To PCV or ?

Tech tips and how to's

Moderators: notoptoy, S Allen, Solex68

User avatar
nismou20
Roadsteraholic
Posts: 1488
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:16 pm
Location: Pasadena, Ca

To PCV or ?

Post by nismou20 »

I modified my SU baseplate by cutting off the stock horns to accommodate aftermarket Velocity stacks. In that process I’ve lost the ability to connect the valve cover vent hose to baseplate. I’ve tried to route the oily mist with a catch can of various types but I’m always getting that thin mist of moisture and oil that clings around the engine bay. I’d like to feed it back into the intake to rid smell/mess. Should I connect it directly to one of the intake manifold plugs or run a PCV valve in between the hose and intake?
2004 Chevy Tracker
2010 RAV4
1969 Datsun Roadster
2005 Lotus Elise
1995 Toyota Tercel (Poormans Corolla)
2001 Fleetwood Jamboree RV
User avatar
spl310
Roadster Guru
Posts: 13215
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 10:38 pm
Location: In front of this keyboard... in Jacksonville, Florida!

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by spl310 »

Can you post pictures of the modified base plate?
"Wow, a Roadster!" Stuart Little

1967.5 2000
1967.5 2000
1964 1500
1964 1500
1967.5 1600
1968 chassis
2006 Acura MDX
2013 Volkswagen Jetta TDI wagon
1995 F350 Powerstroke!
More...
User avatar
nismou20
Roadsteraholic
Posts: 1488
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:16 pm
Location: Pasadena, Ca

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by nismou20 »

Guess my basic question is since the stacks lack the original bibs on each for the hose that routed vented gases back into the intake, should I go directly from valve cover to one of the taps on manifold or put a PCV inline? Would a PCV pressurize the block too much?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
2004 Chevy Tracker
2010 RAV4
1969 Datsun Roadster
2005 Lotus Elise
1995 Toyota Tercel (Poormans Corolla)
2001 Fleetwood Jamboree RV
unklpat
Roadster Fanatic
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2019 8:43 pm

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by unklpat »

You could drill and tap the stacks for a brass nipple in each, and use the factory rubber "t"?
User avatar
spl310
Roadster Guru
Posts: 13215
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 10:38 pm
Location: In front of this keyboard... in Jacksonville, Florida!

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by spl310 »

I'm a bit confused as to why you did that to the 2000 air cleaner. It had stacks. The 1600 has goofy bent stacks - I could see doing it with that design.
"Wow, a Roadster!" Stuart Little

1967.5 2000
1967.5 2000
1964 1500
1964 1500
1967.5 1600
1968 chassis
2006 Acura MDX
2013 Volkswagen Jetta TDI wagon
1995 F350 Powerstroke!
More...
User avatar
nismou20
Roadsteraholic
Posts: 1488
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:16 pm
Location: Pasadena, Ca

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by nismou20 »

Different stacks and their lengths alter where you want power. The stock U20 is just ok. With bigger bore and SU mods fuller radiused stacks work better for my application.
The shorter ones wake up my mid/top end
I still have my original air box. The one pictured that I hacked was from a friend.
2004 Chevy Tracker
2010 RAV4
1969 Datsun Roadster
2005 Lotus Elise
1995 Toyota Tercel (Poormans Corolla)
2001 Fleetwood Jamboree RV
User avatar
Gregs672000
Roadster Fanatic-Site Supporter
Posts: 8991
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 11:47 pm
Location: Tacoma, WA

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by Gregs672000 »

Just run it to the existing pipe, it will get sucked in.
Greg Burrows
'67 2000 #588
Tacoma, WA
User avatar
nismou20
Roadsteraholic
Posts: 1488
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:16 pm
Location: Pasadena, Ca

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by nismou20 »

