Originally Posted by SilverSnake
Originally Posted by Ducked
Originally Posted by SilverSnake
Had 89 cars and trucks over the last 50 years. Have never installed a catch can on any of them. I have yet to hear of any vehicle manufacturer that installs one from the factory. I think that speaks volumes.
50 years, huh?
I dunno about recent-ish stuff, because I've managed to avoid it, but AFAICR ALL my old cars, probably covering the fist half of that time period, have had some means, as stock (baffling and/or a gauze filter) of intercepting oil vapour from the crankcase ventilation and returning it to the sump. These old cars were all normally aspirated and nearly all carbureted, so by design they'd be expected to suffer less blowby than a boosted DI engine.However, perhaps partly because they were old, they mostly showed some coking/gumming up of the carburetor. This suggests, though it doesn't prove, that a catch can, which does the same job, is likely to do some good. It seems rather unlikely to do any harm. The only scam-like aspect I can see to it is the price people are willing to pay for anodized machined-from-billet alu-bling-ium, for something that looks easy to make, but its their money.
Yes 50 years. Started my car "hobby" at 21 years old soon after entering the USAF. Yes that makes me 71 years old. As I mentioned above, it the catch cans do any good, why are they not incorporated into new car designs by the engineers?
As I said, in some (maybe too much) detail, they (probably all) have devices that do the same job. As Artem implies, a catch can is probably defined by needing emptied, otherwise its some baffling and hard to distinguish from what the manufacturers do fit.
Not hard to guess why they don't fit something that requires action by the punter.
In any case your argument is an "everything is usually for the best in the best of all possible worlds" argument. Hate to break this to you, but...