Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are features you can't use and images you can't see. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: Join our community! |
| Pros & Cons of getting rid of PCV system.....; By just venting blow by gas into the air. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 8 2014, 11:39 PM (3,675 Views) | |
| snowfish | Nov 12 2014, 10:53 AM Post #46 |
|
Basic GearHead
![]()
|
Yes! ![]() "The nature of a vacuum pump is to remove air, blow-by gases, and other contaminants from the crankcase of an engine. The vacuum pump's ability to remove the air in the crankcase results in overall engine vacuum. Vacuum will increase horsepower by allowing the use of low-tension compression and oil rings. The use of these pumps reduces frictional horsepower losses, blow-by, intake charge contamination and aids in detonation prevention. Moroso's "purpose built" racing pumps offer all these advantages and more. Whether you have a normally aspirated small block or a nitrous equipped pro-mod, one of Moroso's vacuum pumps with all the needed accessories has you covered." http://www.jegs.com/p/Moroso/Moroso-Racing-Vacuum-Pumps-Accessories/745524/10002/-1?itemPerPage=90&pno=1 There is no monetary reason, that you can't remove crankcase gases, without having to recirculate and burn them.
|
![]() |
|
| Rondawg | Nov 12 2014, 11:46 AM Post #47 |
![]()
|
500 bucks....excellent deal! I thint I will order 2 of em, hook em up back to back for extra scavenging effect! |
![]() |
|
| vr4 | Nov 12 2014, 12:23 PM Post #48 |
![]()
|
This. Don't try to out engineer the engineers. If there was a better way within reason they would have done it. |
![]() |
|
| myredvert | Nov 12 2014, 01:38 PM Post #49 |
|
myredvert
![]()
|
Why are you trying to "mod" something that was designed by actual engineers in order to integrate with the entire engine system as a whole in a very specific way, and you say you "don't have a problem with?" I'm confused. The G10 is quite the work of engineering and the fact that it was designed and tested by actual professional engineers is not a point that should be trivialized or ignored. To do so by believing you can make a particular system "better" usually indicates shows a lack of understanding of and respect for the engineering involved in the first place. While not perfect, it sure gets a lot out of a little, but to do so at it's intended and designed capability everything has to work (and subsequently repaired/rebuilt) as it was designed to be - and not with any one puzzle piece missing or altered contrary to the design as specified in the FSM. Why the need to start "fixing" something that isn't even broken to begin with, and maybe is not working optimally simply because we didn't fix or rebuild something else properly/perfectly in the first place? As perfesser tried to explain, your beliefs that the pcv system itself causes some kind of actual negative operational issue is based on nothing more than personal assumptions that quickly led to unsupported conclusions that also rely on a premise that the design was somehow flawed in the first place. You say your rebuild is "fresh," but the real question is - "how precise was the work that was "feshly" completed?" Was it a "to FSM spec" rebuild, or was it done in a way to save some money and/or time by cutting some common corners on FSM measurements, specs, and/or procedures? Or maybe the break in process was too gentle and didn't adequately seat or wear in the rings and cylinder machining and you still have some unintended oil consumption? If the rebuild was done properly, then it is what it is and in most cases it's unlikely we can make anything "better" by altering the systems in a way the engineers didn't intend for them to be. And if the rebuild wasn't done completely to FSM spec, then then a little less than perfect operation - oil consumption, power, fuel economy, etc., here and there should be expected. It's a trade off, and you can't expect one aspect of the engine operation to be perfect if the performance of other systems or components is already compromised to some extent. Use quality gas, use the "Old Man" method of putting a little MMO in the fuel to keep things a little cleaner ( ), do an intake cleaning with the solvent of your choice now and then if it is still getting buildup in the intake system, and live with what you have. But don't screw with engineered systems believing it will somehow "fix" something you yourself say you don't even have a problem with.If the overall performance still isn't acceptable to you, (and I'm not assuming how correctly your rebuild work was or was not performed), but IF you cut corners, consider rebuilding the engine as the engineers who designed it in the first place intended for it to be rebuilt in order to achieve and maintain "factory" performance. Oh yeah, and at the risk of being accused by the immorality police of being the morality police, I believe altering a factory installed emissions system is not legal. Not that it matters to most here, and even to myself that much, as in the past I have altered emissions and/or exhaust systems to squeeze a few more months out of a dying car that wasn't worth the cost of an exhaust system or other major repairs, but it's a fact that should be given it's due consideration before being dismissed. If everything else you have done to your car was done perfectly according to the engineered specs and you are simply bored by everything being that correct and simply have an irresistible need to f--- with your car by messing with the design engineering with no equivalent engineering knowledge and scientific testing to support such a modification, and - then go for it! That's certainly an understandable hobby, but convincing yourself something is "wrong" in order to justify making something "better" seems like a frustrating approach. Then ask the engineers who designed it originally. Only they know the design choices and compromises they made, and how modifying any one part of the system would/should affect it. Actually, first ask them if the amount of such recirculated gasses resulting from a properly rebuilt engine is even a real issue in the first place. Spoken like a true engineer. What the HECK do you guys know that allows you to professionally engineer and test a system that any of us couldn't come up with a 'better way" on our own with no formal engineering education or experience? Look at all the 50+ mpg cars that are inexpensive to buy and last 20+ years and meet Federal emissions and safety standards that us DIYers design and build every day.
