When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Actually Dealerships make a lot of money doing warranty, the warranty labor rate is usually as high as the CP rate and they get paid a markup on parts. Only an item directly causing a issue with the problem would be cause for denial. If you blew oil seals because of an improperly plumbed can or because you changed the evac system to operate differently, those could be cause for denial.
FYREANT posted pictures of coking that accumulated while using a catch can. If the engine develops an issue because of an accumulation while inside the warranty period, you are advising removal of the catch can before going to the dealer. Considering the continued coking, although at a slower rate, it seems the catch can is simply delaying the inevitable.
The can Ant used was one designed for a port injection engine and only traps a portion of the compounds that cause the coking, but it still did tons to slow it compared to no system. It is critical to install the correct type that does catch all or nearly all of these compounds. And, if not run, then the valve guides are subject to the abrasive deposits being drawn into the guides with each cycle of the valve. By 20-30 k miles are seeing these worn totally out of spec, and with the past valve issues of the LS7, that is not good either.
Originally Posted by sycraft
Actually Dealerships make a lot of money doing warranty, the warranty labor rate is usually as high as the CP rate and they get paid a markup on parts. Only an item directly causing a issue with the problem would be cause for denial. If you blew oil seals because of an improperly plumbed can or because you changed the evac system to operate differently, those could be cause for denial.
Absolutely correct. A service center should always welcome warranty work, but they also have a fiduciary responsibility to not allow blatant claims. The example Sycraft lists is a perfect one. Connect a system up backwards or incorrectly so pressure builds instead of pulling vacuum then that is a legit reason to deny the claim. Same if you install a tank/vented system that defeats and deletes the critical functions of the PCV system as this will damage the engine over time. It is critical that these compounds are removed via suction/vacuum as soon as they enter as blow-by or they quickly settle and mix with the oil.
Why some dealers are so difficult in many cases is beyond me, but we have all heard the stories of them. Patronize the dealers that deserve your business, boycott those that are jerks.
Now, back to technical discussions....ask any questions concerning GDI and I will answer them. Especially related to PCV systems, intake valve coking issues and accelerated engine wear, and what happens if you defeat the PCV systems function to your engine. It is far more than a "emissions device". It is critical to the life of your engine and you must NEVER defeat it.
The can Ant used was one designed for a port injection engine and only traps a portion of the compounds that cause the coking, but it still did tons to slow it compared to no system. It is critical to install the correct type that does catch all or nearly all of these compounds. And, if not run, then the valve guides are subject to the abrasive deposits being drawn into the guides with each cycle of the valve. By 20-30 k miles are seeing these worn totally out of spec, and with the past valve issues of the LS7, that is not good either.
The can used by FYREANT is an Elite E2 (post #3) which is a product you currently sell. If that is not intended for GDI, what is the proper can?
Why some dealers are so difficult in many cases is beyond me, but we have all heard the stories of them. Patronize the dealers that deserve your business, boycott those that are jerks.
A dealer that does not perform warranty work on a modified vehicle are hardly jerks. Many times the factory rep is the one that says, No, even if the dealer is willing. Manufacturers pay out literally billions of dollars per year in warranty work and goodwill repairs, in which many cases are NOT specifically "Defects in Materials or Workmanship," which is what is actually warrantable. Believe it or not, people lie...."Oh yeah, I didn't have a supercharger on here when it blew, I have no idea what happened."
If the dealer proceeds with the work without authorization, and the manufacturer disagrees with the premise, the dealer gets charged back for the repair. If they call you, the customer, and say, Hey, we told you this was covered but now it's not, come pay for your 10K dollar engine, how long will it take you to show up with the money?
The point is, it isn't the dealer's fault. There is a Sales and Service Agreement the Dealer has with the Manufacturer to do business in a way the Manuf sees fit and if the Dealer deviates they can pay for it, lose the franchise, etc. If you find a dealer willing to assume that risk for you, good for you. But if they don't, I wouldn't blame them one bit. Don't choose your dealer based on working on your modified jalopy, choose them because they underpromise and overdeliver. Choose them because you trust their work and opinions, not for their willingness to circumvent the system.
Modify your car on your own time and your own dime.
They will try and say it will. Anything that a dealership can get out of, they will try. In the end, they are there to make money and warranty costs a dealership money.
If your transmission goes out, no they cannot say it voids your warranty. The catch can and the transmission has no relation.
But I go by the golden rule, if you can take it off and put it back to stock before going to dealership without getting grief, then do so.
I have always thought that GM pays the dealer to do warranty work that GM feels is justified. The dealer wants to do the warranty work to keep his service & parts departments working and defray the overhead costs. The repair has to be justified under the terms of the warranty however. So the dealer is playing both ends against the middle. A tricky row to hoe. That's what I have thought. Is my logic correct or way off?
I agree with your golden rule though. Back to stock and then back to not stock after the warranty work is finished. BTS&TBTNS. A new acronym for the masses- just kidding. Bob
Edit: Sorry for not reading the last few posts and therefore restating what others have said. I answered from the notification email and not from the actual posts. I hate it when that is done. I hate myself for doing it. Oh woe!
Last edited by rettop; 08-26-2015 at 06:20 PM.
Reason: Self chastisement.
I had about 30 min today one on one with the Service Manager of an AutoNation Chevrolet dealership today while we were trying to diagnose an intermittent noise in my C7.
He is very familiar with the use of catch cans to intercept crankcase gases before they enter the the intake system and has no problem with them being installed by owners without voiding warranty. Obviously, it must be installed correctly so as to not interfere with PCV operation.
He pointed out that the 2014 Camaro came from GM with a "PCV oil separator" installed. This part is included in the GM Performance Parts catalog. There is no similar part in the catalog for C7s.
I used a catch can on my C5 and was surprised at how much fluid it collected. I ordered one for my C7 today.
The can used by FYREANT is an Elite E2 (post #3) which is a product you currently sell. If that is not intended for GDI, what is the proper can?
Originally Posted by FYREANT
Your citation is correct, however in post #21 I corrected myself and stated that my can is not the E2, just the regular.
Correct. This is why Elite Engineering went to such lengths to design one that does what the GDI engines need. In the beginning it was thought the current models would be fine, but as more is learned about the unique issue the DI engines have, they went to great time and expense to bring out the new line. By Ants valve pics though it sure did a good job in slowing the rate of deposits! We are starting a dedicated thread to the sales and matching the correct system to each vehicle today so hopefully that will be helpful to those wondering what to order.
So I thought I would add to this as I have been following the thread since it was started. My car currently has 11,500 miles, non-z51, and I put an elite catch can on 4000 miles ago. Yesterday I changed my air filter and checked the can for the first time. Not really much going on in there, no where near what the OP had going on in the first post. Most of my miles are trips to wherever, with a drive to work here and there under "spirited" conditions on the back roads.
Overall, I could say for me and this car, a can is not really needed. The amount that it caught could have been handled by the natural function of the PCV system, so I would go out on a limb and say excessive collection as seen by the OP may be the exception not the rule. But I guess you never know till you put one on and check. Maybe I will keep it maybe I wont, one more thing to remember to check/change.
Your statement below about the amount being handled by the natural function is incorrect. No matter how little it may have collected it still is better then letting it enter the engine which is where the natural function would take it. different driving styles and elevations along with fuel quality play rolls in how much you might see in the can besides the quality of the can itself and how well the engine sealed during break in.
Originally Posted by rothchilds
So I thought I would add to this as I have been following the thread since it was started. My car currently has 11,500 miles, non-z51, and I put an elite catch can on 4000 miles ago. Yesterday I changed my air filter and checked the can for the first time. Not really much going on in there, no where near what the OP had going on in the first post. Most of my miles are trips to wherever, with a drive to work here and there under "spirited" conditions on the back roads.
