Cadillac CTS-V Forum banner
101 - 109 of 109 Posts

·
Registered
2011 CTSV Coupe M BLK LSX376-B15
Joined
·
922 Posts
It was just easier at the time to route straight down. So far no excess oil draining or odors.

I'm also tuning, don't want to skew the octane levels with added oil vapor. Plan to rent the dyno for a couple hours now that the new clutch is broke-in, and before the weather drastically changes. Currently have a 10% toluene/92 octane fuel blend I'm dialing-in.

Side note: Toluene like $30 per gallon now!!!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,754 Posts
Discussion Starter · #103 ·
So I've been running the new MM can for a while, and I've hit almost 20psi of boost and no issues. I think drivability and fuel trims are a little more stable over my last setup but no hard evidence.

I did have a bit of a safety valve built in: a cheap little vacuum cap that I used some RTV to keep in place on the lower valley outlet. I figure if that doesn't get blown off at 20psi of boost, then the MM can is working as intended!


Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,754 Posts
Discussion Starter · #105 ·
It’s not a Safety, it’s a Telltale!
Are those hose clamps from Mighty Mouse?
Kinda looks like you have several “Safety valves”
No, they are space age plastic zip ties. Nothing but the best for my bitch.

Kind of left over from the mock up, but it works and I hate worm clamps. I have some heat shrink ones but wanted to see how it went first.


Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
2011 CTSV Coupe M BLK LSX376-B15
Joined
·
922 Posts
So I've been running the new MM can for a while, and I've hit almost 20psi of boost and no issues. I think drivability and fuel trims are a little more stable over my last setup but no hard evidence.

I did have a bit of a safety valve built in: a cheap little vacuum cap that I used some RTV to keep in place on the lower valley outlet. I figure if that doesn't get blown off at 20psi of boost, then the MM can is working as intended!


Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk
The cap idea is how I feel. I don't run the same boost levels you do, but just to play it safe, I have a check valve at the oil fill on the valve cover routed with a 5/8" hose down to below with a small breather. Nothing wrong having a little extra insurance, replacing seals is a BIG job!
 

·
Premium Member
Fun pedal, Few doors
Joined
·
3,394 Posts
Revisiting the topic as I realize that a portion of my own PCV plan is missing and now I'm having to consider alternate approaches.
My plan has -10 hoses to each valve cover from the MMW can; a half-inch line from the can's 'Boost Check" exit going to the large vacuum port of the TB (teed with the PB booster). but my plan also envisioned a hose from the inlet tube with a check valve going to the valley port to supply fresh air prn to the crankcase.
Problem: The Magnuson-supplied valley plate has no provision for a valley port. SOooo, I don't have an obvious fresh air supply connection port.
Just mulling over the need for it and possible next steps.
I can drill a hole somewhere....
 

·
Premium Member
Fun pedal, Few doors
Joined
·
3,394 Posts
Anyone have any thoughts on this? should I add an inlet fitting and plumb it to the crankcase using a check in line? I would have to add it to a valve cover, I guess, as there's really no valley access. What would the effect be if I added it to one of the -10 hoses right at the VC fitting?
Tell me you don't have a fresh air source...without telling me you don't have a fresh air source
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
506 Posts
if u have a hose to allow air in then it can be good so it also lets air out so it suits either way depending on whats going on in the engine, u dont want to only allow air in when it can over pressurizes and not let more out if needed, if u dont have a valley vent id want more venting to intake before TB from the rocker covers thru catch can
 
101 - 109 of 109 Posts
Top