I'm using a Mann ProVent, atmospheric exhaust. It has oil drainback, so it separates oil vapor and dumps the liquid back to the pan. I rarely add any oil between changes.





I machined a simple straight through fitting for the PCV valve so I just have two straight vents to the ProVent.

 

Very cool setup thepoi! I didn't realize Mann made such a nice oem solution, or I'd have probaby gone that route.

I'll have to give serious consideration to just plumbing the moroso catch can to drain back to the pan. That might be the easier/smarter solution at this point since I have a canton pan, and can just use a 1/2" npt -> 1/2" barb fitting on the pan, and change the fitting on the bottom of the catch can and run the drain to the pan.

 

I've already talked to Jeff at Canton, and Lake Speed at Joe Gibbs Racing, and they both advised that you definitely do not want to plumb a catch can back into your oil pan. The oil and stuff that comes out of the catch can is nasty stuff. And full of hydrocarbons and other pollutants. That stuff you don't want going back into your engine at all.

 

I've debated this as well, but it's worth remembering that the stuff that went into the catch can came FROM the engine/crankcase. The "problem" I think is that the catch can runs significantly cooler than the engine, which allows the water vapor to condense into liquid, which is what people see (the milky/yellowy crud is oil/water mixture). There is some amount of water in the oil, it just happens to accumulate in the catch can. If you drain it back to the pan, it'll burn off/evaporate like it should.

Ideally I completely agree that you don't want to drain the crankcase vapors back to the pan, but in reality I wonder to what extent the difference between draining vs non-draining really makes. On my previous car I had a catch can that drained back to the engine, and it ran fine. Many OEMs drain back to the pan.

 

The pcv IS an emissions device. BUT it also creates positive crank case pressure. Without it, imo, you'll wear your piston rings faster. as well as lose some efficiency. So imo, it is important.

Next, by drilling more holes, we are doing what? INCREASING surface area for oil to exit, but every exit is also an entrance so you're really only making it more probable that you'll puff smoke. Plenty of people have been down that road to no avail.

REsuing the stuff that collects in your catch can is a big no no. That stuff is straight up gunk. Has a high fuel content. basically you put that back in your motor, you're pouring sludge in while destroying the lubricity of the oil.

Not having it connected to the intake manifold will not create positive crank case pressure. it'll leave it at ambient. thus promoting sludge.

Not all catchcans are created equal. I run two moroso baffled catchcans designed for a 2015 mustang gt 5.0

A catch can also needs to be a certain size for a motor. Too big is ok, too small doesnt do squat.

It also needs to be mounted lower than the vc for it to be effective.

this is my setup. but the real magic is inside the vc.

 

also, just to throw gas on the fire. what are your thoughts on the J's t-rev?

http://www.j-sracingusa.com/jsusa/in...S-S1&xKEYWORD=

it has "Better acceleration feeling"

 

I saw it when they were at Buttonwillow. In theory, maybe it makes sense, but, it's sort of falls into the category of" how much money can I waste on a $12000 car?"

 

This is a much debated topic, but I've seen many cars run w/o negative pressure on the crankcase and the engines run well and last a VERY long time. If it's an improvement, it's infinitesimally small imo, and practically negligible.

The "problem" it's believed is that oil gets trapped on top of the baffle and has no way to drain. Drilling holes is simply allowing that oil to drain, rather than pushed towards the pcv port, and blown out the port. You said "plenty of people have been down that road," but there only appear to be a few s2k's that I know of that've done this.

I'm not saying it's ideal, but it's not necessarily horrible either. When I drained mine it looked like oil. Pure oil? Did it have some crap in it? I'm sure, but that's why we all change our oil periodically..

I think you mean negative crankcase pressure, but I get your point. Like I said, I've seen many cars run w/o negative pressure on the crankcase and run just fine. The tradeoff is gumming up your intake/ports vs. no negative crankcase pressure. I prefer the latter. Personally, I haven't decided what I'm going to do yet. Removing and modifying the baffle though seems like a good idea, maybe I'll stick to my original plan.

 

You don't need the PCV, but you do need the larger breather port toward the front of the head. Look at the diameter of the pcv itself in your hand and then explain to me how it 'vents' enough pressure compared to the front breather. PCV is emissions ONLY. Front breather vents pressure

 

Front port is a way for fresh filtered air to enter the motor.
PCV is under a vacuum by the manifold which assists greatly in exhausting moisture, fuel and whatever else that might be a vapor.