is there just the one baffle, or are there multiple layers in there?

 

thanks will do!

 

Great video. Still a bit confused out the tubing runs on the left hand side.

 

It's a bit more complex then just the one baffle, but I can't tell exactly what it all is because I truly do not know I will look in to it for you tho.

 

It taps in to the PCV line on the passenger side on the line its self. You cut in to the line in to the line and connect with the fittings it very ease to install. i hope this answers your question if not let me knoe i will make a vid or take a few more pics to help you understand.

 

That passenger side pcv should be blocked off all together. Its only there for emission purposes. peugot the maker of these engines even makes a factory part to block off the pcv ports on the passenger side for different countries across the pond that have less restrictive emissions. Straight from the dealer you can buy these if you can find peugot parts.

http://etuners.gr/en/index.php?s=12&t=299

 

To suggest that proper emissions controls are not necessary is silly. I mean, when you say that, you almost sound like one of those guys who finds nothing wrong with drilling out their catalytic converter.

Also, by blocking off that path entirely, you're changing the mixture in the combustion chamber, making it run leaner than normal. You want to collect the easily-precipitated hydrocarbons in a can so they don't collect on your intake valves, but it's otherwise good to feed the engine all the fuel it's expecting for how the ECU is coded… and it's expecting some amount of combustable crankcase fumes.

Lastly, to be clear, the only case where blocking off that port is even remotely acceptable is when you have some means of collection on the other side. Without that, you're only filling your intercooler with all the crud that used to collect on your valves. I would be surprised if Peugot sells cars with catch cans from the factory, so I don't think we know the whole story behind when and how they use this part you point to.

 

As you are correct...

Ill rephrase.


The passenger port can be blocked off if you route the driver side port through a collector.

The fact remains..

It still is horrible for these engines. The ecu will self correct and you will NOT see lean mixtures. I have data logged my mini several times and not once has and afr reading shown lean due to the *passenger* pcv being blocked off.

The ecu will NOT* and i emphasize NOT* see lean fuel mixtures due to the passenger port being blocked off. Depending on country of delivery, the pcv on the passenger side comes blocked off(regarding the peugot engines, im not sure about the mini part number regarding the block off).

You would be correct if this was done on a non self adaptive ecu but the ecu will make its own accurate corrections to adjust.


My current setup does have a collector on the driver side port.


My statement is soley for the purpose of stating the passenger one can be eliminated.


Dont get all GREEN on me, I still have my cat in its place.

 

As I have stated before per all the techs that I spoke to at dealers that all drive Minis them selfs (witch a few of them where nuts making crazy HP) and a few Mini/BMW performance shops that I have spoken with yes you can block off passenger side no problem..... if you want problem down the road do to uneven crankcase pressure (even more so on cars that have mods). They redid the cover for 2011 it's not just a block off. And for most people that are not trying to squeeze the 1.6L motor for ever drop of performance you can get form it capping off is ok with can on intake side. But why on earth would you ristrict any part of your flow of any kind, that you simply do not have too. The truth remains that long term testing on the cap off need to be done and also performance base (dyno) testing needs to be done as well. Till then there will be always be huge back and forth fights over all of this thats why I did this set up as nice option for those of us who want it. Please no one miss understand me I'm not fighting against the cap off just showing options is all thank you.

 

Why would you dyno test the performance of a pcv system? You referring to longevitity?

Your not restricting flow by blocking off the the passenger side port. The port works only in vacuum.

Just because someone is a tech doesnt mean they understand any thing and everything. I work with a mini tech myself whom is the only person in the imidiate dc/metro area im in to do a gound up rebuild.


I dont say that as a "whos friend is cooler" statement but one to show that bmw/mini procedures regarding warranty usually comes from a replace aspect and not a figure out what happend then fix the problem... just like 90% of all dealers its just replace, replace. I was a Trans tech for Honda for 2 yrs and i can say unless it was "feasable" to rebuild they would replace before anything else.



I have been running my setup for about 15k miles and from visually inspecting and removing the manifold... there is almost no build up whatsoever.


Another thing that most people are forgetting about the pcv system is like i said before. the problem is when in vacuum. What does this mean? 90% of the people who have minis dont drive them very hard... not to promote speeding everywhere or wreckless driving. What i am getting at is if the air velocity is not high enough to pass the gas(no pun intended) it will accumilate.



When i first inspected my valves at 10k i had little to no accumilation compared to the crazy claims folks have had on here.


Its a matter of driving habit/preventative maintenance period.

 

There have been enough people running enough miles to say with some measure of safety that blocking off the passenger-side PCV line and "canning" the other side (a'la boost tap + catch can) is not going to cause problems.

I haven't gone that route myself because I am uneasy about longevity effects, and that it introduces a single point of failure for significant problems due to a pressurized crankcase (specifically told of one such instance by a service tech; in that case the cause was an inappropriate can for the car, as its ports were far too narrow). So, I don't have a problem with spending the extra for the 2-can approach; works fine for me.

In any case… that BT can looks pretty slick, and it looks like they're selling them now (no longer a prototype). I am still curious about the baffling (is it more than just the one screen?), but I may have to keep my eyes open for when their dual can model comes out.

