Running an OCC (Oil Catch Can) on the 3.5L Ecoboost

[GDI Tech]

My order for a JLT catch can has been placed and it should be here in two weeks or so.
My EX Sport is just hitting the 12K mile mark and I found evidence of PCV vapor sludge in and around the CAC openings ( I removed the entire tube off, along with the rear blow off valve reirculation tube).

Hopefully this will mitigate carbon build-up and I highly recommend those with the EB engines to do the same.

For 2017 Ford added the small port injectors in like Audi/Toyota and others have and that offers a slight reduction in rate of coking, etc. but adds to knock incidence with a combustible mixture now present during the compression stroke where true GDI has no combustibles present until just before ignition.

You mention jlt, all the testing of that can comes out showing only a fraction of the oil most and other contaminates that cause these issues is trapped. I know they did make changes after this test:

http://themustangsource.com/forums/f726/jlt-vs-rx-catch-can-results-part-2-a-532449/

But subsequent tests done the same don't show much better, and this one as well:

http://www.f150forum.com/f70/5-0-upr-vs-rx-catch-can-effectiveness-test-254381/

and more examples, but there are so many cheap counterfeits out there now. Only teamrxp.com seems to have the genuine ones anymore:
http://www.f150online.com/forums/v6...rx-catchcan-system-results-after-install.html

The threads always get closed when the final results come in though.

GDI engines cannot tolerate any of this ingestion, so even though there are a ton of cans out there, only a couple actually stop enough to really benefit the engine long term.

Tons of changes and attempts by the automakers to address this, and the latest GDI engines all are seeing coking at app. 50% of 4-5 years ago, but the other issues, mainly fuel dilution and other contaminates mixing with the engine oil are causing far greater wear. So as the ecoboost only uses the intake manifold vacuum for evacuating these compounds before they can settle and mix with the oil, and these turbo's so efficient, only at idel and deceleration are these removed with the PCV system as it comes from the factory, and most catchcans not doing anything to correct that little is gained other than the "placebo effect" of seeing them catch some gunk. All catch some gunk. The cans the Hawaii user is talking about uses an alternate suction source like the new Audi's. So a series of checkvalves automatically default to the strongest suction source to evacuate at all times correcting all of these issues. When the turbos, that spin up so quickly cancel any usable vacuum present in the intake manifold no evacuation takes place, and instead pressure builds and all of these contaminates entering as blow-by accumulate and settle in the crankcase. Once the pressure builds to a certain point , it seeks the path of least resistance which is backwards out the fresh side of the PCV system out and into the turbo inlet on that side. This is then pushed into the CAC (intercooler) where it condenses and accumulates as a liquid "gunk". But much settles and contaminates the engine oil as the oil analysis shows.

So many well intended owners are installing "catchcans" that will catch some oil, etc. but allow most of this to still get past these cans.

If interested, just ask. I can share tons of data from oil analysis and different examples of the effects of intake valve coking on power over time, etc. as well as where the main premature wear is occurring. Valve guides, made of a softer brass alloy are now wearing for the first time since the carburetor went away with no fuel to wash and cool them, the abrasive build up on the stems is pulled into the guides, so they wear the quickest. Then bearings, mains and rods first, cam bearings not far behind. Timing chain stretch and wear is the most covered by the media from this oil contamination, and the lubrication companies are really scrambling as well since the 10k oil change no longer is soon enough. Only using a full synthetic oil slows the coking rate as well as the syn blends leave many times the sludge and other residue when burned.

Any technical questions, just ask. Most of what the consumer needs to know to get these to last like our old port injection engines the automakers are keeping from the public. GM has dropped engine warranty on GDI engines to 60k miles from 100k, Ford down to 36k, and more reductions may follow due to these issues.

 

[613GT500]

For 2017 Ford added the small port injectors in like Audi/Toyota and others have and that offers a slight reduction in rate of coking, etc. but adds to knock incidence with a combustible mixture now present during the compression stroke where true GDI has no combustibles present until just before ignition.

