Topic Sponsor
2011+ Engine Related Questions Sub-Forum to the new engines that debuted in 2011.

5.0 UPR vs RX Catch Can Effectiveness Test

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-12-2014, 12:01 PM
  #201  
F150 Forum
 
Eco Tuner's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 241
Received 21 Likes on 19 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jgiddy
Correct. lol



Ok. I guess my confusion is this- there is oil collecting on the outlet side whether or not there is mesh present, right? You're saying the presence of the outlet mesh causes more pull-through because the mesh collects oil, but let's say the mesh is removed from that area. The oil is still collecting on the outlet walls, isn't it? Wouldn't that oil get pulled through anyway?

Some will, but this is a good mod to make as it does help. The goal is to get as much as possible to fall to the bottom. A rule of thumb on the Bernoulli effect is with the rate of flow through the average PCV system (from 450-650 CFM) and the velocity through any can, is to have the cans interior capacity close to 1 qt to allow the speed of the flow through to slow enough to prevent pull through, and with the outlet location it must be app 4" from any droplets falling to avoid pull through. So good move on UPR's part.

Originally Posted by Z7What
This thread fills up quick! And it's really to much to read.

I bought my UPR used for a great price, so far I like it. I recently relocated it under the truck so it would stay cooler cause under good it got so hot I couldn't unscrew the "bowl" without gloves. Anyways while reading this tread I say they have a diffuser so I bought it. Now I'm reading this thread and some say to take the mesh out of the exit. UPR do you suggest this?

My theory would be take out the inlet so that the oil from the inlet isn't trapped/stored near the top. It falls straight to the button. And keeping the mesh on the exit would filter any oil if any before getting into the intake.

Can someone help me understand this?

Here is where I moved mine too.

Attachment 324002
Attachment 324001

Wayne
The principal that comes into play is in doing so, it acts the same as if you would take a wet wash cloth, and place it to your mouth. Now suck on it. What happens? Now multiply the flow rate and amount of suction many times what you can emulate with your mouth. This is why you NEVER want any coalescing media against, or near the outlet as it greatly contributes to oil pull through. UPR is on the right track for sure. And the extension is also a must.

Originally Posted by Hunger4TQ
So what your telling me is, gone are these days unless I want to run a straight pipe.




Please stay on topic and quit with the jabs people. Who gives a **** if he changed his name. Take your need to be an internet annoyance some other place.
With an open header yes, that still works. Not the ideal like a belt driven vacuum pump though, but plenty of sportsman class racers still use the inexpensive Venturi evac valves.....but put any length of exhaust pipe or mufflers on and the pulses will blow out the diaphragm inside the one way valve allowing the crankcase to be pressurized.

If you look at one of our dragsters, on the passenger side cylinder head you can see the pulley for a Aerospace Components vacuum pump. We pull from one bank and have an adjustable vac relief valve on the opposite side as we dont want to pull over 15" or so (over 15" or so begins to pull oil off the wrist pins so we limit it around that point).

This way we not only are constantly evacuating, we also can run a lower tension ring set and the vacuum will pull them to the cylinder wall tighter for less blow by and more power.:

Name:  Bradenton5Day005.jpg
Views: 370
Size:  110.0 KB

And here is where a breathered can comes in as we route what is pulled into this can to contain the oil/water/etc.:
Name:  HPIM1005.jpg
Views: 358
Size:  96.3 KB

And the pump closer:
Name:  HPIM1000.jpg
Views: 403
Size:  90.0 KB

Originally Posted by jgiddy
This is very similar to what I'm seeing with the fully upgraded UPR can. The outlet barb has a slight film on the inside. I'm going to remove the outlet mesh from the can and run a longer outlet hose to see if that will eliminate the film.
Anxious to see the results. I predict it increased form 20% effective to 75-80% effective. (we have NOT done the test ourselves so this is a guesstimate only)

I also want to see someone test the Bob's. We have and it tested app 30% effective, but that would not be un-biased. A totally unbiased independent test must be done for the skeptics......so 79monte, let me know.

Eco Tuner is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Hunger4TQ (06-12-2014)
Old 06-12-2014, 12:04 PM
  #202  
F150 Forum
 
Eco Tuner's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 241
Received 21 Likes on 19 Posts
Default

I just noticed that engine is a Dry Sump so that can help pull vac as well.
Eco Tuner is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 03:52 PM
  #203  
Member
 
jgiddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 533
Received 50 Likes on 37 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Eco Tuner
Anxious to see the results. I predict it increased form 20% effective to 75-80% effective. (we have NOT done the test ourselves so this is a guesstimate only)

I already have the fully upgraded UPR can w/ extension and diffuser, which you have already said is around 75% effective, not 20%.

