C3 crankcase ventilation vacuum pump smog pump
Team Owner
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 81,241
Likes: 3,062
From: altered state
St. Jude Donor '05
Too bad bigjoe doesnt post here anymore he does this everyday and could give real life examples on different engine scenarios.
Problem is the "experts" love to discredit long time pros so they
and leave. Knows hes on Speedtalk
Problem is the "experts" love to discredit long time pros so they
and leave. Knows hes on Speedtalk
Le Mans Master
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,284
Likes: 1,170
From: Hermosa
I'm just a bystander reading but I will say every time the name calling and tantrum behavior comes out the point gets lost and statements become less credible regardless of whos making them. Just saying ..
It sure seems now that the pumps can help now even though it was stated in the beginning of the thread that the notion was myth and that was backed up with an incorrect theory about one piston equally displacing another without any type of resistance... (and that was not even considering the blowby pressure) That theory has been proven to not follow the rules of physics in this application and intelligent explanations of this have been given by at least a few people.. Yet the argument now seems to have now changed to attack the "25HP" statement, to save face?
I dont know any of you from Adam but I'm just telling it like it plays out here that egos have taken over and the point of discussion has become a one way argument with one side demanding more proof again and again than just physics alone when they have shown absolutely no proof themselves that their believe that it doesnt work has any merit? That video may have been doctored to exaggerate things to sell a product.. but it doesnt mean the science behind it is all bogus someone could have done a poor job putting the video together or their could have been multiple runs of the same test and maybe they showed the best examples of each to show the best case scenerio? lots of possibilities.
Just my 2 cent although im sure its not appreciated by everyone... Sorry for that
This reminds me of the *** I made of myself when I got all bent out of shape about a members claims about their homemade CAI... turns out I read the estimated HP gains incorrectly and based my negative comments made on a few thread off of that incorrect data I had to suck it up and eat crow.
Point is we are all wrong at times..
It sure seems now that the pumps can help now even though it was stated in the beginning of the thread that the notion was myth and that was backed up with an incorrect theory about one piston equally displacing another without any type of resistance... (and that was not even considering the blowby pressure) That theory has been proven to not follow the rules of physics in this application and intelligent explanations of this have been given by at least a few people.. Yet the argument now seems to have now changed to attack the "25HP" statement, to save face?
I dont know any of you from Adam but I'm just telling it like it plays out here that egos have taken over and the point of discussion has become a one way argument with one side demanding more proof again and again than just physics alone when they have shown absolutely no proof themselves that their believe that it doesnt work has any merit? That video may have been doctored to exaggerate things to sell a product.. but it doesnt mean the science behind it is all bogus someone could have done a poor job putting the video together or their could have been multiple runs of the same test and maybe they showed the best examples of each to show the best case scenerio? lots of possibilities.
Just my 2 cent although im sure its not appreciated by everyone... Sorry for that
This reminds me of the *** I made of myself when I got all bent out of shape about a members claims about their homemade CAI... turns out I read the estimated HP gains incorrectly and based my negative comments made on a few thread off of that incorrect data I had to suck it up and eat crow.
Point is we are all wrong at times..
Last edited by REELAV8R; Jun 24, 2016 at 10:48 AM.
Team Owner
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 37,637
Likes: 3,114
From: Crossville TN
The vidoe is proof, in itself. The guy made two runs with the engine...just like he said: 1) without vacuum pump; 2) with vacuum pump. And, I believe his data are reasonable...if you eliminate the bogus 'add-on' image at the very end of the video.
What do the data tell us? The first run without the vacuum pump generated 461 HP; the second run..with the vacuum pump...generated 449 HP. Proof that the vacuum pump used 22 HP to operate it. Did the vacuum it created in the crankcase benefit the output? No; whatever physics were involved inside the engine, the net result was a 22 HP LOSS.
No one gets something for nothing. You guys can whine all you want about whatever. If you had any integrity, you would simply say "My bad!" and let it go. But, you can't.
I don't know what the book definition of a "fool" is; but my impression is this: A "gullible" person is someone who believes things that aren't true. A "FOOL" IS A GULLIBLE PERSON WHO IS SHOWN PROOF THAT HIS BELIEF IS FALSE AND CONTINUES TO BELIEVE.
If the shoe fits,.......
What do the data tell us? The first run without the vacuum pump generated 461 HP; the second run..with the vacuum pump...generated 449 HP. Proof that the vacuum pump used 22 HP to operate it. Did the vacuum it created in the crankcase benefit the output? No; whatever physics were involved inside the engine, the net result was a 22 HP LOSS.