You mention jlt, all the testing of that can comes out showing only a fraction of the oil most and other contaminates that cause these issues is trapped. I know they did make changes after this test:

http://themustangsource.com/forums/f726/jlt-vs-rx-catch-can-results-part-2-a-532449/

But subsequent tests done the same don't show much better, and this one as well:

http://www.f150forum.com/f70/5-0-upr-vs-rx-catch-can-effectiveness-test-254381/

and more examples, but there are so many cheap counterfeits out there now. Only teamrxp.com seems to have the genuine ones anymore:
http://www.f150online.com/forums/v6...rx-catchcan-system-results-after-install.html

The threads always get closed when the final results come in though.

GDI engines cannot tolerate any of this ingestion, so even though there are a ton of cans out there, only a couple actually stop enough to really benefit the engine long term.

Tons of changes and attempts by the automakers to address this, and the latest GDI engines all are seeing coking at app. 50% of 4-5 years ago, but the other issues, mainly fuel dilution and other contaminates mixing with the engine oil are causing far greater wear. So as the ecoboost only uses the intake manifold vacuum for evacuating these compounds before they can settle and mix with the oil, and these turbo's so efficient, only at idel and deceleration are these removed with the PCV system as it comes from the factory, and most catchcans not doing anything to correct that little is gained other than the "placebo effect" of seeing them catch some gunk. All catch some gunk. The cans the Hawaii user is talking about uses an alternate suction source like the new Audi's. So a series of checkvalves automatically default to the strongest suction source to evacuate at all times correcting all of these issues. When the turbos, that spin up so quickly cancel any usable vacuum present in the intake manifold no evacuation takes place, and instead pressure builds and all of these contaminates entering as blow-by accumulate and settle in the crankcase. Once the pressure builds to a certain point , it seeks the path of least resistance which is backwards out the fresh side of the PCV system out and into the turbo inlet on that side. This is then pushed into the CAC (intercooler) where it condenses and accumulates as a liquid "gunk". But much settles and contaminates the engine oil as the oil analysis shows.

So many well intended owners are installing "catchcans" that will catch some oil, etc. but allow most of this to still get past these cans.

If interested, just ask. I can share tons of data from oil analysis and different examples of the effects of intake valve coking on power over time, etc. as well as where the main premature wear is occurring. Valve guides, made of a softer brass alloy are now wearing for the first time since the carburetor went away with no fuel to wash and cool them, the abrasive build up on the stems is pulled into the guides, so they wear the quickest. Then bearings, mains and rods first, cam bearings not far behind. Timing chain stretch and wear is the most covered by the media from this oil contamination, and the lubrication companies are really scrambling as well since the 10k oil change no longer is soon enough. Only using a full synthetic oil slows the coking rate as well as the syn blends leave many times the sludge and other residue when burned.

Any technical questions, just ask. Most of what the consumer needs to know to get these to last like our old port injection engines the automakers are keeping from the public. GM has dropped engine warranty on GDI engines to 60k miles from 100k, Ford down to 36k, and more reductions may follow due to these issues.

The main reason I went with JLT, is that I'm under warranty and need a "bolt-on" that can be easily removeable.
The RX (dirty and clean side) is my preference; but it is not easily removeable.

So far it seems that I'm doing most things right (catch-can, plus full synthetic oil and premium 91+ fuel).

Considering the JLT is only for the dirty side, is it helping that I'm venting the blow off valves to the atmosphere; versus recirculation back into the CAC tubes?

 

[MiWiAu]

Considering the JLT is only for the dirty side, is it helping that I'm venting the blow off valves to the atmosphere; versus recirculation back into the CAC tubes?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your statement, but aren't all catch cans only for the dirty side?

My RX Monster can has 3 ports, one is the inlet from the dirty side PCV, the other two just provide vacuum to provide constant suction to evacuate under all conditions (vacuum from intake for constant throttle, vacuum from charge pipes while under boost). I have a cleanside separator that is vented to atmosphere.

