Anyone done this?

My understanding is that its prudent to do so on a direct injection engine and the R56 is famous for its coking issues. I wonder if the F56 will suffer too?

I would be quite keen to run one, and I know the likes of m7 make one, which I am sure could be used with the F56, its just a case of working out where the hoses need to come from??

Any info out there?

 

Any Warrenty issues likely to be encountered with this as well????

 

There are articles out there that indicate the manufacturers have figured out to avoid this on 2nd gen direct injection gasoline engines. It can be mitigated in several ways, including valve timing, fueling patterns/timing etc.

I guess only time will tell - BMW hopefully have fully understood the issue and have designed the B48 motor from the outset for it not to be a problem.
However, we all know BMW have been know to ****** things up multiple times, so like I said only time will tell.

 

I can't rememer reading any R56 threads about whatever an "oil catch can" is. What's "coking" anyway? Sound kind of illegal lol.

 

An inherent issue with the R56.

The valves get coked up as a result of direct injection.

http://www.minitorque.com/forum/f15/...es-here-32763/

 

The R56 MCS engine is direct injection, just like the F56.

With direct injection, you no longer have the fuel injected before the intake valves from inside the intake manifold. Rather, the fuel is directly injected into the combustion chamber. Thus the cleaning effect of the fuel on the back on the intake valves on every induction cycle is lost. When you consider the intake air can contain both re-circulated exhaust gas, and oil and other combustion products from the crankcase ventilation system, with direct injection it is eminently possible your intake valves can get crudded up = reduced power and rough running. MINI addressed ( I mean botched up temporary solution) this on the R56 by using a walnut shell cleaning process - basically sand blasting the back of the valves. They were able to do this without removing the cylinder head.

Adding a catch can - redirects the crap coming from the crankcase ventilation system to essentially a small container that you have to empty now and again. You find the correct pipe, re-direct to your can, then block off where the pipe connected to your intake manifold.

If you do this on a direct injection engine, you are reducing the possibility of your valves getting crudded up - BUT you are messing with your car's emission control system and would fail any official inspection in this condition - both the smog test in the USA and the MOT test in the UK

Many forms of Motorsport actually insist on this to reduce the possibility of oil getting on the track (many track cars will just vent the crankcase to the atmosphere - especially when using throttle bodies, and many tracks don't like this for the obvious reason )

 

ANY forced induction engine benefits. The blowby inherent in almost all engines in magnified with boosted engines and is just magnified by direct inject. Usually the manufacturers add a tiny little catch can that collects the heavy particles, but those still coke up also.
You can have the can vented back into the system and just have it catch and accumulate all the excess oil and particles, but its easier to just vent.

 

Again...Any idea what this does to your warrenty? I suspect it voids it. If this is true, not a good risk to take.

 

I would bet it would void it. Maybe that's why I don't remember any threads on the R56 forum about it. Was the Gen1 R53 Mini the same fuel injection deal? Maybe they've got stuff on their forum, their cars are all out of warranty.

 

Perhaps they gave you the slip, but I would bet there is a dozen if not a few dozen threads on Oil Catch cans for the R56.

 

Has anyone had any history of coking of the intake valves in the N18 engine?

 

Oh yea, if you search really good, there are reports that people are still getting coked up intake valves. However, I do believe the N18 is no where near the N14's severity.

 

Could be, I quit visiting NAM much the last several years of MCS ownership. Did people put them in much? I remember some people having their valves blasted with walnut shells or some such maneuver. My 2007 didn't have any problems. Ran like a bat out of hell.

 

Yeah a walnut shell blasting is a common service anymore. Its quite and service too. For some cars it really wakes up them up after getting it done!

 

I imagine anyone doing this to their car is going to throw a code. The dealer will be REAL pleased to see this. Not only do you blow your warrenty out, they are going to charge you $$$$ to reset if possible. BMW/MINI will try to nail you on mods to the car...ESPERCIALLY the engine components. Good Luck to you...just be prepared for a warrenty void.

 

Doubt it would be a warranty void - it wouldn't cause any damage to the engine, all its doing is collecting oil.

I'm not too fussed about trying this - the question is more of a hypothetical one

 

Does anyone know if there is a OCC available yet for our B48 engine?

 

Sorry have not been on in so long, but had to machine more fittings for the different applications.

Want all to know the speedworks cheap made in China cans are not the quality made in the USA originals. The other "catchcan" thread has most all the info anyone needs to do the correct installations that provide evacuation at all times instead of allowing crankcase pressure to build.

Email or PM me direct for any more technical info on anything related to these issues or proper installation.

 

Peter, did you ever get an answer to your question? I can't seem to find any information out there related to a specific OCC solution/product available for the B48.

 

We have 95% effective systems for all the BMW engines. Let me know what questions anyone may have

 

what do you have available?

 

BMW already knows! The N 14 and N18 engines were Peugeot/Citroen engines.
The B 46/48 is a strictly BMW motor, and doesn't suffer valve coking.

 

To clarify: While every automaker has made progress in slowing the rate and severity of coking, none have solved it and every GDI engine on the market still suffers from not only intake valve coking, but severe fuel dilution and washdown from the fuel being introduced at such extreme pressures (1,000-3,000 PSI) and this causes added wear to rings and cylinder walls.
Here are what most are doing: As SpaceCadet stated, variable valve timing events can help, but they also cause some as burnt gasses are allowed to back fill the ports to emulate the old EGR valves functions. Ford and others have added in small port injectors so some fuel touches the valves, but this is not enough to have a big impact and also increases the incidence of detonation and the KR that goes with it. GM on their latest V6 deleted the "Positive" function of the PCV system so they only have a "passive" system that builds pressure and releases it into the main intake air bridge. So they have reduced the coking rate by app. 50% but in turn sacrificed the engines life as leaving the combustion by-products in the crankcase to accumulate greatly increases wear. These need to be flushed and evacuated before they can settle and mix with the oil. Others have added in a secondary evacuation suction source for turbo applications. They use a Venturi Valve vacuum generator built into the turbo housing to generate evacuation vacuum when in boost. But, with all the effort and expense, it is still a pretty serious issue with every manufacturer regardless of what their PR departments release to the public. Just remove the intake manifold from any relatively new engine and see it first hand. This shows a true air/oil separating crankcase evacuation systems impact on engine oil. Note the Lab Techs comments: https://hosting.photobucket.com/albu...ps7l9mvzrs.jpg

Here is a late model Audi turbo showing it: https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...MG_2270_1_.JPG

The average "Catchcan" will do little to address any of this as they trap so little of the total amount of suspended "Gunk".