Folks, is the operation of a factory draft tube ('59, for instance) such that it would tend to spatter oil on the underside of the car during normal usage? I've considered that possibility as a factor in deciding whether to use the existing arrangement or fit the car with a PCV (thus, inauthentic, but beneficial) system. Frankly, I'd hate to go through all the scrubbing/painting and such of a full restoration, only to have the vehicle "lubricate" its underbelly upon its first run down I-5 at speed. Or...am I overthinking this concern?
-
-
Oil spewing out of the Crankcase breather tube would only happen AFTER you wear out the Rings, Valve Guides or something to cause excessive blow-by, it's NOT going to happen on a good engine. Yes you are overthinking this.
The Valve Doors on Sixes and the Lifter Cover on V8's have baffles to separate the Liquid Oil from the vapor.
All Calif. registered Cars (I think it was Mfg. in the prior 10 years or so) in 1961, had to be retrofitted with a upper AND Lower Crankcase ventilation mod kit (PCV kit) to renew the registration.
The new 1961 Calif. and New York sold cars were factory equipped with the Lower kit only. No connection to the Air Cleaner. So I would not consider your idea of adding a PCV Kit a non-original mod that would lose points at a Car show.
A PCV Valve and kit is a good thing because it helps remove moisture from the crankcase, a major cause of sludge and rust.
This 289 Ford one would also work if both it and the GM one mentioned above have the Flow Arrow TO the hose barb end, and you screw it into a '64 only V8 Lifter Cover or drill and tap a aftermarket aluminum cover for it.
Last edited by StudeRich; 03-15-2015, 11:25 PM.StudeRich
Second Generation Stude Driver,
Proud '54 Starliner Owner
SDC Member Since 1967Comment
-
The one I mentioned does not have an arrow. I have two and neither have an arrow. I guess that if used as intended, for a GM application, it would only fit one way, because of being threaded at one end, so no confusion as to direction of flow. I wll see if I can find how it was originally intended to be installed to clear up any doubts.Originally posted by StudeRich View Post
LenComment
-
I have confirmed, to my own satisfaction, that the PCV I mentioned works in the reverse flow to what we need. It screws into a brass block, or directly into the back of the carburetor. The flow is in the opposite direction from a Studebaker engine but does fit the McKinnon 283 engines fitted in 65/66.Originally posted by Skybolt View Post
LenComment
-
The Ford one mentioned also has the writing facing the same direction which leads me to believe it has the same flow direction as the GM one. If holding the PCV in a manner as to have the writing the right way the flow goes from bottom to top. Then it also flows the wrong way. This might be a clue as to how to ID the right part and flow. I will try to find an install diagram for the Ford to confirm.
LenComment
-
Just put it to your lips and blow/suck through it -- that will tell you which way the flow should go.Skip LackieComment
-
This forum post is interesting.
And this: http://www.studebaker-info.org/text3...9/sdc34411.txt
And this also: http://www.studebaker-info.org/text3/pcvhose.txtLast edited by Guest; 03-20-2015, 08:20 AM.Comment
-
Skybolt thanks for the good references to the Old Posts.
That #1 Old Post from 2006 is a very good attempt at finding the AC cross reference PCV Valve for the Factory Carter ones, some very good Research by Skip Lackie. Though no longer in Production, you MAY find these on the Net or at Swap Meets.
But the 3rd. one has me wondering if Stan's info from 2000 is still, or ever was correct.
In a Nutshell, it says that Edelbrock said that their replacement Carbs for the Carter AFB all should pull the Vacuum from the port designed for that purpose IN FRONT of the Carb. (with a hose nipple instead of a better, threaded hole) instead of the neat install that would be at the Rear for the Stude. PCV setup.
It appears that BOTH will work.
What I question is why do they think the Rear two Cylinders are the only ones that get the majority of the flow and Oil Mist when you open the Secondary's?
Shouldn't the Manifold be designed to evenly spread the flow or vacuum draw to/from ALL the Cylinders as evenly as possible?
