[Nsxmatt]

Originally Posted by Whocares05050

I agree. Great motor though.

Oh motor was bulletproof. Lots of big power cars on stock blocks.

[Whocares05050]

Originally Posted by Nsxmatt

Oh motor was bulletproof. Lots of big power cars on stock blocks.

The most I made on a stock block was 600WHP only because the high pressure fuel pump couldnt be upgraded. But my little 135i flew lol

[DaveC113]

It looks like C&D's Corvette GS gained power over their 40k mile long term test.

Retested with 40,000 miles on the clock, the Grand Sport was quicker to 100 mph and 140 mph, and it produced an identical quarter-mile time while going just a bit faster. It was also quicker in the rolling-start and top-gear acceleration tests, leading us to the conclusion that the LT1 picked up a few horses along the road to 40K.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...rt-reliability


This reinforces my decision to NOT use a catch can and make sure I operate the car the way it was meant to be driven in order to minimize intake valve deposits.

After warranty I can see using a CC and replacing the AFM lifters, but while it's under warranty it doesn't make any sense to me to risk warranty denials.

[Emoto]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

It looks like C&D's Corvette GS gained power over their 40k mile long term test.



https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...rt-reliability


This reinforces my decision to NOT use a catch can and make sure I operate the car the way it was meant to be driven in order to minimize intake valve deposits.

After warranty I can see using a CC and replacing the AFM lifters, but while it's under warranty it doesn't make any sense to me to risk warranty denials.

Ha! 40k miles, too. That's really good news to hear.

I'm guessing that those magazine drivers were perhaps not as gentle with the car as they might have been were its payments coming out of their own pockets, either.

ETA: It may also be worth mentioning that not a single person (so far!) has stepped up and posted in this thread claiming to have had a problem themselves in a gen 6 Camaro. Lots of people who sell treatments and tales of other kinds of cars, etc., but nothing firsthand. I see that as a good thing. Time will tell, though.

[Nsxmatt]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

It looks like C&D's Corvette GS gained power over their 40k mile long term test.



https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...rt-reliability


This reinforces my decision to NOT use a catch can and make sure I operate the car the way it was meant to be driven in order to minimize intake valve deposits.

After warranty I can see using a CC and replacing the AFM lifters, but while it's under warranty it doesn't make any sense to me to risk warranty denials.

All lies.

If you don't use my "insert vendor here" catch can your car will blow up and die.

[dviper42]

27000 no issues yet runs great.

[00 Trans Ram]

Let's look at this objectively. We have 2 options - Catch Can or no Catch Can. And, we have 2 results - oil deposits or no oil deposits. This results in 4 scenarios.

Scenario 1 - No CC and no deposits
You've spent no money, and have no bad results. Great!

Scenario 2 - No CC and deposits
You've spent no money, but have bad results. Not good.

Scenario 3 - CC and no deposits
You've spent $230, and have no bad results. Is this because of the CC, or would you have had no deposits in the first place? Unknown, but not a bad price for peace of mind and insurance against reduced performance.

I'm not going to do "Scenario 4 - CC and deposits", since the CC will prevent deposits.

Conclusion? You may or may not get deposits that reduce performance. Getting a CC will DEFINITELY prevent them, while not getting a CC may be OK.

[Nsxmatt]

Originally Posted by 00 Trans Ram

Let's look at this objectively. We have 2 options - Catch Can or no Catch Can. And, we have 2 results - oil deposits or no oil deposits. This results in 4 scenarios.

Scenario 1 - No CC and no deposits
You've spent no money, and have no bad results. Great!

Scenario 2 - No CC and deposits
You've spent no money, but have bad results. Not good.

Scenario 3 - CC and no deposits
You've spent $230, and have no bad results. Is this because of the CC, or would you have had no deposits in the first place? Unknown, but not a bad price for peace of mind and insurance against reduced performance.

I'm not going to do "Scenario 4 - CC and deposits", since the CC will prevent deposits.

Conclusion? You may or may not get deposits that reduce performance. Getting a CC will DEFINITELY prevent them, while not getting a CC may be OK.

Senario 4 - You install the catch can and have another emission control or similar problem that warranty denies coverage because of a modified emissions control device.

Now this depends on the dealer and problem. but having a catch can is not a win win situation always.

[Glen e]

just to add a diff perspective, this was written over at the corvette forum in 2014 when the c7 was introduced. This guy is like Becky here (and there) Becky knows him:

He writes:

I was the one that contacted someone from the Stingray Consultant team from GM...Here comes is what he wrote back on this matter.

"The Stingray was evaluated with over one million development miles on 200 captured test fleet cars. There are tens of thousands of direct injection vehicles on the road from General Motors alone. During the evaluation hundreds of engines were literally torn down in to part piles and evaluated. There are hundreds of thousands of LSx family of motors (where part of this catch can hype started) on the roads and the many of these motors are running well past 250,000 miles without a catch can.

