Cadillac CTS-V Forum banner

21 - 40 of 70 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
509 Posts
I find that video interesting. Never knew what type of - pressure was needed.
I agree, I found his video interesting as well. David is a bit of a rough speaker, however he appears to be very knowledgeable. I liked the quality & aesthetics in the design of the can which lead me to the purchase. Is it better, or necessary?, possibly, but IDK for sure. In any case I have no regrets with the purchase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
I know this is a bit old but don't want to open a new thread. I currently have a Moroso catch can and a built engine running 13 psi boost (just bought the car this way). Currently having an issue with oil consumption (not really any in the can), and was told (just by the previous owner) that he had previously been told he needed a vented can. Not sure if these are related, but either way, it sounds like I may need a can like the MMS mentioned above. Can anyone confirm that based off this info? Some of this is over my head too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adam112

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
How much oil consumption are you talking? You said there is none in the can, is there any smoke? Good oil pressure? Were the heads rebuilt when the motor was put together?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,188 Posts
Doesn’t get any simpler than the Moroso, attach one hose to the valley port and the other hose to the supercharger snout port.

No need for any venting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: MYV and ASteggall

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,014 Posts
I like my Moroso, it seems to work good. I did put a breather cap on the oil filler tube, whether it helps or not I don't know just thought it couldn't hurt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,147 Posts
I did put a breather cap on the oil filler tube, whether it helps or not I don't know just thought it couldn't hurt.
Actually, it could. If air flows backwards through the breather into the crankcase, it will mess with your fuel trims, and eventually set a lean code. This is a closed system that is not meant to have a breather.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
How much oil consumption are you talking? You said there is none in the can, is there any smoke? Good oil pressure? Were the heads rebuilt when the motor was put together?
About a quart in 500 miles. I've added 2 quarts over 1000 miles. No smoke that I'm able to see (even when getting on it a bit). Oil pressure is good. I have the build sheet for the motor here and the only part that mentions the heads is a line that says "valve job and surface heads".

On another note, the line running from the Moroso catch can splits off and goes 2 places. One is the intake. The other I'm not sure at the moment. It heads down under the engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,147 Posts
If your CC is empty and there aren't any puddles under the car, you have to be burning it. The two primary sources are rings, when a load is on the engine (WOT), or valve guide seals, when there is no load (coasting).

The input line to the catch can should come from the valley cover nipple (front passenger side of the engine). The output line from the CC should go to the SC snout nipple (passenger side). No other lines are needed. There should be a line from each valve cover that get T'd together and go to the intake tube just before the TB.

If your PCV system is mis-plumbed and pressure is building in the crankcase, oil can be forced out various seals, but I would expect to see drippage somewhere.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,188 Posts
Sounds like you have the CC attached to the clean side.

I am not a fan of running CC’s on the clean side.

Just install CC on the dirty side, between valley and supercharger snout.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: MYV and Blades1_99

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
If your CC is empty and there aren't any puddles under the car, you have to be burning it. The two primary sources are rings, when a load is on the engine (WOT), or valve guide seals, when there is no load (coasting).

The input line to the catch can should come from the valley cover nipple (front passenger side of the engine). The output line from the CC should go to the SC snout nipple (passenger side). No other lines are needed. There should be a line from each valve cover that get T'd together and go to the intake tube just before the TB.

If your PCV system is mis-plumbed and pressure is building in the crankcase, oil can be forced out various seals, but I would expect to see drippage somewhere.
Thank you for the info! I've taken another look at everything (with some light this time). Doesn't look like anything runs from the valley nipple to the CC. There's a line that runs from the passenger valve cover (front of engine) and one that runs from the driver's side valve cover (back of engine) that T together and then run to the CC. The line then runs from the CC to just the intake tube. Hope that helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,147 Posts
Thank you for the info! I've taken another look at everything (with some light this time). Doesn't look like anything runs from the valley nipple to the CC. There's a line that runs from the passenger valve cover (front of engine) and one that runs from the driver's side valve cover (back of engine) that T together and then run to the CC. The line then runs from the CC to just the intake tube. Hope that helps.
It's as LA suggested - your CC is on the clean side - nothing to catch there.

