0Catchcans

Since the thread on this was closed due to all the trouble makers, I will cover the science of this and have an open challenge to ANY here. Bring in your car and we will install a system. Document your fuel economy and the trip here, and then on the trip back. I absolutely guarantee an improvement from 1-3 MPG if the same type of driving and speed is maintained to make the test equal and accurate.

Now here is how and why:

First off, our systems are not like 99% of all other "catchcans". In fact, ours is a complete oil separating crankcase evacuation system and far from the average "catchcan".
The patented design traps up to 95% of ALL the oil, water, acids, raw fuel, and other contaminants exiting your crankcase and each of these has a negative effect on the efficiency of the engines operation.

Each combustive event the air fuel mixture burns. How complete that burn is is dependent on several factors, and one of the most important is the make up of the air/fuel mixture. Pure air and fuel burns the most even and complete releasing the most power/energy per event. When this has other compounds present, this is when detonation and disruptive and incomplete burn takes place. What causes this?

Water
Acids
oil mist, and other minor amounts of ash/carbon and soot.

Oil being the most disruptive. ANY oil mist present can disrupt flame front and burn pattern as well as cause pre-ignition. When these are removed, the process takes place as designed. When any of these contaminants are present this is less efficient, and anyone that has logged runs before or after the installation of one of our systems knows, we reduce knock retard substantially and a slight gain in power and fuel economy is part of the benefit.

How?

An engine is designed to run a peak efficiency at a certain amount of ignition timing advance. And in a perfect environment, all conditions are ideal. But is reality, our engines do not run as designed mainly due to the oil ingestion that becomes part of the intake air charge and eventually part of the combustion event.

All modern engines have knock sensors. These senors detect the "death rattle" of pre-ignition, or detonation and the ECU will then pull timing until the incidence of knock falls below the reset count rate in the ECU programming. All of this takes place quicker than the human ear can detect this. This is why your engine is NOT running at peak efficiency.

As our system, unlike any other design, ours actually does stop nearly all of this ingestion. And in doing so it allows the engine to run at optimum efficiency and the MPG gains and power gains are real and easily documented and verified by anyone willing to install and test for themselves.

Now there is another aspect of our systems that contributes to this, and that is it provides FULL time evacuation on the crankcase by never allowing pressure to build in the first place. All others allow pressure to build when accelerating or at WOT, and even systems that break the circuit and vent or use breathers still allow pressure to build and vent so we reduce the parasitic loss from the pistons fighting pressure on the down stroke of each cycle.

So, these are the reasons. As many "haters" call BS, I challenge ANY to try this and see first hand. If it does not do as claimed, I will buy it back for the full price, no restocking fee.

Now, how do you test a "catchcan" to see how effective it is? It is not difficult. Simply starting with any can and ours, with both clean and oil free, install the can you wish to test first in line. Then install ours AFTER the first can in series. Drive 2,000 miles and drain both cans (here is a long video showing just that...watch to the end as the first drains did not get all out of the cans):


After you drain each and document what each caught, clean each oil free and reverse the order. Now drive the same 2,000 miles and make sure the driving is done as close to the same to make all things equal and fair. You will see while in the first part of the test our can catches as much or more than the can first in line (after that can did its best) only drops get past ours when done in reverse. That is with ANY can design no matter the manufacturers claims. Can't play games, do it and see for yourself. We have done this challenge for years and no other design comes even close.

So in closing, it is science pure and simple on the MPG gains. We do not focus on this as the biggest benefits are engine longevity, they are still substantial benefits all the same.

While the average MPG gain is in the 1-3 MPG range, those with excessive oil ingestion will see more just due to the fact that this oil mist is the main cause of knock retard.

We have over 15000 of these in use and the same testimonials from most all. For the road track enthusiast to the drag racer to the daily driver, the benefits are real and you can see for yourself. We emulate a vacuum pump systems functions as close as possible without a pump, and the results are easy to verify.

