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.
I just don't think its an issue any more. I have yet to see any decent data showing that any oil on the valves is causing issues. I would imagine that if GM thought it was gonna cause warranty issues, they would design it into the engine itself and call it a day...
Probably don't really need it, but I just bought the Mishimoto Catch Can. Sounds like it can only help and it's not like it's $2k so it wasn't that much of an expense. Never used one before, this will be my first.
I just don't think its an issue any more. I have yet to see any decent data showing that any oil on the valves is causing issues. I would imagine that if GM thought it was gonna cause warranty issues, they would design it into the engine itself and call it a day...
No offense, did you see my pics above? GM does not care once you are out of warranty.
No offense, did you see my pics above? GM does not care once you are out of warranty.
yeah, but with a 5/60k warranty, plus extended warranties that a lot of folks buy, I would imagine that they do care.
I am not saying that there aren't pics showing oil in there... I just don't see a ton of data showing that it actually creates problems on the newer LT2.
yeah, but with a 5/60k warranty, plus extended warranties that a lot of folks buy, I would imagine that they do care.
I am not saying that there aren't pics showing oil in there... I just don't see a ton of data showing that it actually creates problems...
My entire intake manifold was covered w/ oil when I changed it out at 7k miles and you see what came out of my CC at its first dump. Thats a lot of oil flowing onto the valves if not caught, not worth the risk to me on a $90k car, or any car. Cheap insurance IMO. To each their own tho.
I just figure that at this point, the cars have been out for 4 years now... if there were valve issues related to oil in the intake track, we would know about it.
I just figure that at this point, the cars have been out for 4 years now... if there were valve issues related to oil in the intake track, we would know about it.
Exactly.
No, we don't need an oil catch can...get one if you want to get one.
That carbon fiber one is badass! Larger capacity can and hoses that look OEM with the braided sleeves. Mishimoto makes a solid product backed by legit engineering and actual R&D, which is why I'm running their intake on my wife's Rubicon vs. the aFe systems I typically prefer on sports cars.
RPI's sale price is $444 while it's $420 direct from Mishimoto. The best price I can find for the standard Mishimoto can is $234.
Spirited driving (particularly track) will significantly increase the amount of blowby compared to a lazy Sunday morning drive, so if the purpose is to reduce oil in the manifold, the "need" for a can really depends upon how the car is driven.
In RKCRLR's first pic, the guy purchased the car used @ 27k miles... we don't know how the car was driven. The second pic shows his wife's Camaro SS (not his) @ 40k miles... we don't know how she drives. Last pic was stock Sierra @ 117k miles (disturbingly clean... like, this truck has never been driven, clean)... but we don't know how he drives. Seeing the pattern? It's difficult to draw useful conclusions without all of the data. Several here, however, have shown their cans are catching significant amounts of oil in only 1k miles, and we do know their driving pattern as they usually tell us.
My can (ADD W1) came in just yesterday, so I'll be adding it into the mix once my pTR manifold shows up. I'll probably add in a small chunk of brass brillo pad to the can's upper lid just to provide more surface area for oil to condense onto.
I see a sale for the carbon fiber one, but I don’t need that. I wish they would put the regular one on sale. That thing is expensive as **** for what it is.
I see a sale for the carbon fiber one, but I don’t need that. I wish they would put the regular one on sale. That thing is expensive as **** for what it is.
I found it for $234 last night, otherwise you can get the Corsa, which is very similar, for under $200. Those are my two personal favorites for the C8.
When I used them on my Silverado's, I used these. Cheap, and it captured plenty of oil and sludge... Add some extra fine steel wool into the inlet filter, toss the larger steel wool into the bottom to keep the oil from sloshing around...
Spirited driving (particularly track) will significantly increase the amount of blowby compared to a lazy Sunday morning drive, so if the purpose is to reduce oil in the manifold, the "need" for a can really depends upon how the car is driven.
In RKCRLR's first pic, the guy purchased the car used @ 27k miles... we don't know how the car was driven. The second pic shows his wife's Camaro SS (not his) @ 40k miles... we don't know how she drives. Last pic was stock Sierra @ 117k miles (disturbingly clean... like, this truck has never been driven, clean)... but we don't know how he drives. Seeing the pattern? It's difficult to draw useful conclusions without all of the data. Several here, however, have shown their cans are catching significant amounts of oil in only 1k miles, and we do know their driving pattern as they usually tell us.
My can (ADD W1) came in just yesterday, so I'll be adding it into the mix once my pTR manifold shows up. I'll probably add in a small chunk of brass brillo pad to the can's upper lid just to provide more surface area for oil to condense onto.
I agree how much you catch is dependant on how you drive. If I was frequently tracking I'd probably add one. And if I was doing engine mods that affect breathing I'd definitely add one. But I don't believe it is necessary for stock LT engines even during the most spirited street driving.
Some believe that it is a self-fulfilling prophecy, i.e., the very act of installing a catch can upsets the balance of the PVC system and will cause you to collect more fluid. I don't know if I buy into this but it is a plausible theory. Nor do we know if there is a correlation between the fluid in the LT PVC system and carbon buildup on the valves. It would be interesting to see an analysis of what the fluid is.
What we do know is that the LT engines have been out for a decade now. If there was an inherent problem with intake carbon buildup on otherwise normally operating LT engines you'd think there would be at least a few reports of it. There is certainly no shortage of reports on the internet of engines that do have a problem with carbon buildup.
I agree how much you catch is dependant on how you drive. If I was frequently tracking I'd probably add one. And if I was doing engine mods that affect breathing I'd definitely add one. But I don't believe it is necessary for stock LT engines even during the most spirited street driving.
Some believe that it is a self-fulfilling prophecy, i.e., the very act of installing a catch can upsets the balance of the PVC system and will cause you to collect more fluid. I don't know if I buy into this but it is a plausible theory. Nor do we know if there is a correlation between the fluid in the LT PVC system and carbon buildup on the valves. It would be interesting to see an analysis of what the fluid is.
What we do know is that the LT engines have been out for a decade now. If there was an inherent problem with intake carbon buildup on otherwise normally operating LT engines you'd think there would be at least a few reports of it. There is certainly no shortage of reports on the internet of engines that do have a problem with carbon buildup.
Agreed. Seems to be some credibility to the notion that adding a catch can, might increase the amount of oil collected...
After reading that thread for 45 min, the one comment that hit home was, "The engineers for this motor said it is not needed. If you don't trust them, then why would you buy the car that they designed?"
I found it for $234 last night, otherwise you can get the Corsa, which is very similar, for under $200. Those are my two personal favorites for the C8.
I just spent some time googling GM LT motor valve coking issues and turned up... nothing. Nada. Zilch.
Which is surprising, given how the interwebs work. Out of 1000 owners of a product, any product... 1 or 2 have an issue, and the internet amplifies that to the point that you search and read and conclude that said product has a 64% failure rate... Nobody talks about their product without issues, because there is no need, they are out using whatever it is and enjoying it... The small percentage that have problems post it, others see it and repost it and before you know it, the product is junk and "constantly failing" even though the rate is tiny fraction of 1%. Most people don't have DCT failures, but reading the forums and social media, you would assume it's like 1 out of 4 fails...
So when you search for this issue and can't find a single issue of valves failing or some sort of problem stemming from carbon buildup due to the PCV issue... I find that telling, in a good way. The only stuff I could find was dealing with early motors and faulty valve springs cracking, or lifter issues from a defect on older engines...
Nothing so far on this issue, in 4 years, seems like a pretty good track record, in "internet terms"...
