Tests will continue... but here is to my second crack at breaking the surface.

Everyone is learning with me here, so please pardon my video work.

Also.... This work is on an Earth Dreams GK engine. I am sure there is a chance that different generation and different amounts of wear on engines will provide different results.

 

just watched all 4 vids in prev post

so at idle, the needle seems to be at the very bottom of the 0, almost points towards negative pressure. post #50 shows that the needle was roughly 75% of the way towards leaving that 0 white box area and into the positive pressure range. interesting!

and was it just me, or was there no discernible change at wot?

 

Doesn't EGR system reduce circulation during hard acceleration to maximize amount of cool/clean 02 entering the engine and therefore maximize power output?

 

Hey guys, jumping in mid discussion here.
So after reading most of your responses here, I looked into this matter on Japanese sites and will share what I have found. Sorry if any of this is repetitive information already posted.
The J's racing T-Rev system is actually just a rebranded Teramoto T-Rev system, the same company that released the explanation video somebody posted earlier.
Teramoto comes from a moto racing back ground in Japan is actually very well respected in that arena. The T-Rev was originally began development back in the early 2000s when a rider was going into turn 1 at Tsukuba and had difficulty down shifting 2 gears. He explained to the engineers at the time that the rear tire would "chatter" and hesitate to rotate smoothly. The solution they came up with was to remove as much crank case pressure. So much so that the pressure in the crank case actually becomes negative. By creating an environment inside the crank case that was less than normal atmospheric pressure (1kpa), they were able to physically allow the engine to rotate more smoothly. Some other benefits that they discovered were smoother engine braking and smoother acceleration. As you can see in the video below starting at around 3:11, without the T-Rev system the CC pressure rarely goes below -0.20kpa. However with the T-Rev system CC pressures go all the way down to almost -11.00kpa.


Video of T-rev installed in a BRZ

Another point is about the filter. The filter is their to draw air in an let the crank "breath" fresh air to equalize pressure inside the CC when necessary (preventing it to make too much negative pressure.) This only happens once the reeds have closed the valve.


Also worth mentioning, Teramoto actually has a all-in-one T-Rev with oil catch can as well.

 

EDIT: Leaving this post in its original form in order to eliminate confusion for those who may have already read this. ....I found out the spring in the valve is correct. Some perfect chain of events led me to believe the valve adjusted opposite to how it really adjusts. The rest of this post is better off ignored.

Original:
Okay... Here is an update. I had high hopes of doing some testing over the weekend, but instead I woke up Saturday, feeling like I was hit by a truck. For the first time in my adult life I had a fever for about 60 straight hours.... wow it sucked...

Nisco, thank you for jumping in on the discussion and supplying great youtube links.

Here is where I am at.... I just ran out to the garage for a quick test before bed. I believe these clones have an incorrect spring on the check valve. I have the valve set to allow the least amount of air through the filter as possible and still I do not get vacuum. To reach my conclusion, I decided to block off the filter entirely to confirm the T-rev is capable of vacuum. Check out the pic with a zip-lock bag and a zip tie. I immediately had vacuum after pulling the zip tie tight.







My current plan is to remove the unit, get an understanding on the spring size and see if I can find something that will work. Ideally something that anyone can purchase in case others want to follow along on this trip by purchasing their own.

It's after midnight here in Indiana and I still feel like crap. Sorry for keeping this one short.

 

My goals of this test from this point forward are.....

• Find out if I can get the engine to maintain 4-5 inches of mercury
• Not exceed my goal of 4-5 inches of mercury * (see note below)
• Perform a 660 ft (1/8) mile test with and without the valve installed.
• Try to figure out a test that can tell me flow through the PCV side, thus making sure harmful fumes and deposits are getting pulled out of the crankcase. ** (see note below)
• Continue monitoring fuel economy and see if this is a boost. I need to do this without obvious attempts to "game" the system. I will need to try to be my same old self as I drive, for the next few weeks.

* Something that I cannot test for or see any results of, is change in oil pressure caused by the addition of vacuum inside the engine. It is almost a big enough deal that I lose interest in the testing. But also, I see enough information out there where people safely run small amounts of vacuum, it leads me to be more okay with this goal of 4-5 inches of mercury. Our cars have piston cooling oil jets and vacuum can cause these to become less efficient.

** I am assuming that as long as my MAP pressure shows more vacuum than my crankcase pressure, there should be PCV flow toward the air intake. I can take my MAP readings from my ScanGauge2 and get an idea as to when my crankcase vacuum exceeds my intake vacuum. This likely only during 75-100% throttle, and for those short moments, I don't care.

As always, thanks for following along.

p.s. I am starting to think this thread should not be solely dedicated to the GE cars.. My testing is on a GK, and my methods would be just as effective on a GE, GK, or any other vehicle.

 

So cool to see the -11.00kpa and that is corresponds to my most recent findings too. I know not everyone will follow along with all the conversions as we talk about inches of HG (mercury), or kpa, or PSI, so I am adding this table to help out in the future.

