Anybody run RB PCV External Kit without plugging the head ports?

[Jeffman]

I just installed a new OE valve cover and gasket and am pretty certain everything is working fine and there are no oil or vacuum leaks. Rob Beck’s post at http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showpost.php?p=432501&postcount=63
says that plugging the head ports isn’t required (assuming there are no VC / VCG leaks etc) to run his RB N54 External PCV Kit.
Anybody running it this way without plugging the ports? If so can you please share your experience as I want to reduce oil build up in my intake without having to take off the VC again.
Thanks.
Edit: Poll added.

 

[NoQuarter]

I am on my Z4. Same scenario. My valve cover is new and not leaking so no interest in risking making it worse just yet.

I will plug the ports at some point but I have other things that are more interesting to do.

 

[Rob@RBTurbo]

We'd guess that 1 in 4 plug the head ports when doing the RB External PCV install. It is not required so that is ok to not do it, but it will give you a more "bulletproof" setup when eventually said and done.

Just to note there is no fitting on the market that will "bulletproof" the head ports and even those who say "It is not needed" really mean "It is not required so that is ok to not do it, but it will give you a more "bulletproof" setup when eventually said and done" just as we had said above.

Rob

 

[Gavin]

We'd guess that 1 in 4 plug the head ports when doing the RB External PCV install. It is not required so that is ok to not do it, but it will give you a more "bulletproof" setup when eventually said and done.

Just to note there is no fitting on the market that will "bulletproof" the head ports and even those who say "It is not needed" really mean "It is not required so that is ok to not do it, but it will give you a more "bulletproof" setup when eventually said and done" just as we had said above.

Rob

Rob what's your take on the new breather that removes pressure build up in valve cover.thinking this is the fix for not plugging ports?

 

[Rob@RBTurbo]

Rob what's your take on the new breather that removes pressure build up in valve cover.thinking this is the fix for not plugging ports?

Sir,

Nothing, I Repeat NOTHING, is the fix for not plugging the head ports... aside for plugging the head ports.

Thanks,
Rob

 

[Gavin]

Sir,

Nothing, I Repeat NOTHING, is the fix for not plugging the head ports... aside for plugging the head ports.

Thanks,
Rob

Sorry wrong choice of words.definitely not a fix.my thought was that since the valve cover breather opens at quarter psi so the valve cover won't see much boost under load over quarter Lbs of boost.then closes back up so there's normal vacuum.

 

[Rob@RBTurbo]

Sorry wrong choice of words.definitely not a fix.my thought was that since the valve cover breather opens at quarter psi so the valve cover won't see much boost under load over quarter Lbs of boost.then closes back up so there's normal vacuum.

Yeah the crank breather function would be completely independent of the the plugging the head ports topic, so not even worth trying to intermingle them.

However as long as the breather remains closed (ie. sealed) under any sort of vacuum then it should cause no harm to the low side PCV functionality- aside for potentially being a means for oil vapors/droplets to escape in a VTA sort of fashion (which could cabin smells, engine bay messes, etc.).

Going to take some time in the field in order to tell if the pros outweigh the cons, we'd honestly suggest measuring crankcase pressures before just arbitrarily installing one- they are likely a moot point on the need scale until in the really big power zones.

Rob

 

[Gavin]

Yeah the crank breather function would be completely independent of the the plugging the head ports topic, so not even worth trying to intermingle them.

However as long as the breather remains closed (ie. sealed) under any sort of vacuum then it should cause no harm- aside for potentially being a means for oil vapors/droplets to escape in a VTA sort of fashion (which could cabin smells, engine bay messes, etc.).

Going to take some time in the field in order to tell if the pros outweigh the cons, we'd honestly suggest measuring crankcase pressures before just arbitrarily installing one- likely a moot point on the need scale until in the really big power zones.

Rob

Good point.

 

[Jeffman]

Thanks, @Rob@RBTurbo Rob.
I just ordered your RB external PCV kit, Option A from your site and the Mishimoto OCC from Amazon. I also ordered the VTT Oil Cap Vent. Looking forward to providing feedback to the forum.

 

[doublespaces]

I don't have mine plugged... Yet.

 

[Rush @ RushCustoms]

Yeah the crank breather function would be completely independent of the the plugging the head ports topic, so not even worth trying to intermingle them.

However as long as the breather remains closed (ie. sealed) under any sort of vacuum then it should cause no harm to the low side PCV functionality- aside for potentially being a means for oil vapors/droplets to escape in a VTA sort of fashion (which could cabin smells, engine bay messes, etc.).

Going to take some time in the field in order to tell if the pros outweigh the cons, we'd honestly suggest measuring crankcase pressures before just arbitrarily installing one- they are likely a moot point on the need scale until in the really big power zones.

Rob

I ran my own breather set up but have not plugged the head ports. PCV delete fitting and using the front port on the VC. So So you’re saying We should still plug the headports. That is what you are saying correct?

 

[Rob@RBTurbo]

I ran my own breather set up but have not plugged the head ports. PCV delete fitting and using the front port on the VC. So So you’re saying We should still plug the headports. That is what you are saying correct?