I did that Greg with those itty bitty filters as many guys have done but there’s always a film of oil, even if it’s just a little. I would much rather reintroduce it back into the intake. Just need to know if it’s better just recycling it back or introducing a PCV. Don’t want smell and mess. It’s all about the engine bay tidiness is what I’m seeking.
2004 Chevy Tracker
2010 RAV4
1969 Datsun Roadster
2005 Lotus Elise
1995 Toyota Tercel (Poormans Corolla)
2001 Fleetwood Jamboree RV
User avatar
redroadster
Roadsteraholic
Posts: 2407
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 10:58 am
Location: KCMO
Model: 1500/1600
Year: High Windshield-68-70

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by redroadster »

I'd bet with the minimal intake there might be a problem with the vacuum leak on 1 branch .. ( carb syncro ).or Datsun might have put it in ...the vacuum port for pcv is always located in the plenum area of the intake
there was a mini pcv half the size of the common one some sun compacts used I forget which one
Last edited by redroadster on Wed Aug 26, 2020 8:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
Datsun dealer tech 76 to 87
Mitsubishi tech 9 yrs
Volvo, Kia, Toyota too
6 month - Rolls Royce
ASE MASTER TECH 96. - 11
70 SPL 86 Z31 T , Sportster
unklpat
Roadster Fanatic
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2019 8:43 pm

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by unklpat »

drill and tap the stacks for barbs for the stock rubber "t"?
User avatar
nismou20
Roadsteraholic
Posts: 1488
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:16 pm
Location: Pasadena, Ca

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by nismou20 »

What I’m trying to avoid. Venting to atmosphere will always result in misty oil. I’m not going to bugger up nice stacks and even if I did there will be a mist of oil at stacks. Has to be a way to recycle it back to intake. Just need to know if PCV is better than recycling it continuously back constantly.
2004 Chevy Tracker
2010 RAV4
1969 Datsun Roadster
2005 Lotus Elise
1995 Toyota Tercel (Poormans Corolla)
2001 Fleetwood Jamboree RV
User avatar
CSP311
Site Supporter
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:29 am
Location: Uk
Contact:

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by CSP311 »

What about to a good quality oil catch tank then back to airbox?
1965 Nissan Silvia (CSP311) for total restoration
1978 260Z finally on the road (Rebello 3.2L)
User avatar
redroadster
Roadsteraholic
Posts: 2407
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 10:58 am
Location: KCMO
Model: 1500/1600
Year: High Windshield-68-70

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by redroadster »

nismou20 wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 10:03 pm What I’m trying to avoid. Venting to atmosphere will always result in misty oil. I’m not going to bugger up nice stacks and even if I did there will be a mist of oil at stacks. Has to be a way to recycle it back to intake. Just need to know if PCV is better than recycling it continuously back constantly.
Hells yes... it will not work ,just sucking the vent tube into the intake....would be a oil burner for sure you need the pulsing valve
Datsun dealer tech 76 to 87
Mitsubishi tech 9 yrs
Volvo, Kia, Toyota too
6 month - Rolls Royce
ASE MASTER TECH 96. - 11
70 SPL 86 Z31 T , Sportster
Ttiger
Roadster Newby
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2020 1:32 am
Location: Hollister, CA
Model: 2000
Year: High Windshield-68-70

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by Ttiger »

The 240Z system is the same as what you did by cutting the stacks. They just route into the air cleaner and the suction takes care of the rest. It should work as you have it with the hose from the valve cover to the air cleaner.
User avatar
Habitat.pat
Roadsteraholic
Posts: 602
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2016 8:29 pm
Location: Central Texas
Model: 1500/1600
Year: Low Windshield-64-67.5

Re: To PCV or ?

Post by Habitat.pat »

I don't understand how the oil mist is making it out of the air filter. Are you running an air filter, or just the plate?

Peace,
Pat
67.5 SPL311 Stroker Restomod
Pat Horne, Near Austin, TX
We support Habitat for Humanity
A hand UP, not a hand OUT
Post Reply