30,000 Mile, No Catch Can Report

[jdsfly]

Tell us more about your extensive search.

I did forum and internet searches looking for high mileage cars without catch cans.
I couldn't find one Ecoboost Mustang with any carbon issues. I did find 3.5 Ecoboosts with issues though, but the 3.5 has been around longer than the 2.3.

Sponsored

 

[StealthStang]

It would be interesting to know what kind of techniques are being used to reduce carbon buildup, it was clearly a problem on earlier non mustang ecoboost cars, so whats different ?

 

[Deleted member]

If you think a DI motor shouldn't have a catch can you're just trying to prove everyone whose told you otherwise wrong.

The crank case in these motors sees positive pressure.

Positive pressure creates oil vapor.

Oil vapor is picked up by the PCV system and sent directly into your intake manifold where it will start to coat the inside of the manifold and the valves.

Yes some cars are better than others and maybe at 30k you'll have little to no build up, but as these engines wear and blow by increases you will start to see more vapor make its way to the intake.

Putting a catch can on these cars does absolutely nothing detrimental to your engine or the way it runs. Not having one will lead to build up eventually on any directed injection motor.

Please anyone reading this don't spread false information that DI motor shouldn't have a CC, every single direct injected motor on the planet should come with some form of one from the factory.

 

[Turbong]

If you think a DI motor shouldn't have a catch can you're just trying to prove everyone whose told you otherwise wrong.

The crank case in these motors sees positive pressure.

Positive pressure creates oil vapor.

Oil vapor is picked up by the PCV system and sent directly into your intake manifold where it will start to coat the inside of the manifold and the valves.

Yes some cars are better than others and maybe at 30k you'll have little to no build up, but as these engines wear and blow by increases you will start to see more vapor make its way to the intake.

Putting a catch can on these cars does absolutely nothing detrimental to your engine or the way it runs. Not having one will lead to build up eventually on any directed injection motor.

Please anyone reading this don't spread false information that DI motor shouldn't have a CC, every single direct injected motor on the planet should come with some form of one from the factory.

Bro, your spreading misinfo right now, by your logic Einstein should have been wrong, the clear point is there is no verifiable evidence to show DI is a big issue on THIS particular platform and additional catch can makes a difference in the rate of fouling without one, too many variables to consider but all theory pure and simple. The only people that were pushing that it's must have or your engine will self destruct were vendors selling the cans that's the only thing that can be verified. 45k miles later still no misfires in sight how would I compare to 45k with one? would I look like 30k miles of carbon in comparison? 35k? you can't answer any of these questions all theory and conjecture, assumptions. The platform has been around 5+ years now plenty high mileage running perfectly fine, no plagues and endless threads of destruction and death. Yes it can be very detrimental, installing it wrong, forget to empty it, hose clogs, failures, leaks, warranty denial. You introduce complexities is an invite to potential new problems quite simply. This has been discussed to death but its comes down to what you think is best for you not by facts, discussion over.

 

[Deleted member]

Bro, your spreading misinfo right now, by your logic Einstein should have been wrong, the clear point is there is no verifiable evidence to show DI is a big issue on THIS particular platform and additional catch can makes a difference in the rate of fouling without one, too many variables to consider but all theory pure and simple. The only people that were pushing that it's must have or your engine will self destruct were vendors selling the cans that's the only thing that can be verified. 45k miles later still no misfires in sight how would I compare to 45k with one? would I look like 30k miles of carbon in comparison? 35k? you can't answer any of these questions all theory and conjecture, assumptions. The platform has been around 5+ years now plenty high mileage running perfectly fine, no plagues and endless threads of destruction and death. Yes it can be very detrimental, installing it wrong, forget to empty it, hose clogs, failures, leaks, warranty denial. You introduce complexities is an invite to potential new problems quite simply. This has been discussed to death but its comes down to what you think is best for you not by facts, discussion over.

How is anything i said above mis info? Oil is picked up by the PCV system, that is an undeniable fact.

