• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

Oil catch tank

Go For it,

I fitted one to my car, and after i cleaned all the inlet manifold and turbo pipes, they stayed pretty clean!

I have taken it off at the moment, because the one I had started leaking.

After about 2 years of having it on the car it was about half full, plus whatever had leaked out!

My car does breathe heavy though, you can still see an oilly haze if stopped with the headlights on! depends where you put the exit pipe.
 
Don't do it, oil is good for the valve seats and guides.
 
Does it actually get to the valve seats?

When I replaced my fuel pipes i had to take the inlet manifold off, and it was full of crud and oily grease! same with the over engine turbo pipe.

I thought the breather being vented into the air intake, would (on my c250 td) gum up the turbo, make smoke and generally just make a mess inside all the air pipes.

As i said, i have removed it and put it back to how it was at the moment, if its potentially a bad thing, i wont put it back on.

I thought it was the same sort of thing as the EGR, just a way to get less emmissions!
But actually cause more trouble!
 
After relocating my MAF yesterday, my inlet system is swimming in oil ( almost! ).

Any other thoughts on a catch tank to replace the breather system on a petrol car ?

Cheers

Whitey
 
You can make one that is inexpensive...
Just use a air compressor oil/water separator...
A small unit is about 5 sterling.
You probably have to fabricate a mounting bracket.
Some hose,fittings, hose clamps and you're done.
I did this DIY on my M103 twin turbo and yet to see any oil in the bowl.
 
Last edited:
I did this DIY on my M103 twin turbo and yet to see any oil in the bowl.

Possibly because it has enough back pressure to stop the vapour breathing through it or the initial filter is blocked, or because it doesn't have positive vacuum it just isn't breathing via the breather at all.

I really can't see the point of a catch tank...oil passing through the intake is good for lubricating moving components.
 
The breather system lowers crankcase pressure, which can prevent leaks over time.

Also the suction generated helps to stabalise the oil inside the engine as you don't have as much positive pressure in there.

If the engine breathing affects performance, then your engine is breathing heavy enough to be class as in need of a rebuild anyway.

Dave!
 
For the last 20k miles my C230k has been venting into a lucozade sport bottle (orange flavour if it helps).

Doing 700 miles a week in the car, RR'd at 226bhp and 242lbft, has 182k on the original engine, pretty much no oil consumption, zero smoke from the exhaust, clean MAF and boost pipes (cleaned them out before I did it as the stock system coats everything in ****e), zero fumes inside the car, on track a couple of times a month where it spends most the time on or near the rev limiter...

MF4M2821.jpg


...and its fine.

99% of the contents of the catch tank is dirty water which is mostly condensation from the engine, and I just empty it every coupla weeks.

Venting back to your inlet is purely an emissions thing, needed by law when a cars new, but not needed for an MOT in the UK at least (situation very different abroad), and depending how its set up and depending how hard your car breaths (condition and what oil you use plays the part there a lot) its useful to prevent any fumes getting into the interior.

On my car at least I considered most the stock setup to be fine, quite good even with a decent drain back to the sump etc, APART from anywhere where it joins to the air inlet system of the engine, that had to be re routed elsewhere.

Never had a single tuned car I didnt do this to, and always a benefit. Granted I usually use something prettier than a lucozade bottle, but hey.
 
What benefit?

No oil gunk filled boost pipes, sensors, intercoolers, and turbos. Reducing compressor efficiency, reducing flow, reducing cooling, lowering the det threshold, and messing up sensor readings.
No crankcase pressure buildups from setups more concerned with goverment regulations on car emissions setups than performance of an engine.
 
No oil gunk filled boost pipes, sensors, intercoolers, and turbos. Reducing compressor efficiency, reducing flow, reducing cooling, lowering the det threshold, and messing up sensor readings.
No crankcase pressure buildups from setups more concerned with goverment regulations on car emissions setups than performance of an engine.

I thought I'd read it all on here, but seemingly not so...
All you are doing is reducing the vacuum scavenging of the engine and reducing valve lubrication.
 
Last edited:
I thought I'd read it all on here, but seemingly not so...
All you are doing is reducing the vacuum scavenging of the engine and reducing valve lubrication.

Lol.

I dont know much about diesels, and no idea if you do either, but for petrol engines, thats properly funny, especially the valve lubrication thing which is just daft- You DO realise why fuels consist of some of the things they do, dont you?!

Infact a little basica google research finds a lot of diesel engines with a VTA setup as standard, and a lot more where its done as an upgrade for exactly the reasons I say I do on petrols Ive played with. And on lot bigger spec things than what we are talking about.

Vac is a good thing as a bonus, but vent to atmo setups are far better than stock setups, and 99% of tuned engines, from road to WRC to drag to whatever, run with no vac and no issues.

Feel free to preach to people who have been there and done it that what they know works doesnt (seems to be one of the first upgrades on a Ford Powerstroke engine vehicles to stop oil gunking everything up- so thats about 5 million diesel owners and a huge engine manufacturer- International, who built the engine as standard with VTA oil breather, but Ford changed it to go back to the intake for the aformentioned emissions reasons to tell them they are wrong), but I sense this turning into another of 'those' threads, so ill leave you to your beliefs.
 
Last edited:
Possibly because it has enough back pressure to stop the vapour breathing through it or the initial filter is blocked, or because it doesn't have positive vacuum it just isn't breathing via the breather at all.

I really can't see the point of a catch tank...oil passing through the intake is good for lubricating moving components.

Educate me...
Where does the oil enter the intake...before or after the air filter?

You claim it oils the valves but the "oil" from the engine thru the breather system only ends up on the surface of the air filter in many cars.

Purely emssions requirement, much like an EGR,naught to do with lubrication as the engine provides for lubrication...adding oil to the intake air can cause carbon deposit on the valves...
Valve stems need to be lubricated ,but you have valve stem seals that prevent oil from entering the combustion area...
What moving components need to and can be lubricated in the intake air stream ????
 
Last edited:
DSC00827.jpg


The standard oil catch system (on my car at least) vents to the air box after the filter - there is also a path that goes directly into the inlet manifold.

I'm going to get a cheap catch tank to see what it catches - if anything, it can't hurt.

Chris
 
No oil gunk filled boost pipes, sensors, intercoolers, and turbos. Reducing compressor efficiency, reducing flow, reducing cooling, lowering the det threshold, and messing up sensor readings.
No crankcase pressure buildups from setups more concerned with goverment regulations on car emissions setups than performance of an engine.

Excellent explanation...fully concur.
You want to keep your intake air as clean, and cool as possible.
Cars ran without PCV for years pre emissions standards. :thumb:
 
Excellent explanation...fully concur.
You want to keep your intake air as clean, and cool as possible.
Cars ran without PCV for years pre emissions standards. :thumb:

And coked the valves up. Coking is a result of spraying the petrol onto the back of the valve to cause evaporation, not oil vapour.

Can you provide proper analysis data to show that removal of breather fumes improves performance or longevity?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom