Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Thursday May 25, 2017
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Factory 2.5L Turbo Powertrain (EJ Series Factory 2.5L Turbo)

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads. 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-10-2016, 10:04 AM   #1
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default Killer B Motorsport - Air/Oil Separator

After years of being asked to develop a Killer B Motorsport Air/Oil Separator, we are nearing our release for the FA20 WRX Air/Oil Separator. This is a product we’ve been asked to develop for many years, and in that time there has been a lot of research, engineering, simulations, development, testing (and repeat), with several Subaru engines and build types. This has been going on over many seasons exposing to environmental extremes, and driving conditions (daily driving, auto-X, drag racing, dyno testing, etc.), as well as on stock engines and exceeding 700whp.

The goal of this product is simple. To function as its Air/Oil Separator description implies: the removal of oil, in liquid or vapor form, from the vented crankcase gasses.

Simple in premise, but function wise there’s a bit more to it. Varying oil droplet sizes, with differing pressure and velocity conditions. Different engines with varying venting characteristics or a street car vs a track or performance elevated engine. The variable list goes on, making acceptable function and performance a difficult challenge.

Performance must be spot on, but the effects on the engine’s operation must be unchanged at the least, or improved ad best. We prefer the later. This is accomplished by using a design that has no restrictions; media or baffles, to reduce the flow potential of the crankcase and head vents. Under positive boost conditions it will produce vacuum in the crankcase. The benefit of this is improved evacuation of crankcase gasses and the many other benefits that can be had with crankcase vacuum; improved ring seal, reduced oil consumption and improved power potential.

The Killer B Motorsport Air/Oil Separator functions with a vacuum source only, the turbo inlet. This provides the vacuum source for the crankcase. It is in no way effected by the turbo size, in fact a larger turbo that draws more air will improved separator function, compensating for increased venting requirements seen at improved performance levels. While small OEM turbochargers produce crankcase vacuum under boost, larger turbochargers produce more.

Drain back design assures any oil that accumulates, ends up where it needs to be, in the oil pan assuring consistent supply to the engine. Six stainless steel bolts on the top, make it quick and easy for inspection and cleaning. It is not heated and we see no reason to add unnecessary cooling/heating (weight, complexity, increased install time, and increase probability of something leaking) and this simple engineered form functions just fine without it.

The Killer B Motorsport Air/Oil Separator should meet and exceeds your expectations of how an Air/Oil Separator should work and function on a Subaru engine. Not only that, it will display some of the best eye candy fabrication available.

As we finalize production details we will begin to take orders, soon. They will be processed on a first pay first ship basis and we expect significant demand for this product that you the enthusiasts, have been waiting years for. If you’d like further details on pricing, options, and availability, please feel free to contact us at [email protected]








* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

Last edited by KillerBMotorsport; 12-28-2016 at 08:53 AM.
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 08-10-2016, 01:50 PM   #2
wrxhard
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 108091
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Fargo, ND
Vehicle:
2002 WRX

Default

404 error 2.5 ej motor content not found?
wrxhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2016, 01:52 PM   #3
NJReppin
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 371530
Join Date: Oct 2013
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: (856),New Jersey
Vehicle:
2004 PBP 2.5RS
PSM 04 STi

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wrxhard View Post
404 error 2.5 ej motor content not found?
lulz.. oops copy n paste...

curious too even tho I already have an iag
NJReppin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2016, 03:38 PM   #4
kenliu84
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 107618
Join Date: Feb 2006
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NY
Vehicle:
2006 OBP WRX Wagon
PrecisionTuned/TiCSuspen.