No one gets something for nothing. You guys can whine all you want about whatever. If you had any integrity, you would simply say "My bad!" and let it go. But, you can't.
I don't know what the book definition of a "fool" is; but my impression is this: A "gullible" person is someone who believes things that aren't true. A "FOOL" IS A GULLIBLE PERSON WHO IS SHOWN PROOF THAT HIS BELIEF IS FALSE AND CONTINUES TO BELIEVE.
If the shoe fits,.......
Last edited by 7T1vette; Jun 24, 2016 at 12:08 PM.
Le Mans Master
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 5,007
Likes: 1,114
From: North tonawanda NY
The vidoe is proof, in itself. The guy made two runs with the engine...just like he said: 1) without vacuum pump; 2) with vacuum pump. And, I believe his data are reasonable...if you eliminate the bogus 'add-on' image at the very end of the video.
What do the data tell us? The first run without the vacuum pump generated 461 HP; the second run..with the vacuum pump...generated 449 HP. Proof that the vacuum pump used 22 HP to operate it. Did the vacuum it created in the crankcase benefit the output? No; whatever physics were involved inside the engine, the net result was a 22 HP LOSS.
No one gets something for nothing. You guys can whine all you want about whatever. If you had any integrity, you would simply say "My bad!" and let it go. But, you can't.
I don't know what the book definition of a "fool" is; but my impression is this: A "gullible" person is someone who believes things that aren't true. A "FOOL" IS A GULLIBLE PERSON WHO IS SHOWN PROOF THAT HIS BELIEF IS FALSE AND CONTINUES TO BELIEVE.
If the shoe fits,.......
What do the data tell us? The first run without the vacuum pump generated 461 HP; the second run..with the vacuum pump...generated 449 HP. Proof that the vacuum pump used 22 HP to operate it. Did the vacuum it created in the crankcase benefit the output? No; whatever physics were involved inside the engine, the net result was a 22 HP LOSS.
No one gets something for nothing. You guys can whine all you want about whatever. If you had any integrity, you would simply say "My bad!" and let it go. But, you can't.
I don't know what the book definition of a "fool" is; but my impression is this: A "gullible" person is someone who believes things that aren't true. A "FOOL" IS A GULLIBLE PERSON WHO IS SHOWN PROOF THAT HIS BELIEF IS FALSE AND CONTINUES TO BELIEVE.
If the shoe fits,.......
What I see.
In the video the real time momentary HP readout without the pump hits a peak of 430.7hp (of course this means little because the actual hp could have momentarily been higher and hit the 461 mark as the dyno shows... just as the second run WITH the pump attached showed a peak of 451.5hp and again the same reasonable thinking would apply it that it could have easily hit 481.. same thing goes with the torque values which also show gains on the second run. I just dont see where your assumptions are coming from here that its a fraud?
Can someone else explain it too me? Am I missing some of the video? Is anyone else seeing the same thing I'm seeing?
You may have got the second part right..
question is who does the shoe fit here?
Last edited by augiedoggy; Jun 24, 2016 at 12:49 PM.
Safety Car
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,000
Likes: 299
From: New York
Here is 1000 miles of driving . This bucket shows you what your PCV is pumping back through your induction system . But of course let me just say that this is doctored , I am faking it and these results are to prove a fake point LMAO 
If anyone asks me to send this to a lab and have it examined and get a written report to prove anything I will hunt you down .. LOL ..
If anyone asks me to send this to a lab and have it examined and get a written report to prove anything I will hunt you down .. LOL ..
Le Mans Master
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,503
Likes: 138
From: Butler Pa
Here is 1000 miles of driving . This bucket shows you what your PCV is pumping back through your induction system . But of course let me just say that this is doctored , I am faking it and these results are to prove a fake point LMAO
If anyone asks me to send this to a lab and have it examined and get a written report to prove anything I will hunt you down .. LOL ..
If anyone asks me to send this to a lab and have it examined and get a written report to prove anything I will hunt you down .. LOL ..
Le Mans Master
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,284
Likes: 1,170
From: Hermosa
Here is a quote from him taken from Speedtalk.
On an 1150 HP Big block (632) the vacuum pump was worth 56 HP at 7500 RPM. On a very racy SB Ford I did. the vacuum pump was good for 51 HP at 8500 RPM.. To get these big gains, the engine should have narrow rings( O$#) and very low tention oil rigs. It is true, If the engine does NOT have some blowby, there will be little or NO gain at all. JOE SHERMAN RACING
Safety Car
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,000
Likes: 299
From: New York
Baffling can do noting to stop what you see in that pail
The Vacuum pump pulls this out of the crankcase and puts it into a catch can. I wanted to show people how combustion gasses, water and oil mix which are in turn fed back into a motor by the PCV ..