The PCV system routes that oil vapor directly into your intake, please explain to me how oil vapor in your intake manifold over time will not have build up occur when there is no detergent(gas) flowing through the head over the intake valves?

The only chance of one having some sort of failure as you described is all from operator error, if you can't install a catch can properly you probably shouldn't be working on your own car, but for those people that's why ford has the dummy proof catch can that drains the oil back into the car. There's no added complexity to a catch can it's extremely simple, warranty claims can be avoided by returning your PCV system to stock.

Your also saying that the only reason to have one is if you are "pushing the car" that is BS, all turbo motors have some amount of blow by, pressure will make its way to the crank case stock or modified it doesn't matter.

Yes the platform is only 5 years old, but this isn't a civic or a corolla. We don't have alot of drivers at the 125k+ mark yet, and I can guarantee you that when you start getting more drivers especially with stock eco's that get to that mileage, if you pop of the intake manifold you will see carbon build up.

I'm at 97k right now and do 100 miles a day with commuting, my UPR CC has been on since 25k and it catches 1/8-1/4 a quart every 5k oil change, you can't tell me that it would have been better for that oil to end up in the intake.

 

[Turbong]

@turbotigger604

Okay so it looks like my points completely flew over your head, so I will keep it simple are you saying at 97k miles you have 0 carbon build up and have completely clean valves?

 

[Deleted member]

@turbotigger604

Okay so it looks like my points completely flew over your head, so I will keep it simple are you saying at 97k miles you have 0 carbon build up and have completely clean valves?

If I read my post im pretty sure I addressed all your points and they definitely didn't fly over my head.

Actually i was preparing to pull the intake at 100k to do an inspection, so give me another few weeks of commuting here and I will gladly post pics/ a video.

For the record ive never once said that having a catch can means you will have 0 carbon build up, but it will help prevent it.

 

[Turbong]

@turbotigger604

Right that was my whole argument, how would your 97k miles look if you didn't have one? That's where the debate comes in, there is no measurement is it 5% 10% 50% 75% better you see how it's a problem when arguing facts, it's anyone's guess.
But yea would definitely like to see how your individually fairing, always good to share personal experiences.

 

[Deleted member]

@turbotigger604

Right that was my whole argument, how would your 97k miles look if you didn't have one? That's where the debate comes in, there is no measurement is it 5% 10% 50% 75% better you see how it's a problem when arguing facts, it's anyone's guess.
But yea would definitely like to see how your individually fairing, always good to share personal experiences.

I agree with you that there is no set way of measuring it in the form of a percentage. It's more black and white than that. Oil vapor will make its way to the intake and will cause build up, to what degree you are correct is subjective to the car, driver, driving conditions, how the vehicle was taken care off, BUT the build up WILL occur regardless.

I don't see how anyone can argue against something that can help prevent the life of your motor but has shown no adverse affects to engine longevity.

I would really love to see any data that shows a catch can was responsible for an engine failure.

 

[RubyRed15]

I'd love to see some data that proves anything related catch cans.

 

[Cobra Jet]

Bro, your spreading misinfo right now, by your logic Einstein should have been wrong, the clear point is there is no verifiable evidence to show DI is a big issue on THIS particular platform and additional catch can makes a difference in the rate of fouling without one, too many variables to consider but all theory pure and simple. The only people that were pushing that it's must have or your engine will self destruct were vendors selling the cans that's the only thing that can be verified. 45k miles later still no misfires in sight how would I compare to 45k with one? would I look like 30k miles of carbon in comparison? 35k? you can't answer any of these questions all theory and conjecture, assumptions. The platform has been around 5+ years now plenty high mileage running perfectly fine, no plagues and endless threads of destruction and death. Yes it can be very detrimental, installing it wrong, forget to empty it, hose clogs, failures, leaks, warranty denial. You introduce complexities is an invite to potential new problems quite simply. This has been discussed to death but its comes down to what you think is best for you not by facts, discussion over.

I'd love to see some data that proves anything related catch cans.