Default

that's a lot of money. I'd love to see the tech behind this product. It would have to be a lot better than the competitors in order for me to drop another $150ish for an AOS, at a total of over $500.
kenliu84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2016, 03:46 PM   #5
hondaeater69
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 60324
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: soon to be somewhere else
Vehicle:
1998 RS

Default

am i the only one who wonders how overkill some of these AOS's are? for most street cars anyway... check your intake tract and intercooler... if you're not getting excessive coating of oil from blowby, i don't see the point.
hondaeater69 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2016, 04:59 PM   #6
NJReppin
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 371530
Join Date: Oct 2013
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: (856),New Jersey
Vehicle:
2004 PBP 2.5RS
PSM 04 STi

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hondaeater69 View Post
am i the only one who wonders how overkill some of these AOS's are? for most street cars anyway... check your intake tract and intercooler... if you're not getting excessive coating of oil from blowby, i don't see the point.
Lol every subie I ever pulled the intercooler off of had a fair coating of oil in there...

how often you take your car apart?
NJReppin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2016, 06:06 PM   #7
mrsaturn7085
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 375462
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza WRX STI
WR Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hondaeater69 View Post
am i the only one who wonders how overkill some of these AOS's are?
No. The whole AOS thing blows my mind - search any of my posts in AOS-related threads...

I'm not stomping this product - for those who need it, it's probably great... it certainly will not *hurt* your motor; I'll leave it at that.

$500+ is a certainly hard pill to swallow for a welded-up can no matter how you cut it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hondaeater69 View Post
check your intake tract and intercooler... if you're not getting excessive coating of oil from blowby, i don't see the point.
If you run a well-routed catch can with a vent, you should see zero unless your turbo seals are wearing. Drain-back, water cooling, etc. are all 'features' that turn a catch can into an AOS (which is just a marketing term stolen from in-line water traps on air compressors). I have yet to see any features in this regard that justify the 4-5x price tag over a simple baffled can w/o drain-back. One major benefit to NOT having drain-back is that you'll be able to notice when the catch can starts shifting from half-full in one month to half-full in a week...

Last edited by mrsaturn7085; 08-10-2016 at 06:14 PM.
mrsaturn7085 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2016, 09:04 PM   #8
Rizen
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 157002
Join Date: Aug 2007
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Vehicle:
2011 Street Mod STI
11.4 @ 127

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsaturn7085 View Post
No. The whole AOS thing blows my mind - search any of my posts in AOS-related threads...

I'm not stomping this product - for those who need it, it's probably great... it certainly will not *hurt* your motor; I'll leave it at that.

$500+ is a certainly hard pill to swallow for a welded-up can no matter how you cut it.



If you run a well-routed catch can with a vent, you should see zero unless your turbo seals are wearing. Drain-back, water cooling, etc. are all 'features' that turn a catch can into an AOS (which is just a marketing term stolen from in-line water traps on air compressors). I have yet to see any features in this regard that justify the 4-5x price tag over a simple baffled can w/o drain-back. One major benefit to NOT having drain-back is that you'll be able to notice when the catch can starts shifting from half-full in one month to half-full in a week...
1) R&D

2) Even @ $500 it's a lot less expensive than rebuilding your motor.

My car @ stage 2 power levels, without a catch can, definitely saw oil in the intercooler. And once I started autocrossing I had to upgrade from the GrimmSpeed AOS to an IAG because I would still find oil in my intake tract.
Rizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 07:32 AM   #9
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wrxhard View Post
404 error 2.5 ej motor content not found?
It's coming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kenliu84 View Post
that's a lot of money. I'd love to see the tech behind this product. It would have to be a lot better than the competitors in order for me to drop another $150ish for an AOS, at a total of over $500.
There will be an introductory group-buy posted soon that will knock some off the MSRP. There is welding (challenging at that) inside and out, the outer 'cone' is made from a solid chuck of billet aluminum, as are almost all the other parts. A couple being laser cut from sheetmetal. The barbs are even all our own design (clamp-less), made specifically for this product and CNC turned from solid billet. "She may not look like much from, but she's got it where it counts" and yes you are a dork if you know that quote!

Quote:
Originally Posted by hondaeater69 View Post
am i the only one who wonders how overkill some of these AOS's are? for most street cars anyway... check your intake tract and intercooler... if you're not getting excessive coating of oil from blowby, i don't see the point.
Some believe this. Many more feel they'd rather have something that's overkill, than underperforming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NJReppin View Post
Lol every subie I ever pulled the intercooler off of had a fair coating of oil in there...

how often you take your car apart?
^ this. Every car is different due to driving style, environmental conditions, age, engine health, build type, etc...

