Sponsored

Michigan Bronco Club

Members from the Mitten and the U.P.
Trustable
Post a post on the forum about this, but haven't had a reply yet, maybe one of you guys will know... Any of you run catch cans in the winter. I'm worried about condensation filling it up fast and that I may forget to empty it weekly, what are your thoughts?
Show full message
Gr8Hortoni
Gr8Hortoni
Saw it and following. To my knowledge I wouldn’t think it’s an issue, but I’ve never owned a turbo before so idk.
Trustable
Trustable
Yeah I'm not sure. Hopefully somebody has an answer.
VelocityBronco
VelocityBronco
I had a post about catch cans, hit or miss on people's thoughts on them. 1 guy had a story about his freezing, but not sure the situation. Tons of people run them, maybe it more about where it's mounted.
https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/threads/oil-catch-can.5406/
What engine are you going to get? Some say the can is not needed on the 2.7 bc of port and direct injection, where the 2.3 is only direct and could have an issue with carbon build up.
  • Like
Reactions: Trustable
Trustable
Trustable
@McCracken Even though its only one guy, it worries me. I may not drive for 3 days straight in the winter, so it seems that a lot can happen in 3 days.
Gr8Hortoni
Gr8Hortoni
I know it’s recommended to get on the 4, not as big an issue with the 6.
VelocityBronco
VelocityBronco
I have the 3.5L EB in my 2012 F-150, direct injection, and no catch can. Haven't had an issue related to build up. But I know a lot of people running catch cans on F-150s and Mustangs. I don't see how running one would hurt, as long as you empty it often.
Mattwings
Mattwings
The interesting thing to me is I would think DI would be the “best” solution in terms of build up, because it does not pass fuel over the valves. My understanding of the actual situation, it’s the lack of fresh fuel “washing” the carbon off the valves that creates the issue. The emissions system circulates un burned fuel and crankcase “gasses” back into the intake so it can be burned and pass over the catalytic converters. Catch can uses gravity to hold some of the oil and fuel mixture that you occasionally drain and discard. Manufacturers have added an oil specification that should mitigate the issue somewhat, it is mentioned in a few of the posts here and other forums (my last case of Mobil 1 did not carry the new certification). 2.7 is DI and port, so the issue is much less prevalent. BTW, no fuel additive or “better” fuel has any effect. It just isn’t part of the equation for the valve specific issue. It’s another reason the actual total cost of ownership between the 2.3 and 2.7 will be very low, if not lower for the 2.7. Ford catch can for Ranger is about $300 I think, plus you have to empty it??
View previous replies…
VelocityBronco
VelocityBronco
@Mattwings Totally agree on the warranty concern. I have heard 'tons' of people state that Ford/dealership need to prove that your aftermarket gizmo is the cause of failure, but I have heard of people getting screwed on this. Not catch can specific, but any aftermarket parts. Safe bet to wait until warranty is up.
FYI, catch can is easy to install/uninstall, so you could take it off before taking vehicle to dealer if you have an issue with something. Kind of a pain though...
VelocityBronco
VelocityBronco
I waited to tune my truck until warranty was over...not sure I will wait on next one though.
etmccaus86
etmccaus86
@Mattwings another reason I plan on using my block heater religiously when parking outdoors at home. :)
Gr8Hortoni
Gr8Hortoni
I have found kits from 5 star for about half that much, just for comparison sake. All I have to add at the moment lol.
VelocityBronco
VelocityBronco
You can get catch cans with a drain tube that flows back to crankcase I believe, but i'm not sure I want that oil going back to the motor. I would rather have it captured, and empty after every oil change.
Mattwings
Mattwings
I know it has been beaten to death, but I am still curious how different the 2.3 vs. 2.7 will be in driving dynamics. I think the power from the 2.3 will be fine for most off raod (and on road) situations. I also think the 2.3 will be noticeable in terms of weight and driving dynamics. 100+ lbs, in the front of the vehicle, plus the overall packaging being more centralized should equate to better off road performace in most situations (those looking at 35" plus tires, big lifts and mud or paddled sand tires being the norm are already buying the 2.7 I assume). But if it's not that much better, the 2.7 is just an awesome motor with lots of room for tuning, plus still likley delivering overall lower total cost of ownership. I am 97.3% decided on the 2.7, but it is an interesting subject to ponder!
VelocityBronco
VelocityBronco
@Mattwings I am 100% getting the 2.7TT V6. No way I could go from my 3.5TT to a 2.3 4 cylinder. I am sure it has power/torque, but is it "fun" to drive? The 2.7 will be "fun", and I won't feel like I am taking a huge step backwards on power.
Mattwings
Mattwings
My 2.7 is certainnly addicting. I do wonder how Ford managed to get the Bronco up to F150 weight. Maybe 100lb difference? The 2.3 ends up about 230lbs lighter than an f150 supercrew, 2.7 about 100lbs less, from what I can gather.

Share this group

Quick Overview

Category
BRONCO CLUBS / GROUPS
Language
English (US)
Total members
404
Total events
2
Total views
68,203


Top