Messages

     Sorry, no pictures, but our family as I was growing up had a '56 Mercury wagon, a red/red, nine passenger, with the 292 and three-on-the-tree.  My dad replaced the 292 with a like unit, but we never had anyone haul off the take-out; so maybe a decade later I dug a deep hole in the back yard, and here it became a challenge to see how deep I could go, this resulting in my having to carve out foot holds in the wall to climb out, when I finally tired I pushed it in, and covered it up.  At sometime in the future, some bulldozer driver is going to be in for a surprise!     

     Later we acquired a '60 Ford wagon, green & white with green six passenger interior, which my dad installed a 289 4V with a 4-spd.  The only problem was with the shifter sticking thru the floor the bench seat wouldn't fit, so for a while we had a concrete block to sit on, this didn't work well for me as as light as I was, when I would attempt to push the clutch in, all that happened was that the concrete block (and my arse) slid back!     

     Scott.

     What do you do with ones' left-over LeMans race cars when you choose to quit?............Well, in the case of Jaguar, Sir William Lyons chose to convert their left-over D-Type chassis in to "road" cars, hence the Jaguar XKSS! 

     That is, if one had the coin, ..............enter the man in the photo.     

     And he owned it twice!     

     Scott.

The motors in those "Square Birds" always looked odd to me ... like they are too far forward in the engine compartment?

     If you view an example that is equipped with air-conditioning then it will make sense, as the blower box is mounted in the engine compartment ahead of the firewall behind the engine in the void witnessed.  Though it would have been really cool if the vehicles without air had been engineered with an engine set-back sum, but perhaps the bellhousing intrusion into the toe-board would have been to great.   

     Scott.

.......... I discovered that every time I ran the car, essentially I would get about an inch and a half of water in it, .

If the water is the result of condensation it will not make any difference because it is coming from the oil galley anyway regardless of if you had a catch can or not. Besides it will evaporate with the high temp of the oil like it normally would if you didn't have a catch can.

     This is another reason to be sure you have provided adequate breathing capability to the crankcase ventilation system one chooses to create as for if not, yes the water will evaporate into the atmosphere available when heated, that is to it's saturation point anyway, but unless that saturated atmosphere is removed form the crankcase, as it cools after shutdown, the water drops out and condenses on the cooler interior surfaces such as the interior of the valve covers where it is often witnessed.     

     And this would not provide a good environment within the crankcase over time!  I have even seen instances where engines were in an environment of high humidity (I'm in Florida) where they were operated frequently but not for durations lengthy enough to cook-off the moisture, but rather acquire it, to the point where the indicated oil level rises on the dip-stick as the water accumulation in the oil sump displaces the oil upward (remember water is heavier the oil) and the engine ends up starved oil but drowned in water!  Doesn't do much for the bearings!   

     Scott.

In this scenario the high mounted catch can is mounted high on the firewall . Threaded inserts are in the backside of the can and it is bolted from the passenger side.

I think a 55 year technology style car is better suited with items that don't stand out as from another era when you can help it . If you can't help it so be it .  Just my opinion others have theirs.

     Yes, this is where we have mounted the tanks before also, as it provides for a high mounting, for simple straight forward pluming, has generally proven to be available area, though if already utilized whatever is there can be relocated, and almost as important, with the proper selection of canister and plumbing it can provide an aesthetically reasonable representation of what one would expect "in-period" as Mr. Gains pointed out.       

     Rather than some, just to shinny "bling-bling" import car kiddie crap!   

     Scott.
     

     

Should I keep the PCV in the valve cover, or install it in the "rear of the manifold" location, which is currently capped off?

     The answer is: it depends!   Aesthetics aside, although every engineering attempt should include this consideration, I would advise on an FE mounted in a modern Cobra to have two "open" breathers mounted, one to each valve cover, of a type with baffling consideration for resisting oil loss to the exterior, and the P.V.C. valve inserted into the rear intake manifold breather opening also with the required baffling to impede oil entry into this plumbing.  Although this does provide a certain sum of symmetry, it's functional in that first as indicated previously the plumbing is routed uphill from the valve to the entry to the manifold which also as mentioned previously should be under the carburetor presenting particularly the oil contamination in the plenum area thereby dividing this sum among the cylinders and not the presentation into a singular inlet runner.