I'm not intimately familiar with the JLT design, but based on treadmarks photo in post #33, it looks like it's a single inlet (from dirty side PCV)/single outlet (to intake). My understanding is that this will only evacuate under constant throttle conditions when you're not under boost.

When under boost, the charge pipes are under higher vacuum. Part of the issue with the OE clean side is that it routes from the front valve cover to the front charge pipe. Under boost, theoretically, you could pull oil vapor from the clean side into the front charge pipe. Under normal operating conditions, the clean side port should draw a vacuum, but I suspect this flow might be reversed when under boost.

A check valve could be installed in the clean side plumbing to allow air flow TO the valve cover, but not AWAY from it. This would prevent high charge pipe vacuum from drawing oil vapors through the clean side when under boost.

EDIT: With respect to the BOVs, I presume this couldn't hurt. I've seen some pictures of oil dripping from VTA BOV, which indicates there was still contamination in the system. If you're not using an OCC (or using an inefficient one), then I would assume that VTA would help prevent contaminants from re-entering the system. Make sure you plug/cap the openings in the charge pipes when you remove the BOV tubing so you're not ingesting unfiltered air.

 

[613GT500]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your statement, but aren't all catch cans only for the dirty side?

My RX Monster can has 3 ports, one is the inlet from the dirty side PCV, the other two just provide vacuum to provide constant suction to evacuate under all conditions (vacuum from intake for constant throttle, vacuum from charge pipes while under boost). I have a cleanside separator that is vented to atmosphere.

I'm not intimately familiar with the JLT design, but based on treadmarks photo in post #33, it looks like it's a single inlet (from dirty side PCV)/single outlet (to intake). My understanding is that this will only evacuate under constant throttle conditions when you're not under boost.

When under boost, the charge pipes are under higher vacuum. Part of the issue with the OE clean side is that it routes from the front valve cover to the front charge pipe. Under boost, theoretically, you could pull oil vapor from the clean side into the front charge pipe. Under normal operating conditions, the clean side port should draw a vacuum, but I suspect this flow might be reversed when under boost.

A check valve could be installed in the clean side plumbing to allow air flow TO the valve cover, but not AWAY from it. This would prevent high charge pipe vacuum from drawing oil vapors through the clean side when under boost.

EDIT: With respect to the BOVs, I presume this couldn't hurt. I've seen some pictures of oil dripping from VTA BOV, which indicates there was still contamination in the system. If you're not using an OCC (or using an inefficient one), then I would assume that VTA would help prevent contaminants from re-entering the system. Make sure you plug/cap the openings in the charge pipes when you remove the BOV tubing so you're not ingesting unfiltered air.

Appreciate the detailed explanation.
My confusion about "clean" side was referring to RX's clean side separator setup with oil cap attachment.

 

[MiWiAu]

Appreciate the detailed explanation.
My confusion about "clean" side was referring to RX's clean side separator setup with oil cap attachment.

No problem.

The instructions I got for my teamrxp Monster Can said to route the CSS vent to the clean side of the airbox lid; it doesn't actually route to the OCC. In theory, this is supposed to be closest to ATM pressure while still maintaining a closed loop system for emissions. Then you no longer have to worry about vacuum from the charge pipe drawing oil vapor from the clean side port. Since I'm in WI, a non-inspection state (OBDII only), I just vented my CSS to atmosphere with a small breather filter.

It looks like you can purchase the clean side separator a la carte from teamrxp ($69), if you decided you wanted to go that route in the future. The factory connectors are super quick to install/remove, so I supposed you could pop the OE clean side plumbing back on before inspections or dealer servicing, if that was a concern.

In thinking about it further, with a couple of tees and two check valves, I don't see why you couldn't adapt a single in/single out OCC (like the JLT) to pull vacuum from the same places as the RX can, so you can get additional vacuum pressure under boost. The most important part, though, is the ability of the can to coalesce the oil/fuel/mositure vapors into a liquid, so you are not feeding it back into the engine. If the OCC can't do this, you're no better off than the stock system.