Overall, I could say for me and this car, a can is not really needed. The amount that it caught could have been handled by the natural function of the PCV system, so I would go out on a limb and say excessive collection as seen by the OP may be the exception not the rule. But I guess you never know till you put one on and check. Maybe I will keep it maybe I wont, one more thing to remember to check/change.
Your statement below about the amount being handled by the natural function is incorrect. No matter how little it may have collected it still is better then letting it enter the engine which is where the natural function would take it. different driving styles and elevations along with fuel quality play rolls in how much you might see in the can besides the quality of the can itself and how well the engine sealed during break in.
You forgot "or how much your cylinders are out-of-round from the factory"
Your statement below about the amount being handled by the natural function is incorrect. No matter how little it may have collected it still is better then letting it enter the engine which is where the natural function would take it. different driving styles and elevations along with fuel quality play rolls in how much you might see in the can besides the quality of the can itself and how well the engine sealed during break in.
No, my statement is not incorrect. All cars burn oil. The question is whether it is a large amount, as in the OP's case, or a small negligible amount, as in my case. So my point being, if it was such a dire thing, and creates such harm to the engine as to be worried about, then either manufacturers would install a catch can or alternate system on every vehicle or a suitable alternate. Obviously this is not the case.
However, I clearly pointed out that each car is different, and manufacturing tolerances or as you pointed out different driving styles and elevations along with fuel quality play rolls in how much you might see in the can besides the quality of the can itself and how well the engine sealed during break in. You wont know until you check.
I believe the OP's point was originally catch cans were a topic for dry-sump z-51 cars, with wet sump not having an issue. In his case he clearly identified it was not true. In my case, I identified something else. Just information, no judgement on the validity. People need a variety of information to make a decision, this is just one more piece.
that said, I'm out of this thread now. I'm not interested in discussing the validity or absolutes of whether a catch can is needed for every car.
So my point being, if it was such a dire thing, and creates such harm to the engine as to be worried about, then either manufacturers would install a catch can or alternate system on every vehicle or a suitable alternate. Obviously this is not the case.
I understand why "you" came to this conclusion which I respect, but I read several articles in the past why car manufacturers do not install oil catch cans. The primary reason being, the vast amount of car owners don't check their tire inflation let alone requiring them to check catch can levels.
I understand why "you" came to this conclusion which I respect, but I read several articles in the past why car manufacturers do not install oil catch cans. The primary reason being, the vast amount of car owners don't check their tire inflation let alone requiring them to check catch can levels.
Actually there are a few vehicle manufacturers that include an OEM Catch Can, in the form of an air/oil PCV separator, VW, Audi, etc.
There is a lot of truth to the fact many people wouldn't check their Catch Can periodically, so there's a possibility that hydro-static lock (and serious engine damage) could occur should the engine ingest a big gulp of oil from a full Catch Can.
The way I look at Catch Can issue is, DI engines will run fine for years without installing a Catch Can, but valve coking will occur at a faster rate, and the valve coking will decrease horsepower over time as well. Not to mention oil coating (and possible oil pooling) of the air manifold areas will occur at a faster rate too.
For those that tend to keep their vehicles for only a few years it's probably not worth adding a Catch Can (let the next owner deal with the valve coking). I tend to keep my vehicles for several years, so for me, it was worth adding it.
Actually there are a few vehicle manufacturers that include an OEM Catch Can, in the form of an air/oil PCV separator, VW, Audi, etc.
There is a lot of truth to the fact many people wouldn't check their Catch Can periodically, so there's a possibility that hydro-static lock (and serious engine damage) could occur should the engine ingest a big gulp of oil from a full Catch Can.
The way I look at Catch Can issue is, DI engines will run fine for years without installing a Catch Can, but valve coking will occur at a faster rate, and the valve coking will decrease horsepower over time as well. Not to mention oil coating (and possible oil pooling) of the air manifold areas will occur at a faster rate too.