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsaturn7085 View Post
If you run a well-routed catch can with a vent, you should see zero unless your turbo seals are wearing. Drain-back, water cooling, etc. are all 'features' that turn a catch can into an AOS (which is just a marketing term stolen from in-line water traps on air compressors). I have yet to see any features in this regard that justify the 4-5x price tag over a simple baffled can w/o drain-back. One major benefit to NOT having drain-back is that you'll be able to notice when the catch can starts shifting from half-full in one month to half-full in a week...
Turbo seals more often cause symptoms on the hotside. Cold side symptoms are nealy always due to restriction in the intake tract, or excessive crankcase pressure.

If you are VTA you DO have crankcase pressure. This may explain your thoughts on turbo seals and cold side oil contamination.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rizen View Post
1) R&D

2) Even @ $500 it's a lot less expensive than rebuilding your motor.

My car @ stage 2 power levels, without a catch can, definitely saw oil in the intercooler. And once I started autocrossing I had to upgrade from the GrimmSpeed AOS to an IAG because I would still find oil in my intake tract.
^ this
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 10:47 AM   #10
Samurai Jack
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 21145
Join Date: Jul 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Not in my own time
Vehicle:
2002 Enemy of Aku

Default

So, correct me if I am wrong, but it appears this unit will "plug" into the oil fill tube, * similar * to the way a Grimmspeed AOS "plugs" into the oil fill tube.

With that set-up, I can see why no coolant lines are needed to keep the unit warm, like other brands that are mounted to the firewall.

... and I didn't say the Grimmspeed was better or equal to, just noting the install location
Samurai Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 11:09 AM   #11
subydude
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 80649
Join Date: Jan 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Columbia, SC
Vehicle:
2000 2.5 Auto-X RSTi
What's A Head Gasket?

Default

Having barbs like that will make removal harder for people who work on their cars on a regular basis, just an FYI.

I'd be curious to see how this does in an actual motorsports environment like autox where we're pulling 1.6-1.7 lateral G's. My Crawford can overflows to a secondary catch can on long sweepers so I'd like to eventually replace it with something else, but until there's a lot of proof it's pretty hard to drop $500 + on something when I can keep adding oil between events.
subydude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 12:34 PM   #12
mrsaturn7085
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 375462
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza WRX STI
WR Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rizen View Post
2) Even @ $500 it's a lot less expensive than rebuilding your motor.
If you believe an AOS prevents the need to rebuild a worn motor (or prevents a motor from wearing out), the marketing is working.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rizen View Post
My car @ stage 2 power levels...
Yep, the marketing is working...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rizen View Post
...without a catch can, definitely saw oil in the intercooler. And once I started autocrossing I had to upgrade from the GrimmSpeed AOS to an IAG because I would still find oil in my intake tract.
You will always find oil in the intake of a turbocharged Subaru because, for emissions reasons, the PCV system *needs* to be connected this way (closed system). Obviously if you screw with the system at all, this may change. Whoever convinced you that oil in the intake is going to blow your motor up is a marketing genius. At high load, oil in the intake charge is bad, yes - it reduces the effective octane rating of the charge.

That being said...

The goal of any wet sump crankcase venting system should be eliminating the oil from the high-load intake charge while providing sufficient breathing for the crankcase. If you changed the displacement, cams, etc. then you *might* need to address the low-load situation (by removing the PCV, adding larger ports, etc.). For the rest of us, the diagram I've posted NUMEROUS times showing how to vent the high-load system is sufficient.

I mentioned this many, many times, but if you want an example of what you need in high-level motorsport with a mandated wet sump - WRC EJ20 motors used three (larger than OEM) vent hoses; two from the heads and one from the block, into a remote baffled oil catch can that was vented to atmosphere.

Now, you can say 'well, they rebuild their motors all the time' or 'the engine's internal baffles were modified'... yes - you can find any excuse if you try hard enough... but the bottom line is, the engines used an open system with a baffled catch can - that's it.

Now back to the OEM situation - if FHI connected the high-load connection post-turbo (without a check valve), that would pressurize the crankcase with whatever boost pressure you were running. If FHI vented the high-load connection, they would violate emissions laws. See where I'm going here? Oil in the intake charge in inevitable in the OEM setup.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
Some believe this. Many more feel they'd rather have something that's overkill, than underperforming.
That's a good spin on it, I guess.

