so , i decided to yank my PCV screen out of the lower intake,, disgusting!!!
needless to say it did not go back in. Its funny how much better the car sounds! and im sure it breaths better to.
no more shiznit smokish stuff puffin out the oil fill now,, amazing how some of this stupid stuff works aginst you.
I've opened them, removed the element, washed with carb or brake cleaner, and put back together...
I think a new one is ~$1.00 at the parts store. It makes a difference if the old one is clogged.
im sure they put a filter there for a reason but the other version that simply stuffed in the valve cover didnt have it,, so why should this,,
if you all think it needs to go back in, then ok. easy enough to clean
I would put a new one in.
My thought is this: Ford (or any company) makes its cars as cheap as it can so it makes the most money. There is a reason this thing is on the car, otherwise it wouldn't be.
You'll likely suck some oil out of the lifter valley without it...
yeah,,,,,your right, i should stuff it back in.
i was thinking how the other version never had a prefilter and it sat right on top of the valve cover, there's a splash guard for the pcv though.
JAY REMEMBER THE MSD UNIT. The one in the garbage. You might want to do the same with that PART. Been chucking them in the garbage for years. By the way it is not a FILTER!!!!
:hick::mullet::burnout:
intake sucks,
it sucks crank case vapor through a hose thats connected to the PCV
The pcv is in the crank case vapor system
the metal mesh is down stream of the pcv,,
and it looks like a filter,, but what its it then?
It's a vapor condenser for lack of a better term... What it does is collect oil vapors and condense them back to liquid where they drip back into the engine... Over time the vapors collect sort of like creosote in a chimney, blocking flow... Some engines WILL use oil if removed, I've always replaced/cleaned them...
The 5.8 Lightning intakes have a baffle over the opening below the PCV valve and don't use the strainer(vapor condenser)...
id rather have a baffle than this.
its still on my work bench, i may just clean it out. Problem is i feel like its just going to clog back up again and it is actually in a bitch of a spot to do preventative maint on.
with the intake off, it was tricky but i got in there with real long needle nose pliars to yank the whole assembly out.
i dono, it sure looks like something that i dont think i really want restricting suction.
btw tom, i just installed that 1/2'' spacer you sold me several years ago.
JAY Trash it in the circular file. Seems like we still do not know what it is fore??? Guess again !!!
:burnout:
I agree, they do prevent the oil from coming up into the hose going to the plenum. They are only a couple bucks at the store. IT'd buy a new one and put a new one back in. The intake manifold should have a baffle, mine broke off at some point when I changed the intake gaskets so I was getting oil sucked up the pcv valve. If you ever want to replace it again, screw a long screw into the unit, pull the unit out with needlenose pliers and install a new one. For the time, the mess, and aggravation to clean it, it's probably worth the couple bucks for a new one.
OK O smart one what's it for?
its all cleaned up,, just a bunch of mangled up brass smashed up into a round chamber,, why spend money to buy something that can either go in the round file cabinet or back in the car after its cleaned up.
if it were falling apart, thats a different story.
just speculation but will dig into the shop manual for a purpose description but,, i think its to catch things that would have eventually made it to the tail pipe and fail emissions.... ,, ie- a choke point but helps meet cafe rules. its the catalytic coverter of the crank case imho.
Nope guess again!!!
F it,, im hitting the shop manual books now,,,,,, brb
TurboCoupe50, (Tom)...So, If I have the full baffle from Ford on the bottom of my Cobra lower intake....would you think I need that screen or not? Just curious. I replaced mine not very long ago, but it makes me wonder.
I've got the big baffle on the GT40 lower in my car and I still run the screen. I'd rather not have the PCV system suck oil into the intake.
