5.0 UPR vs RX Catch Can Effectiveness Test
06-13-2014, 01:57 AM
#211
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.
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.
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.:
And here is where a breathered can comes in as we route what is pulled into this can to contain the oil/water/etc.:
And the pump closer:
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.
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.
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.:
And here is where a breathered can comes in as we route what is pulled into this can to contain the oil/water/etc.:
And the pump closer:
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.
I would be willing to test the Bob's. Are you saying test it against the RX or the UPR? 30% for the Bob's is not that great at all.
Wayne
06-13-2014, 06:58 AM
#212
Senior Member
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.
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.
I am waiting for Phase 3 of this test to be concluded as I personally think that both systems are an improvement from the stock system that just pumps the fumes and residue back into the intake manifold. Plus I am not going to completely nix a system that gets less than 70%. If a system can consistently get 60%+, I think it would be worth the price. Just my opinion though.
Last edited by Manuellabour247; 06-13-2014 at 07:03 AM. Reason: I no spell so good sometimes. lol
06-13-2014, 09:07 AM
#213
F150 Forum
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.
I'm old and slow, so just trying to keep up. Thanks.
06-13-2014, 10:59 AM
#214
Senior Member
Thanks for the clarification. Looks like I'll be placing an order with you as you can get back to me with answers while a competitor of yours cannot seem to do the same even though I currently use their product. To me, the dual valve setup is the only way to go for FI applications, and while I'm not really a fan of not being able to remove the can base for emptying/cleaning, it's still the best option that I see for what I want it to do.
06-13-2014, 06:06 PM
#215
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).
Steve is a busy guy....he will reply. The E2 can be configured to work with the EB with the addition of additional checkvalves and fittings, and we DO test the Elites, and the standard Elite works very well for non-DI applications, and the E2 comes in currently at app 85-90% efficiency (and I expect a few changes will be coming in the next few months to improve on that) which is right at the top of ALL cans (in the top 4 with #5 considerably below the other 4). You can also get a great functioning cleanside separator from Elite.
To date, only the RX corrects the PCV system design flaw as you describe in excellent detail but the Elite E2 can be adapted to do the same. No need to clean the RX ever, but if desired spray some brake clean in the inlet, shake around, and drain and blow out w/compressed air. The 1/4 turn ball valve drain makes draining a snap also.
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.
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.
If you go by the recommendation from @Joe@UPR, he says that the best efficiency for his can is with the estension and diffuser. With those two pieces added it is the same as the RX can on EcoPower.com. Both come out to 199+tax. So far from the testing that Ford850 has done, the RX has done far better, but remember that he had an older version of the UPR can. Phase 3 of this test will be a more apples to apples test. Both systems will be about the same price for what he is testing, and both systems should be close to the same efficiency. Both @Eco Boost and Joe@UPR are recommending that the more remote you can put these systems, the better they will perform.
I am waiting for Phase 3 of this test to be concluded as I personally think that both systems are an improvement from the stock system that just pumps the fumes and residue back into the intake manifold. Plus I am not going to completely nix a system that gets less than 70%. If a system can consistently get 60%+, I think it would be worth the price. Just my opinion though.
I am waiting for Phase 3 of this test to be concluded as I personally think that both systems are an improvement from the stock system that just pumps the fumes and residue back into the intake manifold. Plus I am not going to completely nix a system that gets less than 70%. If a system can consistently get 60%+, I think it would be worth the price. Just my opinion though.
Thanks for the clarification. Looks like I'll be placing an order with you as you can get back to me with answers while a competitor of yours cannot seem to do the same even though I currently use their product. To me, the dual valve setup is the only way to go for FI applications, and while I'm not really a fan of not being able to remove the can base for emptying/cleaning, it's still the best option that I see for what I want it to do.
Cleaning is as easy as you could want as well......should never need it, but easy to spray 1/2 can brake clean in the inlet and shake/drain/blow dry.
06-13-2014, 11:14 PM
#216
Like I mentioned before, I'm currently running a Bob's Auto Sports catch can on my 5.0. Out of curiosity, I went out and pulled the quick connect off of the intake manifold barb. It's been about 1,300 miles since I last checked for signs of oil. Like before, there was a very slight film of oil on the outside of the manifold barb but it didn't discolor the Q-tip I used on it. I then ran the Q-tip around the inside walls of the barb and only came up with a very slight discoloration. I than ran a new Q-tip around the inside of the quick connect and I did get some oil colored discoloration but it wasn't really that much and the Q-tip was still mostly white. It was more than what I got from running a Q-tip over the inside and outside of the manifold barb.