 

[MiWiAu]

In my opinion I wouldn't bother installing one. I had one on my truck and it didn't work as well as I thought and at one point it began leaking due to a bad connection from one of the quick connect clamps. I removed it and threw it away. Waste of time and money. Others my have or had better experiences but I certainly didn't. I had it hooked up right per the instructions however it didn't yield the results I was hoping for as far as collecting very much oil and fluid. Just remove your cold air intake pipe once in a while and clean it when your cleaning your air filter and you should be fine.

Out of curiosity, BillyG, which OCC kit did you have on your truck?

 

[613GT500]

No problem.

The instructions I got for my teamrxp Monster Can said to route the CSS vent to the clean side of the airbox lid; it doesn't actually route to the OCC. In theory, this is supposed to be closest to ATM pressure while still maintaining a closed loop system for emissions. Then you no longer have to worry about vacuum from the charge pipe drawing oil vapor from the clean side port. Since I'm in WI, a non-inspection state (OBDII only), I just vented my CSS to atmosphere with a small breather filter.

It looks like you can purchase the clean side separator a la carte from teamrxp ($69), if you decided you wanted to go that route in the future. The factory connectors are super quick to install/remove, so I supposed you could pop the OE clean side plumbing back on before inspections or dealer servicing, if that was a concern.

In thinking about it further, with a couple of tees and two check valves, I don't see why you couldn't adapt a single in/single out OCC (like the JLT) to pull vacuum from the same places as the RX can, so you can get additional vacuum pressure under boost. The most important part, though, is the ability of the can to coalesce the oil/fuel/mositure vapors into a liquid, so you are not feeding it back into the engine. If the OCC can't do this, you're no better off than the stock system.

No problem.

The instructions I got for my teamrxp Monster Can said to route the CSS vent to the clean side of the airbox lid; it doesn't actually route to the OCC. In theory, this is supposed to be closest to ATM pressure while still maintaining a closed loop system for emissions. Then you no longer have to worry about vacuum from the charge pipe drawing oil vapor from the clean side port. Since I'm in WI, a non-inspection state (OBDII only), I just vented my CSS to atmosphere with a small breather filter.

It looks like you can purchase the clean side separator a la carte from teamrxp ($69), if you decided you wanted to go that route in the future. The factory connectors are super quick to install/remove, so I supposed you could pop the OE clean side plumbing back on before inspections or dealer servicing, if that was a concern.

In thinking about it further, with a couple of tees and two check valves, I don't see why you couldn't adapt a single in/single out OCC (like the JLT) to pull vacuum from the same places as the RX can, so you can get additional vacuum pressure under boost. The most important part, though, is the ability of the can to coalesce the oil/fuel/mositure vapors into a liquid, so you are not feeding it back into the engine. If the OCC can't do this, you're no better off than the stock system.

Now I'm thinking to just cancel my JLT order and go staight to the RX...
If Ford is going to deny me warranty for a system that benefits the engine...so be it.LOL

 

[MiWiAu]

Now I'm thinking to just cancel my JLT order and go staight to the RX...
If Ford is going to deny me warranty for a system that benefits the engine...so be it.LOL

For the record, I'm not pushing one product over another. I don't have much experience with my RX, and zero first-hand experience with any of the other cans. I just got my XSport used in late August, and installed my can in mid-September. After the first 500mi, I only drained about 1/2 teaspoon of fluid (smelled like a combination of oil and gas), though I'm told that this is normal in summer months, and winter time when temps drop are when the RX cans really start to fill up.

Based on my initial research, the teamrxp "original" RX kit seemed to be solid concept (with explanation as to HOW the product worked) and design, so that's why I went with it. Certainly there are worse options out there, perhaps other options that are similar (or better). The Tracy Lewis can is mentioned above as well. If I'm not mistaken, Tracy also designed the original RX Monster can. In fact, I got e-mails from Tracy answering some technical questions via teamrxp.com. I believe the new Tracy Lewis OCC can be disassembled and fully serviced, unlike the RX Monster can which is welded (not sure if servicing is required/recommended), but my guess is that the internal coalescing material and baffling are very similar between the two.