Just as I said before - I'm sure this product is a great deal for someone who needs it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
Turbo seals more often cause symptoms on the hotside. Cold side symptoms are nearly always due to restriction in the intake tract, or excessive crankcase pressure.
I agree, but you can still pull oil from this area in low-load situations. Intake vacuum against a pressurized oil system seal... this leak is common enough to mention...

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
If you are VTA you DO have crankcase pressure. This may explain your thoughts on turbo seals and cold side oil contamination.
You always have crankcase pressure - this is a dynamic system that pumps air... whether this pressure is above, below, or equal to atmospheric pressure, you have crankcase pressure. Without a dry sump and serious vacuum pump (or a giant hole in the block), you will experience all three regularly. You know this as well as I do.

Last edited by mrsaturn7085; 08-11-2016 at 12:44 PM.
mrsaturn7085 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 02:06 PM   #13
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samurai Jack View Post
So, correct me if I am wrong, but it appears this unit will "plug" into the oil fill tube, * similar * to the way a Grimmspeed AOS "plugs" into the oil fill tube.
No. It's a separate unit. On the FA It ties into the single head port and crankcase port. EJs have two head ports and a single crankcase port.

Quote:
Originally Posted by subydude View Post
Having barbs like that will make removal harder for people who work on their cars on a regular basis, just an FYI.
On the FA, it's pretty easy to get to the lines off from the other end. If you're pulling stuff out ALL the time and too lazy to pull from the other side, get dry breaks

Quote:
Originally Posted by subydude View Post
I'd be curious to see how this does in an actual motorsports environment like autox where we're pulling 1.6-1.7 lateral G's. My Crawford can overflows to a secondary catch can on long sweepers so I'd like to eventually replace it with something else, but until there's a lot of proof it's pretty hard to drop $500 + on something when I can keep adding oil between events.
All 3 of our shop cars have seen auto-X abuse with these installed. I'm no A.J. Foyt but we have zero evidence that anything has made it into the outlet port and into the intake tract. Our fat wheel/tire and big power (+700whp) 2005 STi also has our Oil Control Valve in place. It's exact purpose it to prevent oil from coming out of the head ports... and it works pretty well as others have experienced (posted) on those threads.

Anytime you add oil, not only is it going someplace it shouldn't, it's not in the pan. Lower level in the pan increases the probability of starvation. This not desirable!

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsaturn7085 View Post
I mentioned this many, many times, but if you want an example of what can be done in high-level motorsport with a mandated wet sump - WRC EJ20 motors used three (larger than OEM) vent hoses; two from the heads and one from the block, into a remote baffled oil catch can that was vented to atmosphere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsaturn7085 View Post
but the bottom line is, the engines used an open system with a baffled catch can - that's it.
I've seen people argue that their Gatorade bottle works just as well too. If you don't care about smell, the occasional puff of smoke, pulling vacuum, oil consumption, etc... Then a product like this is not for you. Most, that I know of, that pull an engine after 3 stages, are making their own PCV setup anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsaturn7085 View Post
That's a good spin on it, I guess.
Thanks

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsaturn7085 View Post
You always have crankcase pressure - this is a dynamic system that pumps air... whether this pressure is above, below, or equal to atmospheric pressure, you have crankcase pressure. Without a dry sump and serious vacuum pump (or a giant hole in the block), you will experience all three regularly. You know this as well as I do.
I respectfully disagree. We pull a couple+ inches of vacuum under boost with OEM to medium sized turbos. That number increase as the engine gets on boil and P/W clearances and ring end gaps tighten up (and blowby decreases). With a larger turbo setup we see even more crankcase vacuum under boost. This is easy to measure and we do, at different locations on the PCV system across different EJs and FA engines.