     In this layout initially at idle and low engine revolutions with reduced load the air flow routing enters the crankcase thru the breathers mounted to the valve covers, being one in each cover increases the available area reducing the velocity and drawing or shall we say flushing the unappreciated by-products of combustion fume and water condensation from both internal sides of the engine toward the P.V.C. valves' central mounting.  This presenting access to the crankcase thru the intake manifold valley cover is an area well shielded from oil throw-off from rapidly moving components.  But understand not immune as we currently have a 427 T.P. mounted on our dyno in which the assembler (not us!) failed to install the gasket for sealing between the tin valley pan and intake, in short order of operation one has a swimming pool of oil accumulating on top of the cover pan.

     As the engine increases in speed and load the blow-by sums greatly increase, soon to the point beyond the flow capacity of the P.C.V. plumbing and now these excessive sums are emitted from the "open" valve cover breathers, and this is the happening that creates the greatest incident of oil escapage and the point of need of typically as defined an "oil catch can".   Again this makes for sound intention as with the area of two "open" breathers velocity is reduced (vs. having only one), and other than oil directly thrown up the pipe (evidence of poor baffling) it is this velocity rate that effects the weight of the oil carried in the air stream and thru the plumbing, and as not to nitpick terminology, your not actually "siphoning the pan dry" as in a straw stuck in you soda can.  The breathers mounted high on the engine also aid in the separation of oil as the atmosphere being evacuated is emanating in path from lower in the crankcase where the heat and turbulence is greatest and the bulk of the mixing of the oil in the atmosphere takes place here and with the required lifting of this heavy mixture enroute to the valve cover mounted breathers much of the oil is permitted the opportunity to drop-out even before it becomes a concern for a reasonable attempt to baffle your breather system in an attempt to preclude the remainder escaping.

      The P.V.C. valve installations' greatest perceived value, in your street driven Cobra, is to reduce the obnoxious fume emanating from the breathers, this generally noted particularly with the engine (oil) hot, and say when at idle stopped at a traffic light, this can even perhaps escalate to the point of presenting a not so pleasing cloud about your vehicle that may not only be odifferous but not present the best presentation for your vehicle.  And yes, there is the benefit of "less" oil escapage and this rather messy presentation upon opening the hood, or if permitted even to the point of dripping on the ground, with the joking statements that your car is marking its' territory every were it's parked.  But again in reality the bulk of the oil carry-over whether external or in the plumbing, particularly of the "closed" venting systems, takes place when your on the throttle, and this is beyond what a properly intentioned P.V.C. system is designed to cope with.

      With a track car, I would eliminate the P.V.C. plumbing, then along with the valve cover breathers, utilize the rear manifold mounting for another crankcase breather outlet.  If permitted reasonably baffled to open breathers work best; sometimes you just can't improve on simple!  If plumbing to catch cans(s), as stated previously mount the reservoir(s) as high as possible, route the plumbing up-hill, particularly as closer to the point of the mountings on the engine (example: in the photo presented in reply #11, the driver side breather hose fitting is pointed in the worst way, down), and use the largest possible (reasonable) plumbing lines and fittings (again, (and he's going to hate me!) in reply #11, this is a minimal size hose in plumbing, but perhaps acceptable on a well sealed small block) as this reduces the velocity allowing the heavier oil mist to drop-out in the line, and if it's downhill to the valve cover, the oil will just drip back into the engine where it belongs.  Its' best to be diligent at keeping the oil out of the plumbing rather than trying to figure out what to do with it once it's here.   

      The problem with most of these cute, billet "bling-bling" catch-cans is that they lack enough internal area to create the velocity reduction required to make them function, and not enough effort in the baffling to make up for this, but perhaps often incorporating something that looks like a filter element(?) which it is implied "separates" the oil from the atmosphere, which it will to some degree, or is it that with the restriction created by this element, particularly once saturated, oil that contacts it is rather infused back into the air stream?  But we already have some previous statements made where they have found minimal remnants of anything, so how well is this working?  Or, was it really needed to start with, so how good does it really need to be?  And then if it were to capture any real volume they lack any capacity for storage, which further defeats their abilities.  Also, if a track car with any great singular on track duration time intended, plumb the catch can canister drain back to the engine (oil pan?) as if you are "siphoning" the oil out of the engine, it will also be automatically flowing back in and not draining the pan.      

     Scott.

     

Not to defend the indefensible but in my case I wanted a pcv that fully closed at idle.

Could I have run open breathers and have them dripping all over the valve covers and running on the headers? Sure. How is that a solution?

     Often even the most incapable function will find usefulness, somewhere, somehow, and prove a capable, usefully ally!  But I am attempting to reference the most commonly encountered scenarios one can expect to encounter.