Why don't the automakers include these? The cost is prohibitive and that alone means you will never see this on mass produced vehicles. (an example is the ignition switch debacle. GM knew for almost 10 years about a less than $1 fix yet ignored it due to the cost and now has paid over $1billion on fines and settlements. This is industry wide, not just GM. Then we have the fact that aside from the .01% of us that would empty as needed and dispose of the contents properly, most vehicle owners today don't even open their hoods much less check their oil. So that would never be accepted. The buyer today is conditioned to buy a car and do nothing but put gas in until a message pops up on the display telling them to visit the dealer for service.

I ask any to ask questions, but to also PLEASE be respectful and leave the hate and vitriol out of this thread. Lets keep it technical and civil only. Ask questions, make points you can back up with documentation just as the OP of the closed thread did. He is meticulous in everything he does being retired law enforcement and his engineering past, and he quizzed me every which way possible before making the trip to install a system on his baby. And so to be able to prove or disprove our claims he documented his mileage on the trip over, and duplicated the same driving and speed and roads on the way back and he posted the actual results for all to see. You can bet if it did NOT do as claimed he would have taken us to task.

There is a ton of science involved in this, and unlike the "product pushers" that use assumptions alone, we have taken this to the extreme and invite any that doubt to see for themselves.

Steve_R

tstad9i1

Silly question on my part but does that system void the warranty?

ImpliedConsent

Unfortunately, you failed to provide science, but rather anecdotal evidence. Your catch-can is no different from the others. Prove me wrong, send me one. I'll put it through it's paces at an engine shop and look for this MPG increase v. a $5.00 catch can off of ebay.

proexpert

As a multiple patent holder, I would be interested to read the claims on your patent. Can you please PM me the patent number?

rb185afm

Pisswilly

KenHorse

Their website shows over $400

proexpert

15,000 units at $400 is $6 million. Damn.

mschuyler

The trip over and the trip back are NOT THE SAME TRIP. We went over this in the last thread. To compare the two is not scientifically sound. If your customer attempted to present this as a scientific finding in a peer-reviewed journal it would be rejected out of hand. It would not even pass muster as a high school term paper.

Where is it?

KenHorse

I have over 50K miles on another manufacturer's catch can on my M7 Z51 and have no issues with it. Last trip I pushed 36 MPG on one leg

ImpliedConsent

I offered to test. I have an engine shop available (they're gonna do my heads/cam...staying NA). I've talked... let me rephrase that...we had a good chuckle about this Tracy Lewis thing. If I can score one, we'll test it for days...pics, sensor prints, videos. I'm not buying one, neither is the shop at $400.00. Really? Maybe I'll try to convince one of my mega-buck racer friends to buy one and install (they use catchcans, but are hand built). We won't get the MPG on the racer, but maybe quality test?

Steve_R

proexpert

Show us the patent claims. This will end the story one way or another.

0Catchcans

We normally see from 1-3 MPG The highest was from a company with a fleet of 3/4 ton chevy vans that transports medical from Atlanta to Miami as a steady route. They saw 6 mpg on one, and between 2-4 on the rest. That is unusual. Average is 1-3. And we guarantee the results. You can try and see for yourself.

By Federal law it cannot as it does not reduce, delete, or defeat any function of the factory system, and it does not open any portion to the atmosphere. We are NOT CARB cert for CA highway use yet.

That is a crazy claim. That's like saying a ford fiesta is the same as a corvette! Look at the average Ebay can:




And I supplied videos of long term testing performed by others not in anyway affiliated with us such as this popular can: It is long, but go to the 18 minute mark to see end results.


Or this long term test:
https://www.f150forum.com/f70/5-0-up...s-test-254381/

or this one:
https://themustangsource.com/forums/...rt-2-a-532449/

Or this one:
https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=512223

And dozens of others. There is a huge disparity in effectiveness, and anyone can perform these themselves to test and see personally.

www.RXCatchcans.com The RX and the Signature series are identical internally, the signature series is a billet external case.

15/060,832 Provisional issued as well.



For all those saying there is no proof presented, please go back and read my initial post.