It doesn't appear that very much oil is getting through so it seems that the Bob's can is doing it's job pretty well.
I plan on reinstalling the UPR can with the new diffuser at some point soon and see how well it does in comparison.
Wayne
It doesn't appear that very much oil is getting through so it seems that the Bob's can is doing it's job pretty well.
I plan on reinstalling the UPR can with the new diffuser at some point soon and see how well it does in comparison.
Wayne
Well, tonight I went out to install my UPR can with the new diffuser. I took the Bob's can off and pulled out the quick connects from the hoses.
Looking into the end of the output hose that I had just pulled the quick connect out of, I saw no oil at all. It was completely dry. I looked inside the barbed end of the quick connect that had been inside the hose and ran a new Q-tip all the way around the inside of it and it came back completely white. No discoloration at all. I'm not sure what to think since I did get a slight discoloration on the Q-tip when running it inside the quick connect end. Maybe I forgot to clean that side out when I originally installed it.
I did drain the Bob's can and I had 1/2 ounce of oil in it in 1,300 miles. The oil didn't look like it had any water in it at all.
When I went to bolt down the UPR can to the strut tower, I remembered the other thing I did not like about mounting this can where UPR originally suggests to mount it. It hangs down pretty low and the end sits between the AC hose and the coil cover on the engine and actually hits the cover. Last time I ran this can, it wore a smooth spot in the knurled edge of the can from hitting the cover and wore a place in the cover itself. It also rubs on the AC line which I don't like.
I decided not to install the UPR can until I can come up with a different solution for mounting. I'm going to talk to UPR about making a different bracket that holds the can up higher. UPR now recommends mounting it to the fender on the driver's side next to the master cylinder but my car has the sound tube on it which part of it mounts where the can needs to mount and I don't want to take it off at this time plus I don't have anything to plug up where the sound tube comes and goes to.
I reinstalled the Bob's can for now and will probably run my UPR can on my fiancée's 07GT instead and take hers off for now. I was wanting to run the UPR can because I'm leaving for vacation on Sunday and will be driving a total of about 2,000 miles on this trip. I don't have time to mess with the UPR can so it doesn't touch anything. Maybe next time.
Wayne
06-14-2014, 08:11 AM
#217
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Mid Phase 3 Update
I'll add some more here, even though I don't have phase 3 complete. It might help some of you who are installing cans now. If I had the choice, I would not reinstall the UPR with extension using the suggested mounting. I would come up with something on my own to mount it out front where RX does. First of all, I cannot stress enough what a PITA it is to open the tall can from the spot UPR tells us to install. Pinched and rubbing between hoses is not ideal. This tells me they haven't actually used it on an F150 themselves. Second, it is not performing as well as I had hoped using the newest extension, diffuser, and removing the mesh. I have along way to go in this phase, but so far it's not quite the improvement I expected. I assume the heat from where they tell us to mount it is hurting it at this point.
I hope this helps some of you who are in the process of installing yours.
I'll add some more here, even though I don't have phase 3 complete. It might help some of you who are installing cans now. If I had the choice, I would not reinstall the UPR with extension using the suggested mounting. I would come up with something on my own to mount it out front where RX does. First of all, I cannot stress enough what a PITA it is to open the tall can from the spot UPR tells us to install. Pinched and rubbing between hoses is not ideal. This tells me they haven't actually used it on an F150 themselves. Second, it is not performing as well as I had hoped using the newest extension, diffuser, and removing the mesh. I have along way to go in this phase, but so far it's not quite the improvement I expected. I assume the heat from where they tell us to mount it is hurting it at this point.
I hope this helps some of you who are in the process of installing yours.
06-14-2014, 10:17 AM
#218
I cannot agree more about the can location and the heat drastically effecting performance. I have to say it was frustrating to not be able to mount the can in a cool location. Most importantly is have the long lines running to the cans is something we found makes a big impact. The increased Volume and Turbulence running through the long lines help the oil to cool and collect throughout the distance of the longer inlet hose allowing it to start the coalescing process before it even gets to the inlet side of the catch can.
I also agree about the location being tough to empty the can. I was just afraid enthusiasts would not go through mounting the can under the front bumper cover due to the location being a bigger install. After careful consideration UPR developed a new mounting bracket for the ecoboost trucks to mount in the same location as the RX and run the longer lines. Short lines on any catch can work the same as running a small catch can due to the airspeed and short distance the oil and vapor has to travel.
