Oil Catch Can. Yes or No?

[viperwolf]

Hello everyone
After reading over this thread about catch cans and seeing a nice disagreement or two. Im really confused more now if I should get one for my unit. Ive had catch cans on all my turbo cars in the states, as I built those engines( Gas ) from the ground up. I now have a 2020 Ford Everest with the new Ranger Raptor BI Turbo engine in it. I noticed that the fuel filter is in the engine bay, very accessible, and it has a water drain plug that you have to maintain. Should I install a catch can on this unit, I cannot find a diagram or anything like that for it.

Sponsored

 

[MannyS]

Is this an issue with the 2.3L's? Lot's of debates using the cans for the 2.7L and 3.5L EB's but there hasn't been any hard evidence of valve issues even with high mileage (200k mile +) EB's.
Personally I run a low NOACK oil and not worry about the can.

If I'm not mistaken the 2.7 and 3.5 have dual injection. It has direct injection and port injection. The port injectors spray fuel directly on the on the intake which helps keep them clean and prevents build up.

 

[MannyS]

It makes no sense why Ford didn't go with dual injection on the Ranger like they did with the 2nd generation 3.5. I feel like with this being a 4 banger and the motor always having to work a little harder, carbon buildup is going to be a real issue with these trucks without a catch can installed.

Most likely for better MPG

 

[steve973]

If I'm not mistaken the 2.7 and 3.5 have dual injection. It has direct injection and port injection. The port injectors spray fuel directly on the on the intake which helps keep them clean and prevents build up.

If there is no current solution to add an auxiliary fuel rail for the Ranger's 2.3L ecoboost (i.e., if the options for the mustang will not fit), then I imagine that it will be available eventually and before super significant coking occurs. So, we can just add the port injection kit of our choice if we really want to do that. Other solutions, like methanol, work even better to keep the valves clean. So at least there are options. And if you object to this, which would be reasonable, I understand that it would just be easier if it came from the factory that way. But the people who are concerned about this are probably in the "enthusiast" category, and it's just really fun to install the mods that you find to be useful!

 

[lohchief]

For the dept of what it's worth dept,I will be adding a catch can soon.

 

[HenryMac]

Thanks for the info, but you missed the context of my point...
I was referring only to the magnitude of the problem of carboned intake valves.

I'm still not convinced that on our Rangers the cans are a good thing. Most of the photo's I've seen of what the cans are catching is fuel. That fuel when piped back into the intake of the engine will wash the back of the intake valves and help remove any carbon deposits.

Without a side by side comparison of (2) motors running in the same scenario, one with a catch can, one without, we'll never really know if the catch can helps the carbon issues... hurts the carbon issues... or does nothing at all.

You'd think one of the companies selling them would perform such a test.... if in fact they are as good as what they are advertised to be.

 

[VAMike]

Most of the photo's I've seen of what the cans are catching is fuel.

Most of the photos I've seen look like they've caught a lot of condensation.

 

[RCMUSTANG]

There definitely is a measurable amount of oil. In colder weather I've picked up a ton of condensation on top of that. If anyone thinks it's catching mostly fuel you're mistaken. If that much fuel is being caught you've got serious issues with your rings. I can tell you I don't small any fuel whatsoever in my catch can. I can smell the oil.

 

[Floyd]

This for all the people saying I'm waiting for Ford to make one because, I don't believe it works unless Ford makes one and I don't want an aftermarket one because of the warranty. Not because it won't work for street applications. Not even close comparison to brake pads.

That wasn't a comparison, it was an example.

 

[Gecko157]

Hi Floyd,

If Ford in all its testing saw a degrading carboning issue, it would have been addressed. I am of the opinion that a catch can is a solution seeking a problem...

Best,
Phil Schilke
Ranger Vehicle Engineering
Ford Motor Co. Retired

This!

 

[Kiran04]

The 2.3L already has an air/oil separator. It's my understanding that it even returns oil to the crank case. If that's true, why would you pull that oil out and dump it? I won't be installing one in my truck. I've also heard they can cause problems when the contents of the catch can freeze, since they do get water in them, and it gets pretty dang cold here in the winter. The pond nearby already has a pretty significant sheet of ice on the surface that's only growing by the day. I don't need to add problems to my vehicle maintenance.

 

[Peterzo]

250 miles, 90% fuel 10% oil using the paper towel method. Sort of accredit using the can to help build up not accumulating elsewhere, like the aftercooler. Surely don't care for the idea of it returning to the crankcase. Worthy in my opinion.

 

[u wish u could ride]

250 miles, 90% fuel 10% oil using the paper towel method. Sort of accredit using the can to help build up not accumulating elsewhere, like the aftercooler. Surely don't care for the idea of it returning to the crankcase. Worthy in my opinion.

is it going to the crank case or being ignited ?.if the catch cans job is to stop it from collecting on the back side of the intake valve its going to get burned no? is the catch can before or after the stock separator?

 

[Peterzo]

is it going to the crank case or being ignited ?.if the catch cans job is to stop it from collecting on the back side of the intake valve its going to get burned no? is the catch can before or after the stock separator?

You are totally correct pretty much straight into the intake.... so why not put something in place to to capture what you can? (that's a pun for fun "can"). Or just let it pollute your engine intake stream? We all have options, I opt to not let my engine digest this muck. "The real test" for all the critic's, stick a nox / co / voc's analyzer in the exhaust stream (pre catalysis) be interesting to see the results, can verses no can?

 

[u wish u could ride]

You are totally correct pretty much straight into the intake.... so why not put something in place to to capture what you can? (that's a pun for fun "can"). Or just let it pollute your engine intake stream? We all have options, I opt to not let my engine digest this muck. "The real test" for all the critic's, stick a nox / co / voc's analyzer in the exhaust stream (pre catalysis) be interesting to see the results, can verses no can?

your are right about about a lot of muck for sure!but lets say ford in all their wisdom cheated and uses this muck to wash the valve ? (I am not even close to being a mechanic but the fuel amount they are catching is suspect no?)

Sponsored