^^^^ good replies and there’s truth to both the regarding the catch can debacle.

Analogy:
Catch cans are like CAI’s... Vendors want to push metal tubed open air elements and claim it’s a CAI, when really it’s a HAI (Hot Air Intake, because it’s absorbing and drawing all that under hood heat right through the intake tract) - psssst hey don’t tell anyone THAT... but everyone sees vendors pushing the parts and their so called claims and instantly believes a cool metal tubed open air element is the shitbomb. (Same applies to the plastic tubed open air elements)

LOL
—

It’s all about the “fear” -
“If ya don’t do this, then THIS will happen”

and the next thing you know, everyone and their great grandmother is pushed into believing that a catch can is a MUST HAVE - when it’s not. If it WERE such an detrimental issue, the Ford Engineers and Engine builders would have included and incorporated such a part into the design, function and necessary maintenance schedule of the S550 2.3 EB or ANY other EB engine in their product line.

These engines and their design aren’t just put together overnight and pushed out into production. In some instances these things are built and tested under extreme measures way before anyone even knows and then put into production after thousands of hours and thousands of miles have been put on them.


My prior 2016 EB w/PP had accrued over 36k on it before it was bought back by Ford. In those 36k miles there never was once an issue with the functional operation of or the performance aspect of that engine at all.

My current 2018 EB w/PP now has over 35k - and again, never an issue with the 2.3 at all.

The “fear mongering” on this site regarding certain aspects of the S550 EB is hilarious at best. But that’s what makes the vendors rich...

I’ve not seen ONE EB owner who has used a catch can for thousands of miles (or years) pull off their intakes to prove their EB has absolutely NO carbon buildup ANYWHERE in the intake or head.

So here’s the challenge:
Somebody do this - and you need to post a compete vid of the R&R from the very start and then showing the parts to the cam after direct removal. I say from the start with no interruptions to prove that the intake or head was not pulled and then cleaned while off cam to claim a miraculous “no carbon” after catch can use.

 

[Deleted member]

I’ve not seen ONE EB owner who has used a catch can for thousands of miles (or years) pull off their intakes to prove their EB has absolutely NO carbon buildup ANYWHERE in the intake or head.

So here’s the challenge:
Somebody do this - and you need to post a compete vid of the R&R from the very start and then showing the parts to the cam after direct removal. I say from the start with no interruptions to prove that the intake or head was not pulled and then cleaned off vid to claim a miraculous “no carbon” after catch can use.

Will be at 100k around the end of February I will gladly be the guinea pig. My catch can has been installed since 25k so it will be a good test mule. Will set up for a no interruptions video.

I'm just failing to see how anyone wouldn't want to prevent oil from going where it's not supposed to go.

 

[Turbong]

Yup nothing sells like fear this sums it up pretty well.

 

[Deleted member]

Yup nothing sells like fear this sums it up pretty well.

You've yet to explain to me how you think all the oil, that is being caught by a catch can is beneficial to direct injected motor? How is oil coating something that is not supposed to, where it will not have the benefit of being cleaned by gasoline better for your engine?

ICE's are not meant to burn a mix of oil, gas and air. Gas and air alone already are going to naturally create carbon deposits over time, so why contribute to this by allowing oil to be burned as well? I'm really failing to understand where the "Snake oil" theory behind a catch can comes from.

No catch can manufacturer is advertising "put this on your car and it will never have carbon build up" they all clearly state how they can CONTRIBUTE to preventing carbon build up, not out right never let it happen.

So why are we against preventing something that we all no for a fact isn't good for a ICE which is carbon build up. We know for a fact that over time robs power, mileage and contributes to parts wearing and oil breaking down faster.

 

[Turbong]

@turbotigger604
The technicalities of it are in theory but not entirely scientific theory of what the can claims to achieve, remember the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim not the other way around therefore nothing is required on the ones that don't add a catch can. It's simply your opinion that the can will help, maybe, possibly, that's not a convincing argument for a must have as you claim. If there was proof after all these years these debates would not exist.

Sponsored