 

[GDI Tech]

MiWiAu has it very accurate. Yes, the issue with warranty is always one of concern. That said, if you live in the US, it is against Federal law (Magason/Moss act) and enforced by the FTC that "No aftermarket part, service, etc. can be reason to deny a warranty claim UNLESS that part/service, etc. can be proven to have been the direct cause of the failure in question". Now, many dealers and most consumers are not aware of this, and to date, only one documented case of warranty denial has occurred. That was a Gen5 Camaro V8 that had an oil pump failure. Totally unrelated to anything in the PCV system, and the car owner shut off and stopped as soon as the DIC message came on, had it flat bedded to the dealer, and the tech misdiagnosed it all stating the engine had blown (LS oil pump failures are common, do a google search) and after all the hassle the guy went through he took the car to a independent shop, and they replaced the oil pump and all is fine. A case of incompetence on the dealers side. And if the owner had hired a Magnasun/Moss atty to send a letter, it would have had to be reversed. That said, there are PLENTY of "catchcans" that could. Some return what they catch to the crankcase and that is a concentration of contaminates and very little actual oil. So engine damage will occur.

Many defeat or delete all or part of the critical functions the PCV system provide to keep an engine alive and as wear free as possible (only one aspect of the PCV system is pollution control related).

The JLT cans we have tested where I work (Automotive Engineer and work at a R&D firm that does mainly contract work for some tier one suppliers to the industry and after market development, focus since 2008 has mainly been on GDI engine issues and determining cause and solutions to the many issues these engines have) we never saw a dual outlet/dual evacuation source version, never have seen a device to address the clean/fresh side of the PCV system, and the controlled testing, as with most brand cans on the market (we have tested probably dozens over the years, most made by a few companies and branded for the vendors so identical) come in between 15% and as high as 30% effective (I can go into design reasons so many allow far more of the contaminates to pass through than they trap). Only a couple came in above 90%. Elite Engineering's E2 and E2-X systems, the original RX of course that pioneered all of this and is copied all over so beware where you order one of them, Saiku Micchi (forgive spelling) came close in the 70% plus range) Colorado Speed, and the latest from the designer of the original RX the Tracy Lewis ones on Jegs, etc. Conceptual Polymer uses air compressor units and their largest unit came in well also. Other than those, almost all, no matter the reputation, endorsements, and well known names were in the very bottom of effectiveness.

To understand the functions of the PCV system, one must look beyond the average assumptions and internet mis-information on it. All engines have a certain amount of blow-by. This blow-by contains many compounds, Water being the main contaminate. App 70% is water vapor released from the incoming ait charge under the tremendous pressures of the combustion process. Un-burnt fuel (gasoline does not burn clean or complete...and dilutes the engine oil quickly), sulfuric acid, and then the particulate matter (soot/carbon/ash). Prior to the mid 1960's when the PCV system was mandated to reduce ground water pollution from road draft vent tubes dripping oil onto the roads, engines when cared for rarely lasted more than 40-50k miles before needing a complete rebuild. That was using premium oils at the time and changes every 1200-1500 miles. What was found after this, these same engines, with same care, and same oils (out oils now are far superior) were now lasting 100-150k plus miles. It was not until research found that the cause of most wear prior to the PCV system was these contaminates entering as blow-by. So, as technology has advanced, the flushing and evacuation of these contaminates before they could settle and mix with the oil was focused on as well. Thus the clean/fresh side of the pcv system where filtered and MAF metered fresh air enters one section of the crankcase and flushes and makes up for the foul contaminate laden vapors that are evacuated (sucked out) the opposite portion. When this is defeated, or disrupted, as so many aftermarket well meaning "Tuner shops" do (as they only think of the crankcase pressure the blow-by creates, and think "venting" it is a solution, but venting as simple flow dynamics shows, means behind the "vent" there is always greater pressure that can vent. Pressure has several negative effects on the engine. One, seals can fail and leak. The parasitic power loss from the pistons fighting this on the down stroke. Piston ring "flutter" from the instability caused (rings are designed to seal properly and maintain stability with pressure above, and suction below), and if pressure is present, improper evacuation is occurring allowing the contaminates a chance to settle and mix with the engine oil accumulating in the oil.
So, the main flaw in the OEM PCV design with most American made turbo versions of today's GDI engines, is they use a PCV system designed to operate properly on a naturally aspirated engine, and that is intake manifold vacuum as the only suction source to evacuate the crankcase. Problem is these new turbo's are so efficient they spool up quickly and most of the time this cancels any vacuum out so no evacuation takes place.