A vacuum is made by blowing over a hole. The amount of flow through the intake tract into the turbo, is spelled out in the compressor maps. It's enough to supply LOTS of vacuum. To the point where it's valuable for a separation process like what we're doing here, providing some beneficial crankcase vacuum, and/or provides diminishing returns. That's where the dorky fun starts
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 02:59 PM   #14
mrsaturn7085
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 375462
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza WRX STI
WR Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
I've seen people argue that their Gatorade bottle works just as well too. If you don't care about smell, the occasional puff of smoke, pulling vacuum, oil consumption, etc... Then a product like this is not for you. Most, that I know of, that pull an engine after 3 stages, are making their own PCV setup anyway.
I'm with you on this - my position is the middle ground between Gatorade bottle and severe overkill. It's not a black and white choice, and as I mentioned twice - this is likely a great product for those with a need for it. The price-tag is inline with being a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of money those needing this product probably spend on the engine...

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
Thanks
I was only being a little sarcastic it really was a well-worded summary of what I was saying, as well!

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
A vacuum is made by blowing over a hole. The amount of flow through the intake tract into the turbo, is spelled out in the compressor maps. It's enough to supply LOTS of vacuum. To the point where it's valuable for a separation process like what we're doing here, providing some beneficial crankcase vacuum, and/or provides diminishing returns. That's where the dorky fun starts
So, effectively, you are saying this product is superior to other (less-effective) AOS as you are pulling double-duty on the turbo and using it as a dry-sump style vacuum pump under load?

This is good - now I'm starting to like this a bit. If the baffle system is up to the task of keeping the turbo vacuum under load w/o polluting the charge, this is great!
mrsaturn7085 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 03:34 PM   #15
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsaturn7085 View Post
So, effectively, you are saying this product is superior to other (less-effective) AOS as you are pulling double-duty on the turbo and using it as a dry-sump style vacuum pump under load?

This is good - now I'm starting to like this a bit. If the baffle system is up to the task of keeping the turbo vacuum under load w/o polluting the charge, this is great!
The vortex design works very well because centrifugal force is constantly acting on vapors, pushing them into the outer wall. Think of it as going around an infinite baffle A traditional Baffle is one corner, or two or three or.... every baffle corner produces turbulence that reduces the separation capabilities and creates turbulence reducing the flow potential vs what the cross sectional area may deem it's capable of flowing.

So in short, it's VERY free flowing... and the more you push through it, and pull on it, the better the separation capabilities. Being free flowing means any vacuum source, like from the turbo inlet, has nearly unrestrictive pull on the crankcase vs a baffled setup that is trying to pull vacuum around one to many turbulent corners.
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 03:52 PM   #16
subydude
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 80649
Join Date: Jan 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Columbia, SC
Vehicle:
2000 2.5 Auto-X RSTi
What's A Head Gasket?

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post

All 3 of our shop cars have seen auto-X abuse with these installed. I'm no A.J. Foyt but we have zero evidence that anything has made it into the outlet port and into the intake tract. Our fat wheel/tire and big power (+700whp) 2005 STi also has our Oil Control Valve in place. It's exact purpose it to prevent oil from coming out of the head ports... and it works pretty well as others have experienced (posted) on those threads.

Anytime you add oil, not only is it going someplace it shouldn't, it's not in the pan. Lower level in the pan increases the probability of starvation. This not desirable!
What cars see (especially mine) in autox on 315 Hoosier A7's and real aero is not what the average car sees. Mine never blows oil out of the Crawford AOS on the dyno or any time going generally straight, but on long sweepers where I'm on throttle the whole way round at high RPM I can easily throw .25 cups of oil into the secondary catch can per run.

I'm aware of what's desirable and what's not What you're missing here is there are some pretty legitimate competition cars here with not a lot of budget and the people behind them (me in this case) have solved a lot of problems in regards to $$ into speed. If I can put $50 of oil into it over a season while making sure the pan stays full between events or runs (if it's a course full of sweepers) then it'd still take me 10 years to justify your AOS or 7 years for your oil control valve. Not a very good investment from that point of view

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
I respectfully disagree. We pull a couple+ inches of vacuum under boost with OEM to medium sized turbos. That number increase as the engine gets on boil and P/W clearances and ring end gaps tighten up (and blowby decreases). With a larger turbo setup we see even more crankcase vacuum under boost. This is easy to measure and we do, at different locations on the PCV system across different EJs and FA engines.