Apparently it isn't necessary with the full baffle, my '93 Lightning didn't have one(yep I've sold it), and neither did the one I picked up to use on a 408 swap in the Bird... Those lowers are a large(ahem wide) version of the GT40 & Cobra lowers...
shop manual calls it a
"Element, Crank Case Vent"
I've pulled a ton of those out and they are always clogged. Usually clean them with carb cleaner or get a new one. PCV is good for keeping the oil clean but does introduce crud to the intake. I guess a nice tight motor with little blow-by would be OK without the baffle, but I always run with one. It catches drops of liquid. I think it would just stop up downstream in the hose or manifold nipple without it. To test for stopped up PCV, remove vent hose at the oil filler cap and place your thumb tightly over the nipple. Rev the motor a couple of times, let it return to idle, and when you remove your thumb it should "gasp" in some air showing a vacuum in the crankcase. If not, the filter is probably the problem. By the way, if this thing stops up water will condense in the oil and collect in the cam valley as a grey creamy goo.
i wonder if one of those fuel filters for like a riding mower would substitute in place of this part so it could be installed between the intake and pcv.
most of em are clear and you can "see" when it needs changed. just thinking........?
It is not a filter boys and girls!!!!!!
what is it?
I was just thinking the same thing, then I read your post.
I think it would let the oil vapors condense in it, instead of the intake. I dunno know though??
This is the same thing, but expensive: http://www.latemodelrestoration.com/item/ST-5553710/1979-04-Mustang-Oil-Seperator-Kit
Tom what the hell is it, not Tom Bryant, Tom Renzo
well, the purpose of this element has been revealed......... but prepare yourselves for a surprise. I had a gut feeling the engineers would not spend the money on something like this if a far more inexpensive solution was readily available. Think about it for a moment,,,,,
-they engineered a larger hole in the lower intake
-they intentionally engineered a step down adaptor to allow for this "element"
-they intentionally engineered the hole which the element sits in to have a defined depth such that it met flush with the bottom of the upper grommet and coupled the PCV valve.
-they also intentionally designed a metal round holder to contain a bunch of windings of what appears to be brass in the range of approx 20awg wire mesh.
sorry, stupid stuff bugs me sometimes but to my relief, the only thing that does really makes sense is its a FLAME ARRESTOR!!!!
GOOD CALL JAY 100% That was an easy one as i used to do a lot of marine engines and Flame traps are everywhere. As the matter of fact the air cleaners on boats are engineered as flame traps also. They are mandatory. Basically on a back fire the engineers did not want a blast back in the oil system if the PC valve did not seal properly. I spent months finding out what was when i saw it many years ago.
STORY
Years ago my dad told me to check the oil in a customers Y block 57 ford engine. He asked me to test the tip of the dip stick with a match. He explained to me he thought the needle and seat was sticking on the carb and diluting the oil. So i did and the end of the dip stick lit up with a match. I was so proud i found this and yelled over to POP. With that i was putting the dip stick back in the engine
BOOM the both valve covers blew of the engine like a bom. What the hell did i DO???? I hit the Positive battery cable with the dip stick when it was almost all the way down in the engine. Those Y blocks were held on with 2 studs and the covers blew off. Embarrassed shocked and soiled my pants POP laughed his butt off. You see he told me he did the exact thinf many years ago. The 57 ford had the battery right next to the dip stick and the positive cable was right in line with the sticks handle. TRUE STORY.
Well I ain't believing the flame arrestor story(even if similar is used in other applications), if that was true why was it eliminated on the Lightnings that have the same style intake???
hmm,, probably after years of on the road tests with it installed, someone concluded it would reduce power if installed on a Lightning,, just speculating. YOu's know better than i would about this,, and your description makes sense as well. i can see how useful this would be if there were a backfire in the lower intake.
I don't see positive pressure(backfire) in the intake as a issue, the PCV valve is a one way device...
Oh yeah the '57 Ford mentioned, did not even have a PCV system, wasn't even invented till the early '60s when they became required in Cal... Many 49 States used a road draft tube into at least '64 as I had a '64 Galaxie 500 that had the tube hanging under the vehicle...
thats a good point,
btw, we to have been blessed with a cyclone but its not mine, close enough though and if the wind is blowing in my favor, perhaps i will have it one day.
How many turbo charged and supercharged aplications have a pcv valve, instead of a seperator?