All is fact. And the oil mist/vapor is created from windage and not excessive temperature.

We are certainly not sending out free systems to rude skeptics, but anyone that is willing to test and report back that can visit us, contact me and discuss this. And we are willing to install a system for additional proof.

0Catchcans

And here is a technical paper on oil vapors to understand this part better. You ONLY want air and fuel in the combustion chamber, and any tuner can tell you how much oil present creates detonation and the resulting knock retard in order to remove the knock:

https://www.machinerylubrication.com...es-consume-oil

We have for the past 10 plus years added hundreds of these to fleets of light trucks and vans only for the fuel economy savings as most fleets are leased and only kept in use for 3-4 years the fleet owners seem less concerned about engine longevity and more about cost to operate.

As this Lubrication lab found in a 2 year study found oil change intervals with our system can be extended substantially as well as our system provides full time evacuation of the contaminates: (only new GDI equipped vehicles were used in this study)

Final results of 2 year study

Here is a brief summary of what was documented in the 2 year testing by one of the Worlds largest Lubrication companies:


The RX/Tracy Lewis Performance system was tested on the most severe engine on the road today as far as GDI related issues. The testing was performed on a fleet of new vehicles including GM and others, but they only focused on the results of the Ford Ecoboost engines as they experience the most severe GDI related effects.

First, here is how the testing was performed. Each vehicle has been run through proper break-in and driven over 10k miles to eliminate ring seating variance, etc.

Then the vehicle would be run for app 5-6k miles on their premium full synthetic oil and a sample drawn...this is without our system installed. Then, our system is installed on that same oil fill, no oil change, and then run another 4-5k miles and another sample drawn and at that time oil is drained and changed.

Here are some examples on just viscosity and fuel dilution:

Miles on vehicle: 55060 Ford 3.5L Ecoboost

Miles on oil when sample drawn: 5,943 Fuel dilution: 5.6% Viscosity @40*C: 45.71 Viscosity @100*C: 8.76 (Now, vehicle is driven and sample drawn below)

Miles on oil when sample drawn: 9,411 Fuel dilution: 3.86% Viscosity @40*C: 46.98 Viscosity @100*C: 8.82 (Even AFTER saturation well above the industry 5% threshold where oil is considered "condemned" or no longer able to protect the engine our system was able to not only prevent further fuel dilution and viscosity degradation, but actually IMPROVED each taking the oil that was no longer usable and extending it's ability to protect far longer.


Now, that was the least dramatic result....some were as high as fuel dilution levels of 7% to above 12% by 5k miles (cold start enrichment in cool/cold conditions adds to dilution far quicker) and we were able to bring those levels down even more dramatically, in some cases by as much as 50% less after a few thousand miles WITH our system installed.


Other benefits documented: Average fuel economy increases of 1-3 MPG due to a cleaner burn with the contaminants removed from the PCV vapors as more energy is released with just air and fuel present during the combustion process. This also shows a significant reduction in knock retard as pre-ignition is reduced and combined with a cleaner burn in the combustion chamber, reduces emissions as well as improves fuel economy.


As our system converts the PCV system to full time evacuation and flushing VS part time as the OEM systems come and retains a closed emissions compliant system.


This prevents the stagnant periods of operation when the contaminants and combustion by-products that enter as blow-by and are the primary source of oil contamination and our system greatly reduces this by removing these at all times the engine is running utilizing 2 separate evacuation suction sources, the intake manifold vacuum for when reversion pluses are not canceling it out (during acceleration or hard operation no evacuation suction is present stock), and using the Venturi effect when accelerating or running high RPM/throttle.


On GDI engines (most all Automakers are now 100% GDI) we have the additional benefit of reducing the intake valve coking issue by as much as 85% (we cannot eliminate all as these engines use variable valve events to allow back filling of exhaust gasses back into the port behind the valves to be re-burnt emulating the outdated EGR system/valves of old.

To summarize, the benefits:

Engine life extended to 2-3 times expected life w.out the system installed.