That is why you need 2 sources of evacuation suction, and BMW and a few other imports use intake manifold vacuum for non boost evacuation, and turbo inlet suction for in-boost evacuation. Same as those cans mentioned above use dual outlets/dual suction sources to avoid the issues that trouble the ecoboost and GM 2.0T turbo engines. They provide full time evacuation, address the cleanside as well with the CSS component (SM and CP do not) address every aspect of the PCV systems shortcomings.

This is a good discussion, good questions, and a few here understand much of the PCV system already, which is rare as it has not been taught in auto tech trade schools or dealer/factory training in the past 15-20 years. The engineers at Ford and others are well aware of all of this, but budget constraints and middle to upper management make the calls no matter what the common sense of any improvement is.

Keep asking questions, and sorry if I missed any. I can give all a glimpse into the back side of the auto industry from an engineering standpoint.

These are amazing small engines making power like never thought 20 years ago, but these are all still mass produced and many area's short cuts are made.

Cheers!

 

[ibuytoys]

My thoughts are that the mounting location of the OCC is extremely important as well. The location should be in a cooler area of the vehicle if possible to maximize the condensing effect of the system. The OCC systems which mount in the engine compartment are subject to extremely high underhood temps, that's why I chose to mount my OCC in the driver's side inner fenderwell area. It will require removing the front bumper ass'y to install it but I think it will work best in that cooler area.

 

[613GT500]

My thoughts are that the mounting location of the OCC is extremely important as well. The location should be in a cooler area of the vehicle if possible to maximize the condensing effect of the system. The OCC systems which mount in the engine compartment are subject to extremely high underhood temps, that's why I chose to mount my OCC in the driver's side inner fenderwell area. It will require removing the front bumper ass'y to install it but I think it will work best in that cooler area.

My thoughts are that the mounting location of the OCC is extremely important as well. The location should be in a cooler area of the vehicle if possible to maximize the condensing effect of the system. The OCC systems which mount in the engine compartment are subject to extremely high underhood temps, that's why I chose to mount my OCC in the driver's side inner fenderwell area. It will require removing the front bumper ass'y to install it but I think it will work best in that cooler area.

@ MiWiAu, your OCC is mounted right behind the front bumper, which is in direct path of cold air; but how do you access the drain valve?

 

[Drive XR7]

Going with the JLT kit.
http://jlttruecoldair.com/ZenCart/i...oduct_info&cPath=524_526_518&products_id=1095

JLT has done the SVTPerformance community right, so I like to support them. But I read Tracy's writeup about why catch cans are important. Very informative.

 

[613GT500]

Going with the JLT kit.
http://jlttruecoldair.com/ZenCart/i...oduct_info&cPath=524_526_518&products_id=1095

JLT has done the SVTPerformance community right, so I like to support them. But I read Tracy's writeup about why catch cans are important. Very informative.

JLT was also my first choice (plug 'n' play) and easy removal when bringing the EX for service, but after comparing with the RX; it does not appear to be very effective.
Not trying to dissuade you by any means, but I hope your decision goes above their reputation.