The pcv valve is designed to pull air into the crank to keep the piston rings from fluttering. If the engine is not properly sealed, then air leaks into the crankcase pressurizing it. On a high mile engine with worn rings, the pcv valve probably does next to nothing. One reason why a lot of guys run a breather on the valve covers, rendering the pcv useless. This issue is even worsse on turbo and supercharged cars for obvious reasons.
Ever wonder why tracks require a locking oil dipstick?
Who the hell said it had a PCV VALVE. 50 Do you actually think i did not know older engines have a road draft tube!!!! That is really insulting!! What i said was i hit the batterys Positive side of the cable with the dipstick. It sent a spark down in to the engine and ignited the crankcase fumes and blew the covers off. That is a FLAME TRAP. If it is a filter what does it FILTER!!! So let me get this straight 50!! Why do people change the PCV VALVE. here is why the check valve as you say is true. It gets dirty and if the engine for some reason backfires the flame trap is their for exactly that. Basically i knew i should not have answered this question because the push back boggles my imagination. Call it what you want and basically i dont care. But think about the Lightning and why it does not need one. THEIR IS A BIG DIFFERENCE. Thank you and i appreciate you schooling me on road draft tubes. I cleaned more of them as a kid than i would like t talk about. Those chevy tin cans were a BITCH and the Y block valley cover was another pain in the A$$ when i was young. Thank You So Much!!
Not to get crazy here but how does a PCV VALVE keep ring from fluttering??? Never heard that one before!!!! Explain Please???
Second a PCV does plenty on a car that has worn rings. It sucks in all that blow by. All you have to do is remove a PCV valve from a car with bad rings and see the CO numbers tank while doing an emission test. All my turbo cars run a PCV VALVE STACKS?? I am not getting your post one bit and the ring statement is beyond my knowledge of piston rings and flutter!!!
Off hand the Turbo coupe in fact has a seperator and a PCV VALVE. Closed crankcase ventilation is an emission device and has to be firmly in place. Just saying. Please correct me if i am wrong!!
Piston ring flutter remedies
Avoid radial collapse by choosing another running face geometry and/or another radial pressure distribution
Retard pressure build-up under the top ring e.g. by using a ring in the 2nd groove that seals less effectively
Increase the volume under the ring
Piston groove inclination
Decrease the inertia forces
Adjust the axial clearance
Your welcome, I like to help out anytime I can...
BTW if you're insulted I don't really care...
Merry Christmas...
Right Thought so.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c4-forced-induction-nitrous/1450082-exhaust-crankcase-evacuation-it-works.html
Here you go tom, has a bowtie attached and everything, so you might believe it. You might want to pay particular attention to where it says it helps with oil consumption and blow by while increasing piston ring seal. Can't imagine why ford would go through all the effort to include it from the factory if it didn't work.
A stock pcv system does esentially nothing when the engine in under load, that's why you see stupid things like crankcase evacuation pumps, and breathers for the valve covers. This si aalso why a lot of guys run catch cans along with a breather, eliminating the pcv system. I personally like the idea of a header evacuation kit over adding an electric pump, like the 03-04 cobras have.
Stacks i know all of this i set up engines with pumps all the time. What does it have to do with RING FLUTTER. And i know if their is no vacuum at WOT the crankcase is not evacuated. But that is why i use 2 PCV valves on Fords. Everyone knows that a catch can is good. But 99% of all engines handle PCV with a simple PCV system. If you want to see a pump system i will post one from my Firebird. lets get real here. So what is your point. If you need a catch can So be it. Engines have blow by that is a given. Their is no engine on this planet that does not. Now explain the ring flutter. Because i know something about rings. I THINK??? Just saying!!