Just the fact that the full circle is so short on the ecoboost and 5.0 catch can due to mounting location you cannot slow the air enough to capture everything. Even more so is the heat does keep everything liquefied in the mist and vapor form allowing it to be carried. In the mustang market the owners buy cans for convenience and ease of install and not for the true performance. So it made it hard to try and force the best performing setup on to the public with so many internet flamer / instigators out there.
My example is the JLT Silverhorse and Shelby catch cans. They cannot capture more that 10% because they have zero capacity / volume to slow air speed. Let alone they mount them on top of the engine with small factory lines Cooking these decorative units. Lastly they use the anti-splash filter from the lower intake of the 86-95 Mustangs. That filter did not work in the stock mustangs let alone these new high rpm tighter motors. But people buy them like crazy and play down cans like UPR and RX because they are too involved. That just doesn't make any sense.
Some of the best names in the industry sell JLT cans because of the mount and the name knowing they are purely ornamental and not functional. Sorry for the long explanation I just wanted to put my concerns out there.
I have picture of the new brackets if you guys want to post them up there. I will be revising our kits over the next week to offer both mounting options and line kits for the advanced and standard kit. One thing I did notice is the catch can mounted on the lower core support is also much easier and a big improvement for current UPR catch can owners. The only thing needed to relocate your UPR catch can is additional line. Lastly opening or draining the can is much easier due to the fact it remains so much cooler.
We do have petcocks available for those that just want to open the drain to empty them. Anyone wanting a petcock can contact us and the total will be $5 shipped to give you the added convenience. Custom bracket kits will be available next week for the Ecoboost and 5.0, call UPR or your nearest UPR distributor for more info.
I also agree about the location being tough to empty the can. I was just afraid enthusiasts would not go through mounting the can under the front bumper cover due to the location being a bigger install. After careful consideration UPR developed a new mounting bracket for the ecoboost trucks to mount in the same location as the RX and run the longer lines. Short lines on any catch can work the same as running a small catch can due to the airspeed and short distance the oil and vapor has to travel.
Just the fact that the full circle is so short on the ecoboost and 5.0 catch can due to mounting location you cannot slow the air enough to capture everything. Even more so is the heat does keep everything liquefied in the mist and vapor form allowing it to be carried. In the mustang market the owners buy cans for convenience and ease of install and not for the true performance. So it made it hard to try and force the best performing setup on to the public with so many internet flamer / instigators out there.
My example is the JLT Silverhorse and Shelby catch cans. They cannot capture more that 10% because they have zero capacity / volume to slow air speed. Let alone they mount them on top of the engine with small factory lines Cooking these decorative units. Lastly they use the anti-splash filter from the lower intake of the 86-95 Mustangs. That filter did not work in the stock mustangs let alone these new high rpm tighter motors. But people buy them like crazy and play down cans like UPR and RX because they are too involved. That just doesn't make any sense.
Some of the best names in the industry sell JLT cans because of the mount and the name knowing they are purely ornamental and not functional. Sorry for the long explanation I just wanted to put my concerns out there.
I have picture of the new brackets if you guys want to post them up there. I will be revising our kits over the next week to offer both mounting options and line kits for the advanced and standard kit. One thing I did notice is the catch can mounted on the lower core support is also much easier and a big improvement for current UPR catch can owners. The only thing needed to relocate your UPR catch can is additional line. Lastly opening or draining the can is much easier due to the fact it remains so much cooler.
We do have petcocks available for those that just want to open the drain to empty them. Anyone wanting a petcock can contact us and the total will be $5 shipped to give you the added convenience. Custom bracket kits will be available next week for the Ecoboost and 5.0, call UPR or your nearest UPR distributor for more info.
Last edited by Joe@UPR; 06-14-2014 at 10:20 AM.
The following users liked this post:
Ford850 (06-14-2014)
06-14-2014, 10:47 AM
#219
Joe@UPR,
Is it possible to make a new bracket for the Mustang application where it mounts on the passenger side strut tower but holds the can up higher and maybe a little farther out? On my car, the bottom of the can hits the coil cover and rubs on the side of the AC line. Thanks.
Wayne
Is it possible to make a new bracket for the Mustang application where it mounts on the passenger side strut tower but holds the can up higher and maybe a little farther out? On my car, the bottom of the can hits the coil cover and rubs on the side of the AC line. Thanks.
Wayne