StudeRich
Second Generation Stude Driver,
Proud '54 Starliner Owner
SDC Member Since 1967Comment
-
Thanks Rich. And thanks to Skybolt for resurrecting that old thread. Maybe this time I'll write those numbers down so I don't have to do all that research another (third) time.Originally posted by StudeRich View PostSkip LackieComment
-
I don't know why I didn't think of this before but if I can instal an original PCV valve, once my V8 is running and on the road, I will take some numbers, as to the different pressures throughout the operating range of the valve, and then try to match a more common valve. As part of my job entails taking these type of reading from hundreds of gas wells each month, and I also make the pitots that I take the readings from, it should not be too difficult to fabricate some sort of spool to fit inline with an appropriate port. Mind you it might take a while to sort it out and I'm not too concerned if my engine is running well, but it will be a rainy day project. I think I have an original 63 V8 PCV valve stashed away and if so I will run the car with that for a while so I can break the engine in. After that I should be good to go. If the reading look realistic I will go through some of the valves suggested in this post and other sites, as well as some that look like they might work. A table will be drawn up and then a comparison can be made.
LenComment
-
Skip and Rich, I just found a C-3729S, 1964 V8, screw into valley/lifter cover type PCV, in my stash of carb related parts. I didn't know I had it. I was looking for the 63 type, which I have somewhere, which is loose but nowhere to be found, so far. There is also a hose with a screw fitting at one end that I'm chasing down. All this will help narrow down the equivalent PCV. I know the Ford one is usable but as to how close the flow and resistance is what I will eventually check.
LenComment
-
Success, I just found the 63 PCV valve. Part #C-3558S, with nipple fitting at each end. It was in a box with an engine small parts kit and some other special odds and ends.
If anyone can tell me at what vacuum reading is at the fitting at the base of the carb, the dedicated one for PCV. What I need is idle readings and WOT readings. If someone has any other RPM that I should check then the corresponding vacuum readings need to be supplied. I need the sealed, closed vacuum. Just hook a vacuum gauge to the carb fitting only. Not with the PCV valve in line or anything else on the same fitting.
I can make up a spool at work and apply the same vacuum and take some readings. This way I can replicate the different vacuums and from there I can check the flow. I will post the results, hopefully with some photos of the tests in progress. I understand this only gives me the OEM part results so at a later date I will procure some similar recommended valves and test them also.
LenComment
-
Since these posts are archived and sometimes referenced later, I want to document the fact that the AC PCV valve number CV735C discussed in posts #12 and 13 above does NOT fit the 1964 Studebaker V8 engines with the threaded fitting in the valley cover. Although they look identical, the flow direction is reversed from the OEM Carter number 3729S (post #26 above). So as far as we know, the correct PCV valves for the 64 Stude engines are NLA and have been for some time.Skip LackieComment
-
One thing I don't see mentioned.
The PCV system is a "part time" system..!
If you think a moment...the vacuum comes from the carburetor. When the engine is at idle, the PCV valve does the most work. As the throttle is opened, the vacuum goes down some, and the faster the throttle is opened, the faster the vacuum drops...equaling the the same amount the PCV does that much less...and does NOTHING at full throttle.
As has been noted though, the valve does "nothing"...for the way the engine runs. It just allows the intake system to pull vapors from the crankcase into the intake. While it does help the environment some, it actually hurts the engine performance. Oil vapor does not burn very well..!
If you want the best in crankcase ventilation, there is actually pumps you can buy to actually pull a full time vacuum in the crankcase. But these don't last long on the street..!
Also as has been noted, the various "breathers" work as the crankcase builds pressure, ALL the time. The stock road draft tube does a good job, rocker cover breathers do a fairly good job, the Avanti, oil pan breather does a good job. All of these work "all" of the time.
For those "green" folks...nothing really wrong with the PCV valve on a good running engine. But as the engine wears, the PCV system adds to the lack of power, and the fouled spark plugs.
MikeComment
-
The function of the PCV valve is often described this way -
idle, valve nearly closed for low flow despite high manifold vacuum. The idle mixture does need to be adjusted to compensate for the additional air coming in from either the air cleaner or oil filler vent, as there is Not much blowby at idle. Ventilates crankcase when the road draft tube would not be doing much good. Which does good things long term for engine life.
Accelerating - PCV wide open for maximum flow despite low manifold vacuum.
Cruising etc, somewhere in between.Attached FilesComment
-
Comment