A vacuum is made by blowing over a hole. The amount of flow through the intake tract into the turbo, is spelled out in the compressor maps. It's enough to supply LOTS of vacuum. To the point where it's valuable for a separation process like what we're doing here, providing some beneficial crankcase vacuum, and/or provides diminishing returns. That's where the dorky fun starts
What the primary issue here is when you start going fast enough and driving these cars like they're meant to be driven, you'll still over power most AOS (if not all) on the market and end up with oil in your intake tract. These are cars that almost never live anywhere other than at high RPM so oil anywhere that's decreasing octane is bad.

Would I prefer to run a vacuum pump on my AOS? Sure, helps in some small ways for the engine. Is it so critical that I'm going to add some other system to the front of my car that's already front heavy just so I can have "better ring seal"? Eh...maybe. I'd have to see verifiable proof that a can could withstand the forces I want to put through the car and NEVER push oil back into the intake tract for me to even consider it.

Now, this is from a motorsports perspective. From a street driven perspective, pretty much any of the AOS systems will work IMO. Most people are driving at 2/10ths and the majority only ever try to go fast in a straight line for like 4-5 seconds at a time. Trying to sell them a $500 can is not going to be easy when your telling them the same thing all the other manufacturers are as well

That being said, if you want to get real data on autox abuse I'll be happy to set one up on my car in place of the Crawford. I'll run your stickers, and post data in comparison. This would give people a real life "this is what the can is able to do" demonstration and something they can somewhat relate to.
subydude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 04:14 PM   #17
mrsaturn7085
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 375462
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza WRX STI
WR Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
The vortex design works very well because centrifugal force is constantly acting on vapors, pushing them into the outer wall...
This "vortex design" is not a new concept in catch cans, however - are there any new designs in your model that are patented (issued or pending)?
mrsaturn7085 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 04:40 PM   #18
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by subydude View Post
there are some pretty legitimate competition cars here with not a lot of budget and the people behind them (me in this case) have solved a lot of problems in regards to $$ into speed. If I can put $50 of oil into it over a season while making sure the pan stays full between events or runs (if it's a course full of sweepers) then it'd still take me 10 years to justify your AOS or 7 years for your oil control valve. Not a very good investment from that point of view
Yes, I know all about that. We get sponsor requests allllllll the time. We only sponsor professional level teams and/or those supported by shops with a relevant background in motorsports. Our products are on many of the fastest Subies in the world, virtually any motorsports venue that Subies take part in... and there's a lot! We have a very good understanding of the forces involved in motorsports. Not to mention the few turbo and supercharged Suby powered aerobatic aircraft we've worked with (talk about weirdo and sustained forces and oiling demands!).

While I fully understand your budgetary needs, those are not going to be for everyone. I'd personally rather not risk a built engine on $50 in oil every year. I'd spend several hundred to protect many thousands... because it only takes that oil level dropping too much just once

Auto-X is a pretty safe sport from an oiling perspective because forces are not as great or sustained as other venues. It may never be an issue for someone like you. For example you're not sustaining 1.7Gs +150mph going through 5th/6th at full load like Mark Jager's T/A car that has good aero (and the speed to use it) with the accompanying racecar built around it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by subydude View Post
you'll still over power most AOS (if not all) on the market and end up with oil in your intake tract.
One of the reasons we got into this game, to change that expectation. The Subaru market is very smart, data driven, and tech savy. We know this and expect it. If we didn't feel we had a good, highly competitive product, we wouldn't be having this conversation

Quote:
Originally Posted by subydude View Post
I'd have to see verifiable proof that a can could withstand the forces I want to put through the car and NEVER push oil back into the intake tract for me to even consider it.
Again, our oil control valve is a motorsports grade product for this reason. When your valve cover become the sump because the lateral forces are that high, you're going to get oil into your lines, there is no preventing this. We do some different routing to reduce this over some others, but this is really the place for the valve. The separator is for assuring crankcase gasses are vented to their maximum and clean air is presented to the intake. That is its function.
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 04:42 PM   #19
rtv900
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 428511
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: philadelphia
Vehicle:
2016 STI

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsaturn7085 View Post
This "vortex design" is not a new concept in catch cans, however - are there any new designs in your model that are patented (issued or pending)?
I was thinking the same thing, but I was going to use the word Cyclone.
So it's essentially a cyclone for oil right?
rtv900 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 04:47 PM   #20
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

I like to call it the Multi-Vector Vortex Vacuum Separator. Or, M3VS for short
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 05:02 PM   #21
subydude
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 80649
Join Date: Jan 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Columbia, SC
Vehicle:
2000 2.5 Auto-X RSTi
What's A Head Gasket?