|
![]() |
|
| Rondawg | Nov 12 2014, 01:46 PM Post #50 |
![]()
|
I'm glad our ancient ancestors did not share this sentiment....we would still be eating raw meat and sleeping in caves. |
![]() |
|
| vr4 | Nov 12 2014, 03:46 PM Post #51 |
![]()
|
Doesn't even relate to the argument at hand. Good luck with your draft tube. |
![]() |
|
| myredvert | Nov 12 2014, 03:47 PM Post #52 |
|
myredvert
![]()
|
I'm pretty sure that if our ancestors did not share this sentiment and develop and appreciation for what is actually involved in engineering/science and make the effort to become educated and develop experience in it, yes we may be now cooking our meat over an open fire, but I'm pretty sure we also wouldn't be driving these cars with these systems in the first place to have the opportunity to "determine" there are "problems" that the engineers who designed them apparently failed to recognize or appreciate, let alone get the opportunity to get online and talk with people all over the world in an instant about all of our revolutionary, "better engineering solutions through internet forum discussions" either... Quite the paradox I think... |
![]() |
|
| Rondawg | Nov 12 2014, 06:41 PM Post #53 |
![]()
|
I think this forum and others like it are perfect places to share info, learn from each other,try different things and often improve on the sacred engineers original design. A few things that come to mind that I have read in here are changing resistors to outsmart ecu's for cold starts, aerodynamic improvements, suspension upgrades, lights, cams, heads, etc etc. What engineers wanted or had to do in order to stick to gvt regulations, budget restraints, or technology of the or day can often be improved upon especially in regards to specific owners wants or needs.
Edited by Rondawg, Nov 12 2014, 07:23 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Greywolf | Nov 12 2014, 08:36 PM Post #54 |
|
Mostly Harmless
![]()
|
Odd... Fresh meat cooked on a stick over an open fire sounds downright mouth watering. But you know what? It isn't the engineers that usually cause overcomplex non-problem solving anti solutions. It's the big ideas politicians often have, like the federally mandated 55 mile an hour speed limit, and mister Obamas idea that we should throw away all our non-toxic light bulbs and replace them with mercury filled flourescent tubes. A real DIY idea might be to retro fit an air injection reaction pump, and set it up to pull vapor out of the block, instead of inject air into the exhaust manifold... I'm sure the brackets exist, and the pulleys. But even the moroso vacuum pump has a price in terms of power used to drive it, PCV works with what is already there. Edited by Greywolf, Nov 12 2014, 08:38 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Metromightymouse | Nov 13 2014, 06:03 AM Post #55 |
|
Powdercoat Wizard
![]()
|
Maybe a summary is in order... Several people, generally respected for their automotive knowledge, have suggested that there are benefits to using the PCV system as designed... Rondawg has stood firmly on the belief that burning any additional oil in the combustion chamber, along with any other crankcase vapors, is bad... Round and round... I think it's time for Nike.. Just Do It. |
![]() |
|
| Woodie | Nov 13 2014, 06:55 AM Post #56 |
![]()
|
May want to check out this post before performing this "improvement". http://geometroforum.com/single/?p=953672&t=4770979 |
![]() |
|
| Rondawg | Nov 13 2014, 10:20 AM Post #57 |
![]()
|
Excellent Summary! |
![]() |
|
| Rondawg | Nov 13 2014, 10:29 AM Post #58 |
![]()
|
Thanks a bunch for that link! It's exactly the kind of info I was looking for when I started this thread. Not a theoretical debate on the thermodynamics of how much oil you can safely pump thru your intake. I replied to that post you linked. Hopefully he replies with some real world hands on info. Maybe he even can supply some dyno run data to validate his findings
|
![]() |
|
| Rondawg | Nov 13 2014, 11:22 PM Post #59 |
![]()
|
Some additional posts in this thread if you are interested. http://geometroforum.com/topic/4770979/204/#new |
![]() |
|
| Metromightymouse | Nov 14 2014, 06:46 AM Post #60 |
|
Powdercoat Wizard
![]()
|
http://geometroforum.com/single/?p=378329&t=3244821
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Intake and Exhaust Systems · Next Topic » |


Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.







7:57 PM Jul 10