Removing the outlet mesh and running a longer outlet hose on a fully upgraded UPR can should increase it from ~75% effective to ~90+% effective (ballpark figures of course).

Last edited by jgiddy; 06-12-2014 at 04:05 PM.
jgiddy is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 03:59 PM
  #204  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Ford850's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,840
Received 374 Likes on 228 Posts

Default

Why use a longer outlet hose instead of a longer inlet, or longer length of both?
Ford850 is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 04:02 PM
  #205  
Member
 
jgiddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 533
Received 50 Likes on 37 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Ford850
Why use a longer outlet hose instead of a longer inlet, or longer length of both?
The inlet hose is going to be dirty no matter what. The longer outlet hose should be the one that helps resist pull-through from the Bernoulli effect.

If I ever relocate my UPR can to the front of the radiator then I will need a longer inlet hose, but until then it's not needed.
jgiddy is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 04:13 PM
  #206  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Ford850's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,840
Received 374 Likes on 228 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by jgiddy
The inlet hose is going to be dirty no matter what. The longer outlet hose should be the one that helps resist pull-through from the Bernoulli effect.

If I ever relocate my UPR can to the front of the radiator then I will need a longer inlet hose, but until then it's not needed.
Ok, I was just wondering since I noticed it mentioned several times.
Note - on my test phases 1 and 3, the outlet hose from the UPR can is at least 30" which goes to the RX can. It didn't seem to make a difference in phase 1 with the standard can. We'll see how the extension, diffuser, and mesh removal affect it in phase 3.
Ford850 is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 04:34 PM
  #207  
Senior Member
 
phantomblackgto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Parkville, MO
Posts: 556
Received 90 Likes on 68 Posts
Default

Just looking for some clarification here, if that's ok. Tracy (aka Tuner Boost), manufacturer of the Rx catch can evaporator system, did you buy out Mike (EcoboostPowerParts - located in Arizona), vendor for the Rx catch can evaporator system, change the name to EcoPowerParts (now located in Florida) and are now the manufacturer and vendor for the Rx catch can evaporator system now posting under the username Eco Tuner?

I'm old and slow, so just trying to keep up. Thanks.
phantomblackgto is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 06:20 PM
  #208  
Junior Member
 
Raptor2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 13
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

My head mechanic at work is looking into catch cans for our F-150 Eco Boost trucks, we have approximately 35 trucks he wants to do, but he is wanting to test a few brands first. It looks like UPR and RX would be the ones to test. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Raptor2014 is offline  
Old 06-12-2014, 07:24 PM
  #209  
Senior Member
 
phantomblackgto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Parkville, MO
Posts: 556
Received 90 Likes on 68 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Raptor2014
My head mechanic at work is looking into catch cans for our F-150 Eco Boost trucks, we have approximately 35 trucks he wants to do, but he is wanting to test a few brands first. It looks like UPR and RX would be the ones to test. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
IMO, if you want a complete solution, Rx is the way to go. I know there's all kind of debating on this issue, but unless you have a setup like the Rx that can tap into the turbo inlet to provide vacuum during boost, it doesn't matter how many improvements have been made to the UPR can, at best it's only going to trap what is being pulled through the evap, and without constant vacuum, not all blow by is going to be evacuated to catch. The only other setup that I've researched that would do the same thing as the Rx is the Elite Engineering E2. I run the EE basic cans on my 2005 GTO and 2011 Camaro LLT DI V6 and they work great for those applications but neither is FI. The Ecoboost turbos, IMO, are spooling quite often, and I'm concerned about the lack of IM vacuum to be doing a good enough job. However, I can't get anyone from Elite Engineering to call or email me back. Most of their applications are GM, so I don't know if they have an install kit for the F150 or not. Not that you couldn't come up with the supplies to install their can, but I would prefer to not have to go through that hassle. The only thing that I don't like about the Rx that the E2 provides is the ability to open the catch can for cleaning. I'm concerned the Rx could eventually gum up on the inside enough to cause problems down the road. However, with no response from Elite in a week now, the Rx is looking like my best option. My truck has 1,700 miles on it now, and I'd like to get this done sooner than later. I'm just trying to figure out who I'm dealing with here as it looks like some ownership changes have occurred. I would also recommend the clean side separator while you're at it to do the entire job right (but, I'm usually OCD when it comes to this type of thing).
phantomblackgto is offline  
Old 06-13-2014, 01:23 AM
  #210  
Junior Member
 
Raptor2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 13
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Thanks Phantomblackgto,

Per your recommendation I looked at the elite cans also, and the Elite and UPR seem to be better quality than the RX cans, and they are cheaper. Since I am buying at least 35 the price difference adds up. I will see if I can get a response from Elite also.
Raptor2014 is offline  


Quick Reply: 5.0 UPR vs RX Catch Can Effectiveness Test



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:54 PM.