Stacks years ago i used to use header scavenging for evacuation. Now we use pumps. I know what you are talking about but it is not RING FLUTTER. When pressure builds in the crankcase it floods the rings with 2 much oil. I found this out years ago when i installed Honda squatters in my 2.3 TC engine. To much oil for the rings to handle. To much of a good thing can cause other issues. Years back i used to drill the top of the pistons vertically down to the back of the ring land o the upper ring set. This pushed the top ring against the walls. It cant be dun successfully on a street car because the holes carbon up. Also many engine builders gap the second ring tighter than the top. That is totally wrong. The second ring should have a bigger gap. Not to get to technical here . Crankcase vacuum or pulsator evacuation is fine in high revving engines. On the street a 2 PCV system on the SBF is totally adequate as far as i am concerned and i have tested this. But you said ring flutter. That is incorrect. With that i have spent endless hours behind the dyno for many years and i do not shoot from the hip. With that thanks and have a good night. Lets not go their with the BOW TIE. People do not want to hear that. Even though i am a chevy guy as well as ford. Thanks
Right tom, okay you win. We all bow down the your greatness. I guess the best I'll ever get out of you is a half agreement with you throwing your experiance in my face followed by a so what. Even if you do agree with me.
I wish I had absolutely nothing better to do then try to piss on people all day everyday, just to try to start an argument.
i always thought the closer to zero gap you had the better, compression wise. thats why i brought up gapless rings a while back and was very surprised at all the people here who said they are not such a great thing.
i always thought that if you went with a ring kit youd wanna get a little over and file them and feeler guage them at the top, middle and bottom,, of course thats after the the cylinders have been bored or freshened up.
A looser ring on the bottom is something new to me,, sounds like i better not touch a motor ever again till i start over from day one.
http://www.moparchat.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-60049.html
Good write up on gapless rings.
JAY
Ring gaps are not that critical as some might think. Reason being most of the compression rings are deep in the ring lands. It leaves very little open area if you look at it it's area. The second ring is an oil control ring as well as a compression ring. The oil ring is a ser ring in essence. It ses the oil clean of the walls and transfers it to the open area between the expander and the second se on the oil sets. So years ago i found out that the second ring gap had to be at least the same and or bigger than the top ring. This removed pressure build up behind the ring up to the first ring. Years back it was always the opposite. The second ring always was much tighter in gap as we believed it ran cooler and it did. The second ring would not butt because it ran cooler. But it would not relieve the pressure between the second and top ring. So i startes opening up the gaps on the second ring. This in turn made more HP and it is now industry standard. See how things change. But i have tested Gap less rings and by now you know i worked with sealed power engineers quite a bit in the old days. So gap less rings came along. I do not like them one bit. They sound good but in essence they are counter productive. They make higher vacuum pressures and tend to suck more oil past the other 2 ring sets. We found this out with our blower and turbo motors. Actually they are not gap less. They have a double ring set in the upper compression ring 180* apart. Funny years ago my dad and myself used to machine the ring lands when they were worn out and install a buffer ring under the effected ring. basically making a gap less ring. This was common practice in the old days.
Hay stacks i am not trying to pound you. I thought about it last night and maybe you just dont explain things correctly. Please dont think i am trying to mess with you. Sometimes i have to read you several time to decipher what you might be talking about. And as far as experience i have a lot. I am OLD. This is what i have been doing all my life. I never worked in any other field. I also have a masters in mechanical engineering. You know an engineering educated know it all. If i get out of line i truly mean no harm. And be free to let me know. Dont take my bs fire right back. Thanks and have a happy holiday.
Staks here is an example of how things change. I had a bad hernia years ago at my belly button. The doctor operated and i was out of commission for 8 weeks. Last year i had a double hernia. The doctor put 3 little holes in my GUT and installed Kevlar mesh. 4 Hours after the operation i walked out and went home. 3 days later i went to work to do just paper work. And 2 weeks later i was doing small jobs. Also no stitches they glued the holes SHUT. Technology is it so GRAND!!! Things change. Once again sorry if i pissed you off. I have actually learned a few things from your posts.
Tom, thanks. That post means a lot. I have learned quite a few things from you as well, emotions and meaning are commonly lost through text.
I'm not trying to talk or piss anyone off either. Like I've said before, if we had some tech talk in person, I think we'd end up sharing a 12 pack or something. I like the way you give good advice and share your knowledge.