 

Yes I'm hoping to have the dual can setup in my car for some small testing of the brace and general fit and placement I can't wait! I'm going to stop by there tomorrow and see whats up see if I can give you all a better time line of when they will have it ready. As for the baffling Q I will ask them about it tomorrow as well. sorry that is something that I should know but I don't so answers will come asap

 

I agree 100% with you.

 

Is it like a T-connector? Any chance of a close-up photo?

Thanks!

 

No its not a T here is the best pic I have of it now in the morning I will take a better one of it for you.

 

I cut the factory hose at the other end to reduce the amount of extra hose. It takes 1 straight adapter and 1 90degree elbow. I have 90 degree elbow fittings on my can and the hoses come from beneath. I have enough room to put a second one if I want. I'll post a pic tomorrow.

I got mine from an ebay vendor. It was the only round one I could find with removable top and bottom plates, so I could baffle the insides. It has a sight glass on the side too. It came with crappy little 1/4" fittings which I replace with 5/8". I made a baffle to separate the inlet from the outlet, which also deflects the airflow into some stainless steel scouring pad to condense the vapor.

I like making things and have the ability, so all up it cost me $35 for the can, $20 for the fittings and $3 for the other bits. But I gotta say if I had some spare cash and was a little lazier, the price of this one would have won me.

 

Ok sorry I thought today was friday its not its Saturday so I have to wait till Monday then I will stop by BT and see what going on.... Wow, I m going back to bed, I love Weekends!!!!

 

Add me to the list of potential customers interested in a fitment for the 2011 N18 engine.

BSH has been promising a solution since the beginning of the calendar year and have been evasive about their progress, so my interest and patience with them is waning. I've put 6K miles on the clock and was hoping to be condensing out bad PCV gases long ago...

 

If the crankcase-to-combustion-chamber routing is now internal to the valve cover, then I don't think it's possible to block or can that path anymore (short of offering an aftermarket valve cover, anyway). You can still throw a can on the driver side hose, though, to protect your intercooler. I would guess their present fittings would still work there.

 

Can anyone see a problem with using the spring type hose clamps on the OCC hoses? I think it looks a bit cleaner and would be easier to remove with the airbox still installed.

 

The N18 BSH OCC is coming.. it required new fittings for both sides of the PCV therefore it takes time to properly develop something that just won't fall flat on its face when its on a race track.

As for the disagreement with blocking off the passenger PCV, the BSH Boost Tap and OCC was on the Yellow MINIUSA/ABF R56 for the duration of the 2010 Redline Time Attack season. Also to include many of the Road Tour R56's that went into the hands of 100's if not 1000's of different drivers BEFORE it hit market. Although BSH was certain of its success without testing, it can never hurt to know for sure how your product will perform under all circumstances.

This can looks good, and yes, no welding, but I might add that there are many places where when this CC see's boost (yes it will see boost because it is directly hooked up to the intake manifold) it can fail, such as those fittings being screwed in. I know you are only pushing 19psi, but who wants a boost leak from a CC?

The PCV hose that sees the MOST use, is the one from the driver side vent to the intake pipe. This is because there is no check-valve associated with it to prevent boosting the crankcase. Those PCV gases, yes are hot when entering the turbo, but wouldn't they cool down when hitting the intercooler? Have you looked at you intercooler with only having a CC on the passenger PCV? (which again, only vents under vacuum and is boosted when the intake manifold sees boost)

The added value of the block off like the BSH direct dual boost tap is in the event that the check valve located in the valve cover ever fails and allows boost into the crank case.

Just my $.02

 

The driver side hose only vents from the crankcase when under boost. For the great majority of running time, the engine is not under boost conditions. In this "normal" non-boost condition, the driver side hose brings in clean, fresh air from the CAI.

So, yeah, this hose sees more overall flow than the passenger side hose to the intake manifold… but most of the time it's fresh air. The passenger side hose to the intake manifold sees more crankcase fumes.

I haven't heard of any MINI owners who have experienced such a failure.
Not saying it's not possible… just that it seems extremely unlikely.

 

With all due respect, I do not believe this to be correct. I believe the driver side vent is open at all times and is unaffected by the boost/vacuum cycle. The driver side is always creating a draw from the crankcase as long as the engine is running.

And as far as blocking the passenger side vent creating a "Lean" condition, I don't believe this is true either. Under vacuum conditions (the only period during which this vent is active) the passenger side vent is actually providing an "unmetered" source of air to the intake manifold. Further, this "unmetered" source is also "dirty" to varying degrees and degrades the air source prior to combustion. In that the vent is closed during the Boost period when mixture is more critical, this issue is a minor concern.

The removal of the passenger side vent should have little or no impact on performance but it may have a significant impact on the longevity of the performance. One of the most significant, detrimental tendency of this engine is the buildup of carbon/crap on the valves. The primary source of this carbon/crap is the "dirty air" from this vent. Add to this the removal of a mechanical valve with its potential for leaking during boost periods, and I think you end up with a net very beneficial trade off.

The more I think about this system the more I believe that this is a poorly designed answer to some legal requirement.

Just my 2¢

 

It works great until you throw direct-injection into the mix. With that in mind, I see it more as growing pains... annoying, expensive growing pains.

[not gonna argue about the other stuff. I disagree with much of it, but I've been in too many PCV-related discussions before, and don't want to clog this thread with unrelated stuff that's already been said elsewhere.]

 

Just my 2¢