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
Auto-X is a pretty safe sport from an oiling perspective because forces are not as great or sustained as other venues. It may never be an issue for someone like you. For example you're not sustaining 1.7Gs +150mph going through 5th/6th at full load like Mark Jager's T/A car that has good aero (and the speed to use it) with the accompanying racecar built around it.
*sigh*. For those at the top of autox the oiling needs are easily as high as most track work (minus endurance races). What you're missing here Chris is while we're not going 150 mph, we are sustaining the same G levels for long periods of time at high RPM and high load. G forces are G forces and engines don't care if they're in a dyno cell or a car when they experience load. The primary difference here is we have time to add oil between runs if needed. There's still a lot of people running AOS, accusumps, and even dry sump systems to keep engines alive.

Aero works at autox speeds. Just an FYI

If I parked my car next to a T/A car the only thing 99% of people would notice that's different is I don't have a roll cage or fixed back seats. Just an FYI that autox is more than what you've likely seen

Last edited by subydude; 08-11-2016 at 05:07 PM.
subydude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 05:27 PM   #22
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by subydude View Post
*sigh*. For those at the top of autox the oiling needs are easily as high as most track work (minus endurance races). What you're missing here Chris is while we're not going 150 mph, we are sustaining the same G levels for long periods of time at high RPM and high load. G forces are G forces and engines don't care if they're in a dyno cell or a car when they experience load. The primary difference here is we have time to add oil between runs if needed. There's still a lot of people running AOS, accusumps, and even dry sump systems to keep engines alive.

Aero works at autox speeds. Just an FYI

If I parked my car next to a T/A car the only thing 99% of people would notice that's different is I don't have a roll cage or fixed back seats. Just an FYI that autox is more than what you've likely seen
I know how physics works, but same forces...? Not quite. If you know how aero works you know it's MUCH more effective at 150mph than 100mph. I also don't know of any banked auto-X turns, and if sustained corners were anywhere near as long... it wouldn't be called auto-X

Don't get me wrong, I love auto-X and I feel it's the most fun anyone can have in a car with keeping their pants on for $28, but it's not road racing and certainly not hours of endurance racing abuse.

I in no way profess to be driving guru myself, just an old codger putting around in this thing...



I leave the real world track testing to those who live it. Data logging, cutting tenths, engine programs, support teams, etc... They are on the cutting edge of blowing stuff up or winning races. Not only does it provide the most valuable data, but they don't hold back with sharing opinions, because the stuff NEEDS to work, and DNF is not an option.
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 05:43 PM   #23
Rizen
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 157002
Join Date: Aug 2007
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Vehicle:
2011 Street Mod STI
11.4 @ 127

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsaturn7085 View Post
If you believe an AOS prevents the need to rebuild a worn motor (or prevents a motor from wearing out), the marketing is working.
I'm not sure how you got that from my post. Did I use the word "wear" anywhere in there? Oil in intake charge = lower octane = detonation = parts break. I'm fully aware this isn't a solution for worn engines, that's nonsense.

Quote:
You will always find oil in the intake of a turbocharged Subaru because, for emissions reasons, the PCV system *needs* to be connected this way (closed system). Obviously if you screw with the system at all, this may change. Whoever convinced you that oil in the intake is going to blow your motor up is a marketing genius. At high load, oil in the intake charge is bad, yes - it reduces the effective octane rating of the charge.
That's all fine and good but before I installed an AOS I had oil in my *intercooler*, post intake and just prior to the throttle body. Obviously, that oil was not being filter or removed by whatever OEM systems are designed to do this, and what I want to avoid.

