2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992) 1986-1992 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections.

Those of you with catch cans and full emissions delete.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 1, 2010 | 11:31 PM
  #1  
NoPistons!'s Avatar
Thread Starter
Tango Down
Tenured Member 05 Years
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,895
Likes: 3
From: SC/NC
Those of you with catch cans and full emissions delete.

Are you running ventless using vac to draw vapors into the can or useing a vented can that just accumulates via pressure from wherever?

I think this car being a rotary would benefit from having all those oil vapors and blowby stuffs being sucked back into the engine.

Thoughts?
Reply
Old May 2, 2010 | 10:04 AM
  #2  
12AllWays's Avatar
It means 12A all ways^
Tenured Member 10 Years
iTrader: (20)
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
From: Northern IN
I am using a vented can that accumulates moisture/oil over time...
Reply
Old May 2, 2010 | 12:50 PM
  #3  
arghx's Avatar
rotorhead
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 16,205
Likes: 461
From: cold
vented is much more common. it really doesn't matter much either way for most applications. The vapors mostly accumulate under high load, where there is sufficient crankcase pressure to force them out anyway. Mazda didn't even run PCV valves on all 95 and later Rx-7's.

I run mine vented, with a hose coming from the middle iron and from the oil filler. the PCV valve has been eliminated.
Reply
Old May 6, 2010 | 02:28 AM
  #4  
NoPistons!'s Avatar
Thread Starter
Tango Down
Tenured Member 05 Years
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,895
Likes: 3
From: SC/NC
That answers it. I suppose i could t everything else i need vented off of one line. Evap and i think there's one more thing i'm missing but thank you.

Yeah, my pvc valve is sitting in one of the many overflowing boxes of "parts i dont need" from my fc. I should weight them all one day and see how much i saved!


I suppose i will run non-vented/vac pull if it really doesn't matter. I'm n/a right now. I'm assuming boost pressure on a vac based setup isn't all that productive? Logically it makes sense to run vented with boost.
Reply
Old May 6, 2010 | 09:04 AM
  #5  
arghx's Avatar
rotorhead
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 16,205
Likes: 461
From: cold
I'm assuming boost pressure on a vac based setup isn't all that productive? Logically it makes sense to run vented with boost.
I'm not sure what kind of plumbing you are describing, but on a day-to-day basis there are a lot of ways to handle crankcase ventilation. Most of them will get the job done in most applications. Just don't mistakenly cap off the breather ports on the engine. Then you will blow out your dipstick. You should see how many V8s run only small breather filters on the valve cover for crankcase ventilation. on a turbo car you usually need a catch can (unless you are recirculating the blowby like stock) because they tend to produce more vapors/oil and you don't want it making a mess in your engine bay.
Reply
Old May 6, 2010 | 09:46 AM
  #6  
Aaron Cake's Avatar
Engine, Not Motor
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 29,798
Likes: 128
From: London, Ontario, Canada
My system is set up such that when the crankcase is under pressure (engine is under boost) it blows into the catch can. Then when the manifold is under vacuum, the manifold draws through the catch can, through the lower middle iron nipple, the out of the filler neck nipple into the intake.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
trickster
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
25
Jul 1, 2023 04:40 PM
Blastfastrotary
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
2
Aug 21, 2015 07:05 PM
Machupicchu
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
8
Aug 17, 2015 08:27 PM
Turblown
Single Turbo RX-7's
0
Aug 14, 2015 04:48 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:51 AM.