The cars have a 100,000 mile powertrain warranty and that includes mechanical failure of the engine. Trust me when I tell you that there are not reams of data (not even pages of data) on cars coming up lame because of oil at the MAF. It just isn't the problem that the "internet" makes it out to be. When you ask a GM Powertrain engineer about a catch can the reply is that the only thing you get is added weight.

In looking at the extra effort and added cost that went in to the Stingray, do you really believe for one second that if a $20.00 part attached to the engine would improve reliability, limit warranty claims and replacement costs, that GM wouldn't have put it on if it was necessary as part of their evaluation?

Every single GM engineer that I have spoken with told me in one form or another that a catch can is predominately a "gimmick" device created by tuners looking to make a few extra bucks on their engine modifications.

As a by-product of the PCV system, excess oil vapor is recycled to prevent it from leaching out in to the environment. It will condense back in to liquid if the temperature and environmental conditions are right. A catch can is an oil separator device. It allows the heavier oil in liquid to condense in the bottom of the can and only pass the air (gases) back. This is basically the same thing that is happening at the front of the MAF where most of the oil can be found.

The theory is that this oil in the intake system will collect on the valves and in the cylinders and cause excess carbon deposits. The catch can will reduce (not eliminate) oil pooling in the MAF.

Where the plan breaks down is that there aren't thousands of cars detonating because of the oil. As I told you on the phone, This isn't new. The engines are designed to deal with a quantity of oil mist presented via the intake.

You asked what I should tell the customer, my answer is I'm not sure because I don't know what his question is. If the question is is this normal? The answer is yes. If the question is should I put a catch can on? The answer is what ever makes you feel better. If the question is do I need a catch can? The answer is a resounding no. If the reply is that they saw it on the internet, apologize politely and tell them virtually every thread about it has started with a vendor selling a product or a consumer that was fooled by the hype and trying to make themselves feel better about their purchase by getting others to agree with them.

If he has concerns about his condition he should take the car to his dealer for evaluation.

Here is my standard response to the dozens of emails I get each year with a link to a thread like you posted (and often, that very same thread).

Simply stated, absolutely not on the catch can. It simply isn’t warranted for any street driven car. We can talk in more detail about it tomorrow and Dan will appreciate it as I’ve all ready had this conversation with him as well. Since the advent of the PCV system, cars have released some oil in places where it wouldn’t normally have gone in a fully sealed system. It ends up in vapor which condenses back in to liquid form in the intake path. As a result of that, the system is designed to ingest and subsequently digest some extra oil. Higher revving produces more oil and repeated higher revving (drag racer, track duty car, etc.) would be in the realm of uses that I might consider adding the can. Daily driving, occasional back road romp or stop light to stop light burst, not so much.

With all of that said, they won’t hurt anything. For those that don’t want to take my word for it, can feel comfortable adding it but it won’t make an appreciable difference in the life of the motor or the efficiency of the system.
If you dig deep enough in to forum information about catch cans, all roads generally lead back to a performance tuner, aftermarket part supplier or fabricator who has a vested interest in selling catch cans." Stingray Consultant


Mike Furman ~
"Be kinder than necessary, for everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle"

[SnakeEyeSS]

I have been using CRC IVD cleaner on my wife's Mazda and it makes a difference before and after. It's supposed to be super concentrated PEA. On that note, the Skyactiv engines were made with a built in catch can type run back so oil that makes it's way where it would be drained back into the oil pan, and beyond that, rerouted the coolant passages away from combustion chamber so the temps soar and it burns off more carbon and oil.(if you ever get a chance to redlibe an overheating engine, it really cleans it out )

Mazda is tiny compared to GM, so it would be very pathetic if they didn't look over the effects of DI. Although with some of the flaws that have made it past GM recently(roof welds, Chevy shake) , I guess it wouldn't be unheard of.

[hotlap]

Senario 4.1

I have a Mishimoto can that I’ll sell for $50 plus shipping.

I took it off my 2016 SS at 7,300 miles because it was condensing water and filling in one weeks time during freezing temperatures. The oil reeked of fuel so badly that I changed it and took the can off. The closed garage smelt like gasoline while draining the oil. The crank case wasn’t venting properly (in my opinion) and (I guess) direct injection magnifies the situation.

I now have a 18 SS with 840 miles and wouldn’t consider installing the can I already own.

[70chevelleSS]

Originally Posted by Nsxmatt

Senario 4 - You install the catch can and have another emission control or similar problem that warranty denies coverage because of a modified emissions control device.

Now this depends on the dealer and problem. but having a catch can is not a win win situation always.

You do realize how easy it is to remove a catch can and replace stock parts. Literally no way they’d ever know it was there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nsxmatt]

Originally Posted by 70chevelleSS

You do realize how easy it is to remove a catch can and replace stock parts. Literally no way they’d ever know it was there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So install catch can on a car that the engineers say doesn't need one and have to remove and reinstall every time you take it for warranty work. Go for it dude.

[ecko04]

There’s a distinct difference between “need” and additional protection. There may not be a need, otherwise that would be an admission of faulty engineering and no Engineer is going to admit that after all we spent all this money on R&D.