 

Phone slipped and lost my entire reply. Summary time. Other air filters are available from amazon, ebay, and other site, likely hobby shops too. They're air filters for motorized RC cars. Can drastically affect vacuum retention but needs individual testing.
next, my T-REV is really free flowing in proper direction so I see evac of harmful vapors as a non-issue.
On the GE I only noticed one evac/relevant vent line. Didnt have a visible pcv. If im not mistaken it this thing might be more relevant for the GE, although it *is* universal and of a higher quality than your standard pcv.

Feel better, sir. Jeez. Get some needed rest!.. and
​​​​maybe some penicillin..
Oh, and thanks for all the hard work!!

 

Going through these in order

I get so long winded in my responses that sometimes I stop and hit "copy" just in case I need to paste them back in if slip on the wrong key.

About the part where you say, "my T-REV is really free flowing in proper direction so I see evac of harmful vapors as a non-issue" I am super biased and really want to make sure that a PCV side is still doing the heavy lifting in terms of keeping the crankcase clean. PCV gases enter after the throttle body, a place I don't mind a little bit dirty, whereas the breather side, where the T-rev is mounted, lets air in before the throttle body. I guess this really cannot be any worse than completely open, the way it was before.

On your GE car, the PCV should be visible with a flashlight. Looking past your dipstick tube, looking ward the driver seat, directly under the intake manifold. Maybe you knew this, but it was written in a way that I am not sure.

Penicillin = Check! Got it Saturday morning!

Edited out a comment related to the check valve spring. I have corrected my own understanding.

 

Originally following my assertion about lack of concern for vapor I said I wasn't trying to be a jerk and that its just a speculative comparison to other pcvs i've.. well. Sucked on. Gotta think like the car, you know?
I really do understand the concern. Guess the best way to test it would be to have some controlled air going in, you know, but I dont have that fancy tool to read cfm, or even know how I'd set that up.​​​​​​

honestly, oh wait! Hm.. yeah the line was ran funny, the pcv. Was really no way for me to get in there comfortably, plus I mounted it to match the images i found.
Man I've been out of it. I recall the spring you're talking about now, and even being concerned about it for how flimsy it is. Even if its appropriate it couldnt stand sustained load. Used to have an ace hardware near here that actually had hardware..
Got another place I can check for springs though..
Initial effect was rad. Following that I got the car stuck in the mud and throttled the hell outta it, goofy shifting after the panic set in.. Now I think I want to replace the fluids... even got the floor mat stuck over the gas pedal and had it bouncing on the rev limiter. Its shifting and such have been less smooth since.

I was actually looking at gauges just the other day. I was hoping to find one with certified calibration but struck out. Matching yours may help with verification despite our vehicle differences.
​​​​​​Pulling excessive vacuum would indeed be a no-no. Oil loss, potential for increased blow-by, and pull on the pistons instead of push.
At any rate itd be bad.

Glad you could actually get your hands on good medicine!! Its hard to do these days... I've heard that you can actually purchase such things straight out for certain kinds animals.. and that it does indeed work just the same and the doseage is even matched..
I'll bite the bullet and get a gauge already.

 

 

Sup boys! Frozone here! Just installed this on my GK5

I had a buddy place it on where the green tube is on this diagram just chop and place it in the middle..

As I drove home I realized a few things.
[BTW my car is 6 speed manual]
Rev hang is dramatically reduced
Upshifts have little power loss, no more jolts when spirited driving
Acceleration is super smooth, less jerky power application upon WOT
More wheelspin... more power? hmm we shall see...

 

Congrats on getting a valve.

I would highly recommend buying the gauge mentioned earlier, or getting some type of low pressure gauge that is capable of reading vacuum. The placebo effect with these is a very real thing.

The PCV side is already a 1 way system so the addition of a reed valve will only make it a little more efficient, but also risks not flowing the volume needed.

The breather side of you system is still open to atmosphere so there is no way to build vacuum.

 

I see, it seems to just be a way to release engine blow by gas to me for the time being. Definitely requires more testing... idk if my throttle response increase is placebo or not but it feels like I have a lightened flywheel when I drive.

 

Hah! Thats exactly what I said. I imagine performance gains would be minimal, like switching to better spark plugs that are appropriate for the driving you do, or running premium.
the thing we wont be able to test for is the feel resulting from the change. To me, its a cool upgrade for smoothing out shifting, which is a huge deal. Reducing that resistance you get when smooshin down that clutch pedal is beneficial in several ways. Just gotta verify that something changed on the car to make it possible.

 

So after finally reading through these posts in entirety, I have decided to replace PCV hose and place it on the breather pipe
Which I assume is the #6 silver pipe on our GK Fits.

By having mine on the pcv side I have noticed a slight rough idle and less fuel in my exhaust gasses.
I deduced this because of my free flowing exhaust (basically just the cats) my car usually has tons of audible afterfire (popping every shift, like 2 step level pops).
When I installed this on the PCV tube I guess it releases the extra blowby gasses through the filter which means less fuel gets reintroduced into the cylinders, which now my car runs quieter (and trust me its loud already) and less after fire.