Fuel economy increase of 1-3 MPG average.

Extended oil drain intervals allowing from 50% to 100% longer use of oil reducing pollution from improperly disposed of drain oil.

Reduced tailpipe emissions. As we remove most of the compounds causing a incomplete burn in the combustion process reducing the amount of emissions.

Reduction of intake valve deposits by as much as 85%.

The downside is these MUST be drained and the contents collected disposed of properly as with any drain oil. every 5k miles as a rule (will vary from engine to engine depending on state of piston ring seal to cylinder walls).

We do have a system that never needs to be emptied or service for in excess of 100k miles, but not released yet that could be retrofitted at a later date.

What is in the contents of the system that are removed from the engine crankcase vapors?

Here is a sample after a 2400 mile drain after being spun in a centrifuge to separate all for analysis:


70% was acidic water (the sulfuric acid produced during the combustion process cannot be separated from the water).

23% was raw fuel (GDI engines introduce fuel at well over 2,000 PSI and this pushes many times the amount past the rings of old port injection systems that operated at 45-50 PSI)

and only 7% was actual oil, and it is saturated with abrasive particulate matter.


This other wise would have remained in the crankcase mixing with and contaminating the engine oil, and also contaminating the intake air charge reducing the over efficiency of the engines combustion process.

On Fleet applications, depending on miles driven the fuel economy and oil drain extensions give a ROI in app 6.7 months average. As a whole, these could drastically reduce overall emissions as well as tremendous savings on fuel cost and usage.

We are still in testing of our Diesel versions, but are a ways from validation and release.

Hope this helps!

speed4tu

So what the original post says is you guarantee better MPG on the "trip back VS the trip here". Does this mean that your are on top of a hill from all directions? Therefore showing customers a 1-3 mpg improvement from leaving your place? Assuming you install it for the customer.

0Catchcans

If you doubt it, try it yourself and see. That simple.

There are over 15,000 of these systems in use currently, approximately 1/4th are for fleet owners just for the fuel economy gains. We don't focus on that benefit for the performance crown as they look for the power improvements and crankcase pressure and evacuation provided and eliminating the oil ingestion causing detonation.
FYI, there are no hills in the south part of Florida so it is all level land. This person that made the first thread documented his fuel economy on the 2 plus hour drive to us (he reset it to confirm accuracy) as he had heard others report MPG increases. We told him what we tell all, 1-3 is average. He gained 4.5 and he reset it when he left and drove the same route back home. He is in the Deltona area, and were near Sarasota. Almost all is interstate and he used his cruise control each way.

Here is his documentation...the guy is ex police detective as well as an engineer and is meticulous in everything he does.

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...-way-home.html

So this simple. Drive the same style, route, and speeds before and after and see first hand. And it is easy to understand. If you are not running at the peak timing advance, your engine will use more fuel and produce less power. That is with any engine. The same with oil mist ingestion via the intake air charge. When you only have air and fuel in the combustion chamber at ignition, the burn is as designed. ANY oil will disrupt this.

And what our system traps on average is shown above after spun in the centrifuge and then analysed.

Anyone not interested in adding the system that's fine, but please don't disrupt the thread for those that wish to learn. And it is risk free to see for yourself. Come to our facility in FL and we install it free, only thing you cover is the system. If not happy, we will buy it back with NO restocking fee. That simple. All of this is guaranteed and verified by thousands of happy users.

Here are back to back dyno runs the same day, same factors before and after c=manually cleaning the vales of the coking deposits at only 20k miles by a member here as well:

proexpert

I don't think this is just any old catch can. Maybe I'm just a stupid old engineer. Link to the US patent is below. There are a number of interesting related documents. The device has multiple baffles that divide the can into sections. The patent lists one claim as listed below. I'm gonna have to get me some of that "coalescing material". I'm not knocking the product, just having fun with the lawyer speak.




https://patents.google.com/patent/US...15%2f060%2c832

PatternDayTrader

Looks like a super fancy catch can.