    And I perhaps understand your intention wishing to have the vacuum loss to the P.V.C. system defeated at idle, this apparently to aid in carburetor function (a concern mentioned previously), or perhaps just for better vac. booster effect but what is it that you expect from the P.V.C. system at higher engine speeds?

    Oil carry-over control from the valve covers(s) or other orifice openings from the crankcase to atmosphere are not in the realm of responsibility of the P.C.V. system though some arbitrary value is had particularly at idle (I guess not in your case though) and perhaps low engine revolutions, but as this system has limited flow capacity and the by-pass sums from particularly combustion pressures quickly increase with load and R.P.M.'s this does outstrip this potential possibility.

If you want to run a car on a track these days a catch can is required for the pcv AND the radiator overflow, so it isn't exactly a solution searching for a problem.

    Why would and what would a "catch-can" requirement do in the P.V.C. plumbing circuit as this system amounts to a sealed pathway from crankcase access (valve cover is common to American V8's) to that of the low pressure manifold area meaning that nothing is going to be escaping or leaking on the ground (the concern for "catching the oil), but rather any oil carry-over is going to routed thru the combustion process leading to only fume out the tail pipe?  On the opposite valve cover of the typical "closed crankcase system" (again as is common to American V8's) again a sealed plumbing pathway is provided from the air cleaner canister to the crankcase area for the purpose of first presenting an atmospheric source for the P.V.C. system to ultimately access as this is drawn thru the crankcase and secondly where when the blow-by (or some prefer "blow-down") sum becomes to great for the P.V.C. plumbing to handle, there will be a reversal in flow direction with the excess volume is then vented to the, again lower than atmospheric pressure, air cleaner canister to be still ingested by the engines' combustion process and out the tail pipe.  This presenting a "closed crankcase ventilation system", what's to "catch"?       

     Now the engine may present whether with or without the presents of a P.V.C. valve, an "open" (to atmosphere) crankcase breathing access, now this does obviously require a "catch-can" and so may some rulings from some race organizations on the prior "closed system", but I am just posing the statement for thought of.........WHY?       


     And also realize that it is not the purpose or intention to actually utilize the P.V.C. system to create a vacuum sum on the crankcase area or as a substitution for the intention of say a dedicated crankcase vacuum pump.     

I wouldn't even do that to a TVR. 

     Does this statement qualify as automotive racism?   I think I'm offended!     

     Scott.

You can't see the pink silk panties.

     I think someone is staring to hard!   

     Scott.

.................... a bit of blow-by on the passenger side during deceleration, from approx 3000 rpm and up. 

      I gather with your concerns of valve cover attachments that your reference of "blow-by" is as observed from the valve cover breather?  Not from the tail pipe?     

I installed an M/E Wagner adjustable PCV, ....................................  I tuned it for the optimum vacuum, etc.

     "Optimum vacuum"?  A control setting for the implied "ideal" operation?  Really!  And how is this "ideal" actually going to be established "in-the-field" and with which parameters for observed function or result?   

       Now I'm aware of perhaps (depends on the application) an observed loss in the vacuum value (change in manifold pressure) within the induction system when a P.C.V. valve is instituted, and a at times real concern for this effect (particularly on a carburetor) but?           

       In my opinion this is a perfect example of creating an implied need, then with a product (gadget) to solve no real issue, but in the price range that will lead to many a "what-if' or "why-not" sale!  But it is a cool billet gizmo anyway!   

      Scott.
     

They've been told what to do and what not to do.

    Always, AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE!     

    Scott.

that's what we like to see acceptance and diversity

HA!
I just want to see America GREAT AGAIN!

     The powers that be won't let that happen again!     

     Scott.

They  could be "marine 427" heads but I thought thouse were low risers? Heads may not match the block. I think side oiler blocks are C5AE-A casting ID's?

     The cylinder heads nor the block are of the typical sort used in the commercial "Marine" applications.  But if curious, most (if not all?) of the marine intention blocks had brass core plugs.     

     Scott.

     I'd be curious if this were to come to fruition as to how Ford would address the roll-over protection requirements?  Perhaps someone found a loop-hole in that perhaps the current regulations are attached solely to passenger cars excluding trucks; but even so, with legal litigation as it is, that "A" pillar is going to have to support a lot of weight and it'll need a pop-up rear hoop that would look like the wing off a Charger Daytona or Superbird!     

     Scott.

Don't forget about Mercury's

     Both in and out of the water!     

and industrial air compressors

     Do the ones running on just one bank of four cylinders and using the other bank of four as the air compressor count?   

     Scott.

     You don't have to wonder, the bow & arrows spoke clearly.  Human behavior really hasn't changed that much!   

     Scott.