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Corvette ZR1X Will Be Pacing the Indy 500, And Could Probably Race, Too!
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvettes Coming to Mecum Indy 2026!
Brett Foote
Top 10 C9 Corvette MUST-HAVES to Fix These C8 Generation Flaws!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Revolutionary 'Corvette Firsts' Most People Don't Know
Joe Kucinski
5 Reasons to Upgrade to an LS6-Powered Corvette; 5 Reasons to Stay LT2
Michael S. Palmer
2027 Corvette vs The World: Every C8 vs Its Closest Competitor
Joe Kucinski
10 Most Common Corvette Problems of the Last 20 Years!
Joe Kucinski
5 MOST and 5 LEAST Popular Corvette Model Years in History!
Joe Kucinski
2027 Corvette Buyer's Guide: Everything You Need to Know!
Joe Kucinski
Le Mans Master
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,503
Likes: 138
From: Butler Pa
Quote:
It is true, If the engine does NOT have some blowby, there will be little or NO gain at all. JOE SHERMAN RACING
It is true, If the engine does NOT have some blowby, there will be little or NO gain at all. JOE SHERMAN RACING
Safety Car
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,000
Likes: 299
From: New York
You might want to go back posting about flooring , birds in a chimney and all other silly topics and stay away from knowledge based topics.
or you may consider reading and learning with no comments at all until you understand the topic.
Of course this is just a suggestion , no intent to offend you at all. Just good sound advice I already know you will not follow, but help is help be it your bird in a chimney topic or here in this topic and I am always ready to assist.
or you may consider reading and learning with no comments at all until you understand the topic.
Of course this is just a suggestion , no intent to offend you at all. Just good sound advice I already know you will not follow, but help is help be it your bird in a chimney topic or here in this topic and I am always ready to assist.
Team Owner
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 37,637
Likes: 3,114
From: Crossville TN
If Joe was telling the truth, he wouldn't have needed to falsify his own video. I'm guessing that he has some stake in selling these [expensive] boat anchors. Charletons have been around as long as there have been gullible folks with money.
If you want to test whether this 'theory' has any chance of some validity, intall a high-speed pressure transducer into the crankcase of an engine, then run it and check for any significant increase in crankcase pressure...in both average pressure and in very short term pressure (milliseconds duration). There will be some increase in crankcase pressure with RPM....which would likely be effectively eliminated with simple breather ports. But, the kind of pressures you think are being generated in the crankcase due to piston ring blow-by just simply don't exist; and whatever pressures are there couldn't possibly be responsible for scrubbing 20+ HP of loss from piston movements. Just thinking about such a scenario is laughable.
If you want to test whether this 'theory' has any chance of some validity, intall a high-speed pressure transducer into the crankcase of an engine, then run it and check for any significant increase in crankcase pressure...in both average pressure and in very short term pressure (milliseconds duration). There will be some increase in crankcase pressure with RPM....which would likely be effectively eliminated with simple breather ports. But, the kind of pressures you think are being generated in the crankcase due to piston ring blow-by just simply don't exist; and whatever pressures are there couldn't possibly be responsible for scrubbing 20+ HP of loss from piston movements. Just thinking about such a scenario is laughable.
Last edited by 7T1vette; Jun 24, 2016 at 02:02 PM.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,503
Likes: 138
From: Butler Pa
You might want to go back posting about flooring , birds in a chimney and all other silly topics and stay away from knowledge based topics.
or you may consider reading and learning with no comments at all until you understand the topic.
Of course this is just a suggestion , no intent to offend you at all. Just good sound advice I already know you will not follow, but help is help be it your bird in a chimney topic or here in this topic and I am always ready to assist.
or you may consider reading and learning with no comments at all until you understand the topic.
Of course this is just a suggestion , no intent to offend you at all. Just good sound advice I already know you will not follow, but help is help be it your bird in a chimney topic or here in this topic and I am always ready to assist.
Racer
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 484
Likes: 43
From: NJ
Sounds like it only works on worn out engines. That would explain diehrd's bucket full of oil.
If Joe was telling the truth, he wouldn't have needed to falsify his own video. I'm guessing that he has some stake in selling these [expensive] boat anchors.
Imagine that, Tens of thousands of races spending good money, using boat anchors on worn out engines to get a few extra horse power at the track. Did they all drink the same cool aid? I'm sure none of them ever did any testing themselves. Did they just spent the money because it's the cool thing to do?