For those that tend to keep their vehicles for only a few years it's probably not worth adding a Catch Can (let the next owner deal with the valve coking). I tend to keep my vehicles for several years, so for me, it was worth adding it.
So I thought I would add to this as I have been following the thread since it was started. My car currently has 11,500 miles, non-z51, and I put an elite catch can on 4000 miles ago. Yesterday I changed my air filter and checked the can for the first time. Not really much going on in there, no where near what the OP had going on in the first post. Most of my miles are trips to wherever, with a drive to work here and there under "spirited" conditions on the back roads.
Overall, I could say for me and this car, a can is not really needed. The amount that it caught could have been handled by the natural function of the PCV system, so I would go out on a limb and say excessive collection as seen by the OP may be the exception not the rule. But I guess you never know till you put one on and check. Maybe I will keep it maybe I wont, one more thing to remember to check/change.
Can you post pictures of how your system is routed and which Elite can you have installed? Also, a good rule is to take the few minutes to remove your intake manifold and actually look at your intake valves up close. Easy to do, quick, and easy to reinstall. Then you will know first hand how yours is holding up.
Originally Posted by Rave
Actually there are a few vehicle manufacturers that include an OEM Catch Can, in the form of an air/oil PCV separator, VW, Audi, etc.
There is a lot of truth to the fact many people wouldn't check their Catch Can periodically, so there's a possibility that hydro-static lock (and serious engine damage) could occur should the engine ingest a big gulp of oil from a full Catch Can.
The way I look at Catch Can issue is, DI engines will run fine for years without installing a Catch Can, but valve coking will occur at a faster rate, and the valve coking will decrease horsepower over time as well. Not to mention oil coating (and possible oil pooling) of the air manifold areas will occur at a faster rate too.
For those that tend to keep their vehicles for only a few years it's probably not worth adding a Catch Can (let the next owner deal with the valve coking). I tend to keep my vehicles for several years, so for me, it was worth adding it.
Originally Posted by FYREANT
This. Solid logic there.
Mopar does on the Hemi's now as well, but the type of separators that return what is trapped to the crankcase again cannot be made more that 20-25% effective or they also trap the damaging compounds that must be removed through the evacuation process or the engine will see accelerated wear and eventual failure. That is one of the projects I have been consulting on, the system that does not need to be emptied or serviced for 100k plus miles. The firm has Patents applied for on the system that self empties and does not pollute or cause issues. Hope to see it implemented in the next 3-4 years (average time to add such into the production on a new vehicle).
Looking back in history, Maserati implemented some very robust/effective catchcans back in the late 50's and through the early 60's to prevent oil dripping on the ground from the draft tube, and to keep oil out of the combustion chamber for power/detonation reduction purposes. I am sure there are other early examples as well if I search.
i only have 2k miles on my baby now. I installed the EE can at about 500 miles and have emptied probably double, or triple of whats pictured in the plastic cup above. A significant or excessive amount? No, but not having that in my intake is worth $200....
i only have 2k miles on my baby now. I installed the EE can at about 500 miles and have emptied probably double, or triple of whats pictured in the plastic cup above. A significant or excessive amount? No, but not having that in my intake is worth $200....
All depends on the engine and if the rings seated properly in that first few hundred miles. A well broken in engine (not run easy, but following the GM instructions for techs...not the consumer version) will have very little, and one driven easy that first 1500 miles will almost always have more. Still interested to see how he has his routed, etc.
Totally agree what you catch is NOT what you want ingested.
08-26-2015, 04:15 PM
Mopar does on the Hemi's now as well, but the type of separators that return what is trapped to the crankcase again cannot be made more that 20-25% effective or they also trap the damaging compounds that must be removed through the evacuation process or the engine will see accelerated wear and eventual failure. That is one of the projects I have been consulting on, the system that does not need to be emptied or serviced for 100k plus miles. The firm has Patents applied for on the system that self empties and does not pollute or cause issues. Hope to see it implemented in the next 3-4 years (average time to add such into the production on a new vehicle).