There is a small curved line from the valley nipple to the snout. Remove it and put the CC in its place. Put the T'd line from the valve covers back into the intake tube w/o the CC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,014 Posts
Actually, it could. If air flows backwards through the breather into the crankcase, it will mess with your fuel trims, and eventually set a lean code. This is a closed system that is not meant to have a breather.
Okay, then why does the Mighty Mouse Catch Can's I see on the CTSV's have a breather on them, different routing ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,147 Posts
Okay, then why does the Mighty Mouse Catch Can's I see on the CTSV's have a breather on them, different routing ?
Sorry, I can't talk to their design philosophy. If you maintain the factory routing, a breather is not required. In fact, just a breather will allow unmetered air into the system, which will affect fuel trims. A breather with a check valve does nothing, since, by design, pressure has to build in the crankcase to overcome the cracking pressure of the check valve. This won't happen with factory the routing (the backfill lines between the valve covers and intake tube are expose to the atmosphere, an infinite volume).

I seem to recall a thread a couple years back where a forum member installed a MM can using their modified routing and started experiencing leakage at the rear main seal. Whether the leakage was the result of the MM can installation, I don't know - I never saw a followup posting. If you change the routing so that crankcase pressure can build, you're just asking for trouble. I wouldn't risk a pricy engine based on the durability/effectiveness of a check valve.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
So the MM wild setup only pulls from the oil fill point? We saying this isn’t the best way?

I thought the MM check valve was more so as a backflow prevention?

Also I noticed the air filter on top only has a 1 way valve.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,014 Posts
Sorry, I can't talk to their design philosophy. If you maintain the factory routing, a breather is not required. In fact, just a breather will allow unmetered air into the system, which will affect fuel trims. A breather with a check valve does nothing, since, by design, pressure has to build in the crankcase to overcome the cracking pressure of the check valve. This won't happen with factory the routing (the backfill lines between the valve covers and intake tube are expose to the atmosphere, an infinite volume).

I seem to recall a thread a couple years back where a forum member installed a MM can using their modified routing and started experiencing leakage at the rear main seal. Whether the leakage was the result of the MM can installation, I don't know - I never saw a followup posting. If you change the routing so that crankcase pressure can build, you're just asking for trouble. I wouldn't risk a pricy engine based on the durability/effectiveness of a check valve.
Okay I wouldn't know what the this factory routing is your talking about, the hoses to the Moroso Oil Catch Can on my 09 V are run to 2 outlet's under the Boost Bypass Actuator pictured below & the lines running under the Boost Actuator. This seems to work as I empty out the collected oil from the Moroso Can every so often. You can see the Oil Fill Breather in the picture too, whether this is the proper routing I don't know as the car came this way.

 
  • Like
Reactions: MYV

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,937 Posts
Sounds like you have the CC attached to the clean side.

I am not a fan of running CC’s on the clean side.

Just install CC on the dirty side, between valley and supercharger snout.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just had my BMR CC checked/drained on oil change, after installing at those connections.

It caught some oil that trickled out, less than an ounce of oil. Very glad I have it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,147 Posts
Okay I wouldn't know what the this factory routing is your talking about . . .
It is very simple and effective. There is a line between the valley nipple and SC nipple. Air is sucked out of the crankcase through this line and fed to the engine. There is a line between each valve cover and the intake tube. Air from the intake is sucked into the valve covers through these lines to replace the air being sucked out from the valley nipple. The flow path is intake tube -> top of engine -> crankcase -> valley -> SC input. With this routing, air is always circulating through the engine. No pressure buildup and, hence, no venting is required.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
It is very simple and effective. There is a line between the valley nipple and SC nipple. Air is sucked out of the crankcase through this line and fed to the engine. There is a line between each valve cover and the intake tube. Air from the intake is sucked into the valve covers through these lines to replace the air being sucked out from the valley nipple. The flow path is intake tube -> top of engine -> crankcase -> valley -> SC input. With this routing, air is always circulating through the engine. No pressure buildup and, hence, no venting is required.
Well, my setup is definitely not correct. The CC did have a lot of gunk in it when I dumped it. Slimy water that smelt like gas. Just to educate myself, why is it bad to have a CC on the clean side? Does it hurt anything if it's only connecting the valve covers to the intake?

Also, there's no hose running to the valley at all on mine currently. The connection there just has a rubber cap on it right now. Is that odd? From what everyone is saying and from what I've read with general problems (mostly in other bad CC setups) is that I could have a pressure issue here that's ultimately forcing oil out through the weakest point but only while it's under higher pressure. Found a pretty good thread talking about a BMR setup that caused an oil leak that was similar but hard to detect. This was caused by pressure building in the crankcase and not having a clear path to circulate due to air restriction in the CC:

https://www.ctsvowners.com/forum/4-...or-catch-can-review.html#/topics/33717?page=3
 
21 - 40 of 70 Posts
Top