staulkor
V-Dubber
- Location
- Tempe, Arizona
- Car(s)
- VW GTI MkV Fahrenhei
You know of the intake valve issue that plagues our engines. I have some pretty good comparison pictures of what an atmospheric catch can actually does. To my knowledge, there havent been pictures taken of one's car with, and then without, a catch can with a good amount of mileage in between while keeping the same engine mods.
Below is a set of comparison pictures. On the left are my valves from 0 to 50,000 miles without a catch can (I got a catch can at maybe 45k, but the damage had already been done, so I am ignoring this). On the right are my valves from 50,000 to 87780 miles with a BSH atmospheric catch can.
Note: For 50-80k, there was less carbon on the valves than from 0-50k.
Note: Both scenarios had considerable build up on the walls.
You must remember, the pictures with the catch can only span 38,000 miles instead of 50,000 miles. This means there will be less build up regardless of what modifications are in place to alleviate blow by build-up, so take this into consideration.
Also, please note that since this is an atmospheric catch can, I am assuming it is a perfect catch can; meaning that ALL blow by goes out of the engine and is not consumed. This is in comparison to a recirculating catch can where most, but not all blow by gets filtered. Recirculating systems are not a perfect system and there will be a small amount that goes back in the engine and is consumed. With that being said, I consider this comparison a best case scenario in terms of the least amount of blow by possible.
With that said, this is what I conclude from the comparison pictures:
Catch cans work, but I don't think they work as well as we have been lead to believe. They are effective, but only so much. The pictures show there is still a major carbon issue, and this will NOT magically fix your issues. It may delay when the issues start occurring by a few thousand or even tens of thousands of miles, but who knows.
The catch can did more than I was expecting. I thought the catch can would have done next to nothing, but that clearly isn't the case. It did prevent some carbon build up, however much that may be, but the buildup that did collect and the amount of carbon is considerable.
I believe catch cans have a place for the FSI. They work as advertised, albeit less than you are lead to believe, but they work nonetheless. Please take the pictures into consideration when buying a catch can. Remember that they are no magic cure for carbon buildup. That carbon is a tenacious bastard and take up camp on your valves no matter what you do to prevent it.
ANYWAY, enough with the serious shit and here are some pictures from the job :thumbsup:
Also, that is what you have to deal with having an atmospheric catch can. It is DIIIIRRRTTTYYYY! I degreased everything and the catch can has been removed. I dont consider it worth the mess for the minimal benefits.
Below is a set of comparison pictures. On the left are my valves from 0 to 50,000 miles without a catch can (I got a catch can at maybe 45k, but the damage had already been done, so I am ignoring this). On the right are my valves from 50,000 to 87780 miles with a BSH atmospheric catch can.
Note: For 50-80k, there was less carbon on the valves than from 0-50k.
Note: Both scenarios had considerable build up on the walls.
You must remember, the pictures with the catch can only span 38,000 miles instead of 50,000 miles. This means there will be less build up regardless of what modifications are in place to alleviate blow by build-up, so take this into consideration.
Also, please note that since this is an atmospheric catch can, I am assuming it is a perfect catch can; meaning that ALL blow by goes out of the engine and is not consumed. This is in comparison to a recirculating catch can where most, but not all blow by gets filtered. Recirculating systems are not a perfect system and there will be a small amount that goes back in the engine and is consumed. With that being said, I consider this comparison a best case scenario in terms of the least amount of blow by possible.
With that said, this is what I conclude from the comparison pictures:
Catch cans work, but I don't think they work as well as we have been lead to believe. They are effective, but only so much. The pictures show there is still a major carbon issue, and this will NOT magically fix your issues. It may delay when the issues start occurring by a few thousand or even tens of thousands of miles, but who knows.
The catch can did more than I was expecting. I thought the catch can would have done next to nothing, but that clearly isn't the case. It did prevent some carbon build up, however much that may be, but the buildup that did collect and the amount of carbon is considerable.
I believe catch cans have a place for the FSI. They work as advertised, albeit less than you are lead to believe, but they work nonetheless. Please take the pictures into consideration when buying a catch can. Remember that they are no magic cure for carbon buildup. That carbon is a tenacious bastard and take up camp on your valves no matter what you do to prevent it.
ANYWAY, enough with the serious shit and here are some pictures from the job :thumbsup:
Also, that is what you have to deal with having an atmospheric catch can. It is DIIIIRRRTTTYYYY! I degreased everything and the catch can has been removed. I dont consider it worth the mess for the minimal benefits.