As you are not running any PCV functionality (which is the only functionality we support) via a PCV delete fitting, you can do whatever you wish or whatever you supplier believes it is that you should do. We'd ultimately suggest reversing what you have done, then tossing the pieces you have purchased in the garbage, and reverting back to a PCV functionality setup- that is as we believe it is the way to go for most every N54 vehicle on the road out there.

 

[Rush @ RushCustoms]

As you are not running any PCV functionality (which is the only functionality we support) via a PCV delete fitting, you can do whatever you wish or whatever you supplier believes it is that you should do.

Thanks man. I appreciate it.

 

[Twinz]

I have been running the BMS OCC since 2011. It collected blowby but it did not keep the intake ports clean.

So about a year ago, I fitted a new valve cover and decided to clean the intake ports again; installed the RB PCV external kit (low side) and plugged the head ports. Since then the intake ports have remained clean and further helped by port injection.

I collect alot more blowby crap on the lowside which had a creamy look at the beginning and overtime became more dark coloured. Plugging the head ports were not so difficult - a few slow turns clockwise & anti clockwise & fit the grub screw & done. Its completely reversable if one really wants to do it but after seeing the benefits I cant imagine going back to stock. Here are some random pix past & present.

 

[Torgus]

It is honestly not a bad job to install the head plugs. I wouldn't install it without plugging the head it is that easy. Good excuse to replace your vc with a lifetime warranty from fcp or just the gasket which is cheap. I put red rtv on the threads and a bit on top. I'm sure they are not going to back out but I probably would use thread locker and rtv on top to guarantee the seal looking back on it. No reason to ever remove them or go back.

I did the full low side RB kit with mishimoto CC and the kit is of high quality.

 

[matreyia]

It is honestly not a bad job to install the head plugs. I wouldn't install it without plugging the head it is that easy. Good excuse to replace your vc with a lifetime warranty from fcp or just the gasket which is cheap. I put red rtv on the threads and a bit on top. I'm sure they are not going to back out but I probably would use thread locker and rtv on top to guarantee the seal looking back on it. No reason to ever remove them or go back.

I did the full low side RB kit with mishimoto CC and the kit is of high quality.

After plugging ports, stalling mm occ and RB kit, and upgrading to vader solutions Bov adapter... the car has sharper throttle, gets in physical motion sooner from dead stop and feel all around more efficient. It has lost its previous sluggish sensation when starting from dead stop. And the tial bov now requires the recommended unpainted 11psi spring instead of the black or the white less psi springs I previously used to match the previously lower vacuum levels.

 

[matreyia]

I have been running the BMS OCC since 2011. It collected blowby but it did not keep the intake ports clean.

So about a year ago, I fitted a new valve cover and decided to clean the intake ports again; installed the RB PCV external kit (low side) and plugged the head ports. Since then the intake ports have remained clean and further helped by port injection.

I collect alot more blowby crap on the lowside which had a creamy look at the beginning and overtime became more dark coloured. Plugging the head ports were not so difficult - a few slow turns clockwise & anti clockwise & fit the grub screw & done. Its completely reversable if one really wants to do it but after seeing the benefits I cant imagine going back to stock. Here are some random pix past & present.
View attachment 12545 View attachment 12545 View attachment 12546 View attachment 12547 View attachment 12548 View attachment 12549 View attachment 12550 View attachment 12551 View attachment 12552 View attachment 12553 View attachment 12554 View attachment 12555 View attachment 12556

1. What is the silicon hose looking connector at the high side pcv outlet in the photo.
2. Where did you buy it?

Thanks.

 

[Twinz]

@matreyia
Its a straight reducer 19mm - 25mm inner diameter from autosilicone. I am sure there are cheaper silicone options available.

http://www.autosiliconehoses.com/si...straight-reducer-25mm-to-19mm-15-colours.html

 

[matreyia]

@matreyia
Its a straight reducer 19mm - 25mm inner diameter from autosilicone. I am sure there are cheaper silicone options available.

http://www.autosiliconehoses.com/si...straight-reducer-25mm-to-19mm-15-colours.html

According to the silicon manufacturers, they are not compatible with oils or fuel interactions. How long have you had them and have you checked on their current state in terms of durability? I ordered one for myself, before I read the warning... and I do not think I can undo the order.

VT

 

[matreyia]

@matreyia
Its a straight reducer 19mm - 25mm inner diameter from autosilicone. I am sure there are cheaper silicone options available.

http://www.autosiliconehoses.com/si...straight-reducer-25mm-to-19mm-15-colours.html

I just called the HPS (High Peformance Silicon) and asked them about it. They said that as long as you do not use the hose for flowing oil or flowing fuel applications, it should be just fine. So...whew...close one. So you replaced your connection with this reducer... for better leak prevention I assume? And if so, did you notice any improvement in any aspect of the car's operation or performance?

http://www.hps-siliconehoses.com/hp...r-coupler-silicone-hose-blue-4-inch-long.html
VT