 

[ibuytoys]

There seems to have been a couple of revisions in regards to the installation of the RX Performance type systems with the three hoses. My new '17 Sport has an EGR feedback sensor in the factory line from the front valve cover to the fresh air piping going to the front turbo. Normally during OCC installation the valve cover fitting is capped and the OCC is plugged into the factory quick connect on the air intake. Does anyone have a set of instructions for this setup with the EGR sensor? I'm going to call Tracy Lewis Performance in the morning but the curiosity is bugging me.

 

[ibuytoys]

Mr. Lewis just returned my call and answered my questions. I was wondering if leaving the OEM line alone and installing the CSS to the airbox would affect the flow on that sensor and trigger a CEL and apparently that does happen in 50% of the installations. Their solution was to remove the sensor from the OEM line and put it into a short piece of 3/8" hose. This hose gets installed with a "T" fitting (1/2" x 1/2" x 3/8") into the line from the rear valve cover to the center port of the can. I'm going to check with Ford parts and price out a new hose. If it's reasonable I'm thinking about removing the sensor fitting from the OEM hose and installing it into the OCC dirty side hose without having to use the aftermarket "T" fitting as that might look cleaner.

 

[Master06]

This all started because I was shopping Tuners, I was looking for a mileage increase tune.
Somehow that turned in about 3 hours of reading, videos, and shopping for the OIL Catch Can. The blow back into the ECOBOOST engine seems to be something serious that should be addressed.

The JLT 3.0 Oil Separator I have seen posted on here looks great because of the easier install. But I question how effective it is because it is only working on "one side" of the PCV system.

The videos of the 3 line RX Oil Catch Can kit show how effective it is, but it's not as easy to install, you have to drill your air box, and it's more than twice the price of the JLT.

That being said, has anyone had any recent experiences installing either of these?
Or the good or bad effects after installation?
Also any mileage increases after installation?

Thanks, always great info on here!

(if you haven't gotten lost on this subject yet, search "catch can" in the forum, see you in 3 hours)

 

[613GT500]

Using the forum's handy search feature...I found the following thread.LOL

Lots of good discussions going on below.
I intially went with the JLT, for ease of installation and removal for warranty purposes; but cancelled and will be going with the RX Monster can.

http://www.explorerforum.com/forums...-jlt-oil-separator.404902/page-3#post-3591785

 

[Larryjb]

In general, I like this guy's videos. He's got a good one related to the catch can for the ecoboost.

 

[peterk9]

This all started because I was shopping Tuners, I was looking for a mileage increase tune.
Somehow that turned in about 3 hours of reading, videos, and shopping for the OIL Catch Can. The blow back into the ECOBOOST engine seems to be something serious that should be addressed.

The JLT 3.0 Oil Separator I have seen posted on here looks great because of the easier install. But I question how effective it is because it is only working on "one side" of the PCV system.

The videos of the 3 line RX Oil Catch Can kit show how effective it is, but it's not as easy to install, you have to drill your air box, and it's more than twice the price of the JLT.

That being said, has anyone had any recent experiences installing either of these?
Or the good or bad effects after installation?
Also any mileage increases after installation?

Thanks, always great info on here!

(if you haven't gotten lost on this subject yet, search "catch can" in the forum, see you in 3 hours)

Your thread has been merged with this one on the general discussion of adding an oil separator/catch can. For what it's worth, there apparently is already one installed from the factory.
There are also individual threads on the JLT and the RX.
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/index.php?threads/new-jlt-oil-separator.404902/
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums...formance-catch-can-for-explorer-sport.403101/

Peter

 

[Master06]

Your thread has been merged with this one on the general discussion of adding an oil separator/catch can. For what it's worth, there apparently is already one installed from the factory.
There are also individual threads on the JLT and the RX.
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/index.php?threads/new-jlt-oil-separator.404902/
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums...formance-catch-can-for-explorer-sport.403101/

Peter

Ok, thanks! Those were all part of what I read (and Watched) for a few hours after searching the forum. I was trying to bump this topic hoping for the latest info and Still wondering if anyone is seeing mileage increases?