Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Correct PCV Valve

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fuel System: Correct PCV Valve

    Looking for a part number, location to purchase, and possibly a picture of an installed PCV valve.

    1963 Wagonaire, 289 auto.

    Thanks

  • #2
    The stock PCV would have been screwed into the rear of the carb with a hose going to the valley pan cap. at least that's how mine was. I replaced it with a more modern one screwed into the manifold and ran a hose from it to the valley (actually two, one goes to the lower case via the oil fill block off plate) and a hose from it to the intake manifold. Just remember it should flow toward the intake and be closed toward the crankcase.

    Here's my mod. (it's not Chevy orange any more)
    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0809.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	113.7 KB
ID:	1727793Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0811.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	107.2 KB
ID:	1727794Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0810.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	100.1 KB
ID:	1727795

    Now, it's Riviera blue.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0877.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	132.8 KB
ID:	1727796
    Last edited by bensherb; 04-25-2019, 03:07 PM.
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      I know there were two different style set ups for the 63 model year with a 2 barrel carb. One screwed into the valley pan and one was a hose to hose set up based off of a modified breather tube. I have both styles at my disposal. Just wondering if anyone has the correct numbers and place where I can purchase.

      Thanks

      Comment


      • #4
        (1) The system from the Oil Pan to the Air Cleaner is the better system, it's for R1 and R2 Avantis and Jet Thrust Larks and Hawks. This is the Upper Crankcase "high speed" portion.

        The other half of the System is the smaller 3/8" Hose from the Oil Pan Tube to the Rear, AFB Carb. Base. It uses a simple "fitting" with a check Ball for a PCV Valve, with NO restriction, VERY simple.

        (2) The Standard Lark/Hawk setup (2 Brl. & 4 Brl.) come from the rear of the Lifter Cover to the Carb. Base, NOT the Intake.

        This system does use a traditional restricted, one way, PCV Valve, the original was a Carter now NLA, but some 3/8 Hose to 3/8" Hose ('63) modified breather Tube fitting), or the '64 Type; 3/8" Pipe Fitting to 3/8" Hose PCV's by AC, Delco, etc. will work.
        Both work exactly the same, and are equal in performance.
        Just make SURE the Flow is TO the Carb.!
        Last edited by StudeRich; 04-25-2019, 04:36 PM.
        StudeRich
        Second Generation Stude Driver,
        Proud '54 Starliner Owner

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks for the info guys. I am going with the original set up so I will look for the valley pan style pcv valves.

          Comment


          • #6
            Something like this on my 1962 GT Hawk?Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3507.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	87.0 KB
ID:	1727798

            Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2775.jpg
Views:	3
Size:	129.1 KB
ID:	1727797

            Also see pages 13 and 14 of the Chassis Parts Catalog.
            Last edited by 56GH; 04-25-2019, 05:14 PM.
            Bill L.
            1962 GT Hawk

            Comment


            • #7
              Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01425.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	126.3 KB
ID:	1727799Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01426.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	118.9 KB
ID:	1727800I have three 259 engines one is a draft tube the other two are PCV one has a nipple braised to the valley cover and the other has a converted draft tube base. I am a non proponent of the PVC systems and prefer the draft tube, but each to their own.

              Comment


              • #8
                The Left Photo is a 1964 Lark/Hawk/Champ/Transtar V8, the Right is a Calif. emissions 1961 or '62 and ALL 1963 as noted in Post #4.

                Good Photos!
                They work Great if all components are original and present, I would not try to re-invent the wheel with these systems, as they are NOT broken.

                They remove acid creating, damaging water and moisture from the crankcase, and do not effect performance or MPG.
                Last edited by StudeRich; 04-26-2019, 12:54 PM.
                StudeRich
                Second Generation Stude Driver,
                Proud '54 Starliner Owner

                Comment


                • #9
                  The left photo is a 63 259 V588353 and the right photo is a Canadian model VCN303 possibly a replacement engine. I still remain a non proponent of the PVC system. They were only installed on engines that were stationary, enclosed or very slow moving. Their early introduction was in California because smoke was noticed coming from a draft tube pipe and it was therefore determined it was causing pollution and was redirected back into the carburetor to be burned. Some early vehicles in the 40s returned the draft tube gases back into the carburetor only to create an explosive condition whereas the dipstick and oil filler caps would blow off under the hood. To prevent the unwanted explosions a check ball was installed in the return pipe, as time progressed the return gas system was given a technical name Positive Crankcase Ventilation. Draft tubes required limited maintenance as did the PVC systems both systems can clog up and cause unwanted oil leaking and serious engine damage in neglected too long. A new efficient engine creates very little crankcase pressure and crankcase exhaust. Both systems have their pros and cons, pulling hard on a grade with low vacuum the PVC system will suffer some what, whereas the draft tube will be very efficient, however at lower speeds the draft tube will be less efficient. I feel that the draft tube is generally a better system millions of cars used them for millions of efficient miles. Except for enclosed, slow moving and stationary engines the draft tube was the choice of most manufactures. Returning the contaminated gases back in to the engine to be (reburned) was only out of necessity to meet certain smog standards in CA. In British Columbia there are no pollution standards and there is no test conducted and therefore it would not matter what type of system is used. The testing system was only a money making endeavour and did nothing for the environment because the cars to day were more efficient than their testing equipment. They set a maximum that could be charged for any minor repairs at $300 and every visit to a shop was always $300 no matter what the problem was. There were hundreds of shops living off this system, I was a victim on several occasions. Whether it was needed or not the PCV was always replaced along with air cleaners and spark plugs. You could not do the work your self you had to produce a certified shop receipt. Our older engines are not as efficient as the new breeds however I don't believe returning contaminated gases in to the engine is a good thing.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by bensherb View Post
                    The stock PCV would have been screwed into the rear of the carb with a hose going to the valley pan cap. at least that's how mine was. I replaced it with a more modern one screwed into the manifold and ran a hose from it to the valley (actually two, one goes to the lower case via the oil fill block off plate) and a hose from it to the intake manifold. Just remember it should flow toward the intake and be closed toward the crankcase.

                    Here's my mod. (it's not Chevy orange any more)
                    [ATTACH=CONFIG]80530[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]80531[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]80532[/ATTACH]

                    Now, it's Riviera blue.
                    [ATTACH=CONFIG]80533[/ATTACH]
                    suggest some more reading on this. Into that port in the intake will result in those cylinders going lean. The carb port is the one we want

                    Jack vines
                    PackardV8

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X