But the slight rough idle concerns me and with some saying losing vacuum to relieve crankcase pressure through pcv sounds harmful.

Question for you CyclingFit, Did you fabricate your own tubing for the T-Rev and simply just move the OEM silver breather to the side not connected to anything?

 

Hey Frozone - My comments are in order to how you wrote your info above.

• I am glad to hear you will be putting the PCV side of your system back to factory. The PCV valve will be able to do what it does with less interruption. In your case it was more like you had two pcv valves in a row.
• You mentioned air going out that little filter. Air only comes in through the little filter. That is part of a regulator that keeps the crankcase from drawing too much vacuum. It allows for the crankcase to inhale if absolutely needed.
• Your exhaust cackle and pop - There are so many variables that can go into this that it would be hard to say if the valve was changing your cackle and popping. Hot pipes and cold pipes flow differently, and the same for the temp of the catalyst. The car is going to adjust fuel by altitude, engine temp, intake air temp, etc.... All of these can change your notes...
• Yes, I made my own plumbing. In post #61, the first video, I think I talk briefly about this. I did move the tubes over for this test.

Another more general post is coming in a few minutes.

 

Frozone forgot to mention ... his B pipe is missing the resonator (resonator delete) ... and his car sounds loud (and imo, sounds rather amazing) as a result ... and makes a cackle & pop sound

when he ran the t-rev after pcv, somehow, that reduced the cackle & pop




Frozone, is the rough idle AFTER you removed the t rev from the pcv side? if yes, try removing the t rev 100% altogether and then report back .... still rough idle? if yes.... that rough idle is prob NOT the t-rev but more than likely in the pcv area itself.

 

That is how I understood him. I believe the faster the engine returns to idle the less cackle and pop he is likely to get. I would go as far as betting that running the air conditioning would have these same effects at reducing the fun sounds. And air conditioning with the rear defrost switch turned on would possible be even more noticeable thanks to the additional drag from the alternator.

In summary: I do believe there can be a difference in exhaust sounds and I think it's caused by pressure or vacuum on in the crankcase, either of which might have happened from putting more restriction on the PCV tube.

 

This touches on things from the last couple of posts...

I too agree with anyone that thinks their car mimics a car with a lighter flywheel. I have not said that until now, but I have felt that way since the first moment. Why could this happen? Personally, I don't think it's because of some miracle negative 2-4psi in the engine and the engine wanting to slow down more naturally. I believe it's because vacuum in the crankcase is actually putting some negative or slowing or suction forces on the engine. I may be able to create a video of me adjusting the T-rev and you can hear the engine rpm drop a little. Additionally my ScanGauge should be able to prove the difference digitally looking at RPM. I am not sure the car adjust very quickly to bring the idle rpm up.

Another thing you notice when you add vacuum to the crankcase is that the engine gets considerably quieter at idle. I am going to try to get video of the topic in bold font above and in doing so, I am hopeful it can show this under hood change in noise at the same time.

I have now done FOUR 0-60mph runs. The results are 1 second slower than the 8.4 seconds achieved by the auto magazines in a 2018 Sport Package 6spd. They achieved 8.4 seconds, which often consists of driving the absolute socks off the things. Also I believe my scenario is likely 125 pounds heavier in terms of my size and stuff in or on the car.

• same start location
• 30 degrees outside
• 1/2 tank of premium
• about 2 miles of soft driving between runs
• I am 265 pounds, dressed
• receiver hitch on the car (probably 20 pounds)
• EX with sunfroof
• CVT in sport mode
• probably 10 pounds of random additional stuff in the car

0-60 times and feet required to reach the speed.

1. 9.6 seconds in 500 feet with T-rev set at -3psi
2. 9.6 seconds in 498 feet with T-rev set at -3psi
3. 9.4 seconds in 480 feet with T-rev set at 0 (barely less than no device installed)
4. 9.4 seconds in 477 feet with T-rev set at 0 (barely less than no device installed)

Sorry that none of these are 660 foot (1/8th mile). So far I am seeing a car that is slower with the T-rev set to -3. The T-rev does allow me closer to zero than no T-rev, so I need to do all of these tests again, then do one with no T-rev installed at all.

Why might this be? I don't know... Vacuum is a very weird thing. Watch the episode of mythbusters where they drop the bowling ball and the feather. This tells you that something moves through space easier when there is no air to slow it down, but that is in a true vacuum. In the case of cylinders moving, there is a chance that vacuum is not permitting them from moving into the bores.

So maybe we are getting drag on the engine... maybe we need more testing (for sure)

Some of the big race engine builders are getting more HP because they get better ring sealing. They also run a lot more vacuum to get that extra sealing. Also, I don't believe our cars, or my car with only 22,000 miles is having any ring sealing issues. This could mean that the T-rev shows more benefit to an engine with more wear??? Maybe...

So much to think about at a time where I thought we would have less to think about.