of the crankcase. The intake vacuum is highest at idle, when it does nothing for the blow-by removal, not that there is a huge amount of it.
Many track cars vent to the atmosphere using electric or mechanical vacuum pumps that keep the crankcase vacuum at optimal level at any RPM. Very illegal for a street use though, and stinky too...