Le Mans Master
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,284
Likes: 1,170
From: Hermosa
Does anyone here have an engine with NO blowby?
Gapless rings may get you close.
Low tension rings reduce frictional losses. They are also more easily unseated however. So potentially more blowby. The vacuum system is very good for those rings.
Stroker engines usually use thin rings that as a result produce less tension. Thinner rings to reduce frictional losses due to the higher piston speeds that will be seen.
But every day rings still produce blowby. At 6000 RPM there are 24000 power cycles per minute, or 400 per second in a V8. Each one of those power cycles produces blowby. Is it really so hard to imagine that this may overwhelm the flow capacity of a 3/8" hose connected to a .310" ID hole on the base of a carburetor? Particularly when the vacuum at that carb port is at or near zero.
We all have seen the posts of where a guy has blowby that is blowing his dip stick out of it's hole, or forcing oil out around the oil filler cap, or causing large amounts of oil to be fed to the intake manifold, and these things are with normal stock motors or slightly hopped up motors at moderate RPM levels.
So why is it hard to imagine that pressure can be accumulated in the crankcase even on an engine experiencing normal blowby levels? Enough that it will impact power at the crank, even on a moderately built engine, or a stock engine that is run hard.
Gapless rings may get you close.
Low tension rings reduce frictional losses. They are also more easily unseated however. So potentially more blowby. The vacuum system is very good for those rings.
Stroker engines usually use thin rings that as a result produce less tension. Thinner rings to reduce frictional losses due to the higher piston speeds that will be seen.
But every day rings still produce blowby. At 6000 RPM there are 24000 power cycles per minute, or 400 per second in a V8. Each one of those power cycles produces blowby. Is it really so hard to imagine that this may overwhelm the flow capacity of a 3/8" hose connected to a .310" ID hole on the base of a carburetor? Particularly when the vacuum at that carb port is at or near zero.
We all have seen the posts of where a guy has blowby that is blowing his dip stick out of it's hole, or forcing oil out around the oil filler cap, or causing large amounts of oil to be fed to the intake manifold, and these things are with normal stock motors or slightly hopped up motors at moderate RPM levels.
So why is it hard to imagine that pressure can be accumulated in the crankcase even on an engine experiencing normal blowby levels? Enough that it will impact power at the crank, even on a moderately built engine, or a stock engine that is run hard.
Team Owner
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 37,637
Likes: 3,114
From: Crossville TN
Two thing I would say:
1) The person who designated that video debacle as "proof" that this theory is valid is the one who undermined this thread;
2) IF this theory held water, the REAL data from that video would have shown it. That engine revved to over 7000 rpm; the data were collected individually at 100 rpm increments...not averaged over a wide rpm band. Therefore, IF the vacuum pump actually produced a net GAIN in horsepower--at any specific rpm--it would have shown in the data. It didn't, pure and simple.
Now, you can also conjecture that this theory "really works", but only with a loosey-goosey, high power circle track engine. Well, go put one on a dyno and prove that it does. Until then, you have merely proven that it DOES NOT work with the test engine that you offered as proof.
P.S. If you guys just wanted to chat with each other, you could have done that with your iPad, or whatever, and kept the rest of the Forum participants out of your little soiree. But, you started a thread in an open forum. If you don't want any negative comments on a 'questionable' device, don't post on an open forum.
1) The person who designated that video debacle as "proof" that this theory is valid is the one who undermined this thread;
2) IF this theory held water, the REAL data from that video would have shown it. That engine revved to over 7000 rpm; the data were collected individually at 100 rpm increments...not averaged over a wide rpm band. Therefore, IF the vacuum pump actually produced a net GAIN in horsepower--at any specific rpm--it would have shown in the data. It didn't, pure and simple.
Now, you can also conjecture that this theory "really works", but only with a loosey-goosey, high power circle track engine. Well, go put one on a dyno and prove that it does. Until then, you have merely proven that it DOES NOT work with the test engine that you offered as proof.
P.S. If you guys just wanted to chat with each other, you could have done that with your iPad, or whatever, and kept the rest of the Forum participants out of your little soiree. But, you started a thread in an open forum. If you don't want any negative comments on a 'questionable' device, don't post on an open forum.
Last edited by 7T1vette; Jun 24, 2016 at 09:11 PM.
Thread Starter
Racer
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 314
Likes: 50
From: Woodbury NJ
I'm the original poster (OP) and thjs thread contains good info. Based on the info, I've decided that I'm going to pursue crankcase ventilation.
A few more questions:
@Kubs: yes, i have an electric fuel pump. When you say attach hose to mechanical fuel pump inlet, your assumtption (sorry to be dense on this) is that the mechanical fuel pump is still installed, correct?
