RJ_RS_SS_350

Another thought has been brewing, too. GM plumbed this in a way that, once the vapor gets out of the head/valve cover, it travels downslope, making it a little easier to evacuate the vapors. Although this nasty sticky gunk probably doesn't flow very well anyway, unless it is airborne. But gravity still may help a little. I wonder how significant it is?

Dbeluscak

I don't think anyone is wrong! You guys will be finished and have figured it out by the time the wife's SS is running.

I just think capping the intake without removing the gases at that point is asking for trouble. If you go all the way back to the first few pages. I show the route through the cylinder head out to the intake via crankcase galleys. Port 2 is only directly connected to the camshaft galleys. These are 2 press fit covers over the camshafts, both are filled with plastic ribs/baffles. It's designed to separate the air/oil vapor, in a filter of sorts. And exit "clean" to the compressor housing. While crankcase gases do enter normally, I wouldn't want to add the extra burden.

In order to get ventilation from the intake side of the cylinder head. It's pulling vacuum through oil return passages in the cylinder head. We don't want return oil getting caught in a vacuum. That being said, I don't know that it will. Under normal circumstances it would flow through into the intake. I think drilling the intake is an easy step once you've come this far.

After all, it's in the name of science!

RJ_RS_SS_350

She blinded me... with science!!

Drummerboy, maybe, in the name of science, while you have the intake manifold off, drill(be careful, the aluminum was a little thinner here than I expected), tap, and put a fitting(capped) in the intake manifold. Then you could run xx miles(1,000 or 2,000, or whatever you think), measure how much oil you catch from port #2, then move your vapor draw point to the intake, rinse, repeat and see which catches more oil. BTW, I just cut off(with a dremel) that braided stainless line from port #2 to the turbo, don't need it anymore, and it's next to impossible to remove.

Well, I didn't like having so much hose(and running slightly upslope), so I moved my turbo-side catch can, mounting it to the passenger inner fender. I was able to cut off 2' of hose, and now it runs level or slightly downslope from the vapor point to the can. That 11/32" PCV line is a perfect fit on the #2 port and the port on the turbo.


The intake-side is still slightly upslope to the can, but it's less than 18" of hose, and I don't see anyplace better to mount it.

you can see where the 2 different sized hoses butt up to one another, clamped(that's the clean side). The PCV valve is hiding in there. 5/16" hose and 1/2" hose. I carefully took off the lip where the O-ring was, with a bench grinder. I really had to work the end of the 1/2" hose to stretch it a little so the valve would go in. It was fuel line, so pretty stiff. Maybe PCV line would have been a little softer.

I took a little of the extra 11/32" line from the turbo-side and wrapped that hard line on the left of the pic. I also put a little fuzzy velcro tape on the charge pipe to protect it from abrading.

I'm pretty pleased with how everything is mounted now. Just hope it works well.

drummerboy0088

Thanks everyone - I could definitely give that a shot RJ.

I'm also thinking of getting the TTR intake manifold, which would totally make my questions moot. I always wanted to get it, but since I'm putting the new LDK engine in with a catch can, might as well just do it now. Definitely more money, but the manifold and their PCV housing already has lines built in so it's almost plug and play.

That would mean valve 2 and line from TTR manifold have to be T'ed into the can, clean 1 from can to inlet of turbo, clean 2 from can to front of manifold.

Dbeluscak

I looked into the TTR manifold as well. While it does outflow a stock intake. The problem is the cylinder head, the factory intake flows better than the cylinder head itself. Unless you're porting and polishing, the added benefits are negated by the fact the head won't keep up the cfm. In my opinion of course!

DrLoch

You mean do like this?



That isn't the only thing that needs to be done. The short side radius in the pocket is the worse I've ever seen. I wish I had taken a picture before I put my head on a weight reduction program.

Dbeluscak

That's it exactly Doc! And to my point, even with a generous "weight reduction" the stock intake manifold will still outflow the cylinder head.

And I also have to agree, the short side radius is not flattering. I'm assuming the ridge dead center was to split the vortices into both valves "evenly". It needs some definite massaging.

DrLoch

Yes, the center ridge is to split the air flow. The exhaust is the same way. Looking at the area's of the port at the inlet versus that of the valves themselves I can assure you the bottleneck is not the intake manifold.

If you get a chance can you get some pictures of the intake valve bowl area just below the valve? I would like for others to see the before and after difference. On the head I did the work on the bowl area just below the seat on the short side was necked down considerably. Don't know if that was intentional or that was a result of the casting/machining process.

The exhaust side was not that bad all things considering. Will post pictures later. Also opened up the ports on the intake manifold to match that of the intake ports of the head.

May need to start another thread on that as well as what it takes to add the 5th injector to the intake manifold.

Cat Man HHR

A couple of questions:
RJ RS SS 350 Could show a line diagram of your system?
DrLoch Are you still using the center ridge in the intake or is it removed? Also have you flowed the port before and after?

RJ_RS_SS_350

Please excuse the crudity of this model, I didn't have time to make it to scale!!