Last edited by Rizen; 08-11-2016 at 05:54 PM.
Rizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 06:04 PM   #24
mrsaturn7085
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 375462
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza WRX STI
WR Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rizen View Post
I'm not sure how you got that from my post. Did I use the word "wear" anywhere in there? Oil in intake charge = lower octane = detonation = parts break. I'm fully aware this isn't a solution for worn engines, that's nonsense.
You compared the cost of a rebuilt motor to the cost of an overpriced catch can... I can quote you if you want, but it's just a few posts up.

If you are running so close to the edge of catastrophic detonation that engine failure will result from the slight change in octane rating you will get from a minuscule amount of oil vapor in the air, then you should hope to hell that you never get a bad tank of gas at the pump or accidentally fill the tank up with a lower grade fuel.

*LIGHT* knock is normal on modern cars, especially with closed loop ignition timing advance based on knock sensor (and other) feedback. You get a little knock here and there and ignition timing is pulled and gradually comes back. This is how your car adjusts to different grades (and additives) of fuel. This also covers any light knock that may pop up from oil vapor in the intake charge. Subaru ECM's have done this for years and many aftermarket management systems will do this, as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rizen View Post
That's all fine and good but before I installed an AOS I had oil in my *intercooler*, post intake and just prior to the throttle body. Obviously, that oil was not being filter or removed by whatever OEM systems are designed to do this, and what I want to avoid.
I explained this. This is normal. There is no OEM system in place to remove the oil vapor from the crankcase ventilation under high load - it gets sucked through the turbo, intercooler, and throttle body. It will coat the intake manifold and the vapor that has not yet condensed will be burned along with the intake charge. You can thank emissions laws for this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
I like to call it the Multi-Vector Vortex Vacuum Separator. Or, M3VS for short
I was serious about the patent question - if it's not patent-able... what advantage does it offer over something like... this:



I've come to learn that things that live up to the hype, especially in a competitive market, generally have a patent behind them.
mrsaturn7085 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 06:06 PM   #25
subydude
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 80649
Join Date: Jan 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Columbia, SC
Vehicle:
2000 2.5 Auto-X RSTi
What's A Head Gasket?

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
I know how physics works, but same forces...? Not quite. If you know how aero works you know it's MUCH more effective at 150mph than 100mph. I also don't know of any banked auto-X turns, and if sustained corners were anywhere near as long... it wouldn't be called auto-X

Don't get me wrong, I love auto-X and I feel it's the most fun anyone can have in a car with keeping their pants on for $28, but it's not road racing and certainly not hours of endurance racing abuse.

I in no way profess to be driving guru myself, just an old codger putting around in this thing...



I leave the real world track testing to those who live it. Data logging, cutting tenths, engine programs, support teams, etc... They are on the cutting edge of blowing stuff up or winning races. Not only does it provide the most valuable data, but they don't hold back with sharing opinions, because the stuff NEEDS to work, and DNF is not an option.
Aero designed for 150 mph usage would do very little at autox speeds. Conversely, aero designed for 50 mph would be unusable at 150. My wing would be generating north of 1,000 lbs of downforce up there

Average big sweeper (1 or 2 per course) length I see is between 5 and 7 seconds long, usually at 6,000-7,500 rpm and above 50% throttle. Banked turns help oil return since you're not seeing as many forces sideways, but do allow you to maintain throttle easier, so unless you're sucking the sump dry they're kind of a non-event in this discussion.

I said it's not endurance racing, but it is (for me) more than most road racers I know. Albeit, I don't have a support team and know people who fund themselves.

I'm just a privateer in mine



Designing for motorsports teams is definitely different. I've got multiple friends I autox with who work for Nascar teams and various other motorsports teams/suppliers. Their budgets far exceed most people who have a day job as do their equipment needs. What I'm saying is $500 for only part of a system to keep the oil in the engine is a lot of money. Especially when the other AOS systems on the market are less and have more real world R&D published. Saying you've got people running your system is one thing. Saying you've got people in all forms of motorsports running your system and "oh look" here's the data for usage, oil blown by/lost into the intake, motor rebuild time changed, etc is way more valuable.

I think we're devolving a bit here though. Your version of autox is not mine, and it's unlikely to matter much. I do like the cone design for the swirl pot effect and I've considered your oil valve a number of times. Just goes back to that "I can check oil between runs and add as needed" vs $350
subydude is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2017 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2017, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.