To those that run crankcase vac pumps: the parts list includes: pump, some sort of regulater to set vac (example: 'not to exceed 15 inches), a catch can, and a valve cover for driver side bank, correct? Am i missing anything?
Can vacuum for crankcase, hvac, headlights, and brakes all be run off one pump, or are two separate systems required or recommended?
A few more questions:
@Kubs: yes, i have an electric fuel pump. When you say attach hose to mechanical fuel pump inlet, your assumtption (sorry to be dense on this) is that the mechanical fuel pump is still installed, correct?
To those that run crankcase vac pumps: the parts list includes: pump, some sort of regulater to set vac (example: 'not to exceed 15 inches), a catch can, and a valve cover for driver side bank, correct? Am i missing anything?
Can vacuum for crankcase, hvac, headlights, and brakes all be run off one pump, or are two separate systems required or recommended?
Team Owner
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 21,953
Likes: 1,444
From: Reno Nevada
2024 C3 of the Year Finalist- Modified
To those that run crankcase vac pumps: the parts list includes: pump, some sort of regulater to set vac (example: 'not to exceed 15 inches), a catch can, and a valve cover for driver side bank, correct? Am i missing anything?
Can vacuum for crankcase, hvac, headlights, and brakes all be run off one pump, or are two separate systems required or recommended?
We also used the vacuum pump for accessories because of the big cams and lack of vacuum.
I can't remember the vacuum in inches on these systems, but we never had a regulator. Dry sump systems get regulated to @ 20 inches
Burning Brakes
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,222
Likes: 93
From: shelbyville West Michigan
I admit I am not an expert on race engines, I understand physics, and don't claim to know everything.
but looking at it in a different way, using the 25hp figure, are we saying it takes 25hp to move the air in the engine? if it was a single cylinder, instead of a v8, would it take 3 hp just to move the air? does that mean a lawnmower engine making 3.5 hp could make 6.5hp by adding a vacuum pump?
it just does not seem logical to me that the engine uses that much HP just to move the air in the crank case. and even if it did, the difference between 400hp and 425hp would be difficult to notice in the everyday world, especially considering the relationship to power and speed is not linear.
I stand by the opinion that yes, there may be some gains, but in the bigger picture any gains are negligible and wouldn't be noticeable on the average street/mild build engine.
I have yet to see any definitive proof otherwise but always willing to learn...
but looking at it in a different way, using the 25hp figure, are we saying it takes 25hp to move the air in the engine? if it was a single cylinder, instead of a v8, would it take 3 hp just to move the air? does that mean a lawnmower engine making 3.5 hp could make 6.5hp by adding a vacuum pump?
it just does not seem logical to me that the engine uses that much HP just to move the air in the crank case. and even if it did, the difference between 400hp and 425hp would be difficult to notice in the everyday world, especially considering the relationship to power and speed is not linear.
I stand by the opinion that yes, there may be some gains, but in the bigger picture any gains are negligible and wouldn't be noticeable on the average street/mild build engine.
I have yet to see any definitive proof otherwise but always willing to learn...
Le Mans Master
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 5,007
Likes: 1,114
From: North tonawanda NY
If Joe was telling the truth, he wouldn't have needed to falsify his own video. I'm guessing that he has some stake in selling these [expensive] boat anchors. Charletons have been around as long as there have been gullible folks with money.
If you want to test whether this 'theory' has any chance of some validity, intall a high-speed pressure transducer into the crankcase of an engine, then run it and check for any significant increase in crankcase pressure...in both average pressure and in very short term pressure (milliseconds duration). There will be some increase in crankcase pressure with RPM....which would likely be effectively eliminated with simple breather ports. But, the kind of pressures you think are being generated in the crankcase due to piston ring blow-by just simply don't exist; and whatever pressures are there couldn't possibly be responsible for scrubbing 20+ HP of loss from piston movements. Just thinking about such a scenario is laughable.
If you want to test whether this 'theory' has any chance of some validity, intall a high-speed pressure transducer into the crankcase of an engine, then run it and check for any significant increase in crankcase pressure...in both average pressure and in very short term pressure (milliseconds duration). There will be some increase in crankcase pressure with RPM....which would likely be effectively eliminated with simple breather ports. But, the kind of pressures you think are being generated in the crankcase due to piston ring blow-by just simply don't exist; and whatever pressures are there couldn't possibly be responsible for scrubbing 20+ HP of loss from piston movements. Just thinking about such a scenario is laughable.
Last edited by augiedoggy; Jun 27, 2016 at 08:16 AM.