|
|
#1 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Spanaway, Washington
Posts: 344
|
I'm putting a PCV in my '48 coupe with 59A engine.
Should I block off the crankcase vent at the bottom front in the pan rail? Thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: nw SanAntonio, TX
Posts: 940
|
You might do a search to find the long, long discussion on this previously. But, in a nutshell, you gotta have an "inny" and an "outy", I think. The crankcase vent used to be the "outy". On the 59A I am building it will be the "inny" with the filler tube in back being sealed by the fill cap and the PCV sucking from there with a tube running to the air cleaner.
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Granger (Northern) Indiana
Posts: 1,611
|
If you plan to keep the 59A ventilation as designed, the pcv should connect to the pan vent and then to intake manifold vacuum. How would you set the pcv up if the pan vent were plugged?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Mill Valley,Ca.
Posts: 1,555
|
My answer: yes... I don't want an unfiltered source of air entry to crankcase... I am running a 1951 Merc intake manifold, rochester carb... I use one of the forward holes, hose to pcv on carburetor... I use the oil fill/ breather at rear for air in...
Karl |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NorCal
Posts: 2,617
|
When I installed mine, I removed the pan vent and replaced it with a fitting to hold a small filter (The inny, as 36Tbird mentioned). I then also modified the dip stick tube to be sealed as well, much like late model cars. Since I don't run a mechanical fuel pump, that filler is also sealed. The PCV valve is mounted under the intake manifold and draws whatever mix is in the engine thru a fitting atop the old oil pump mount inside the engine. Kinda hard to describe, but seems to work fine,
Jim |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Spanaway, Washington
Posts: 344
|
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
With my advanced CRS I needed to ask again. Thanks guys. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,272
|
My pan vent housing is wrapped with an air filter. A Mopar-style flame-arrest PCV oil filler cap is connected with a hose to the air cleaner cannister. Accordingly, it's a reverse flow PCV system.
Jack E/NJ |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Member Emeritus
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Madison, NJ
Posts: 5,230
|
Ford put PCV's on many WWII flatheads...it was set up so:
Pan vent (the original exit for system) was blocked, as the PCV was the new exit for vented fumes. PCV drew from a plate under carb with small passages running to both sides of system. PCV itself mounted vertically on right front of the carb riser and drew from a fitting drilled up front in the generator riser part of manifold so that draw was from right over the top of the vent tube in valley. The inlet was the same as stock on the fuel pump riser, but the filter was replaced with a much larger oil bath unit rather like a half size replica of the carb air cleaner. On a stock 59, many truck manifolds have a large plugged hole (meant for power brake assist) with two small passages connecting to the two plena. This would be a neater hookup than the plates I have seen. Stock 59 car manifold has a flat for this passage that could be drilled pretty easily for hookup. Aftermarket manifolds generally lack a decent place to connect to both passages, and the plumbing from underneath makes a lot of sense for these. (there is a picture of a stock Ford PCV setup in this thread: http://www.fordbarn.com/forum/showth...n+pcv+military ) Last edited by Bruce Lancaster; 01-04-2012 at 12:14 PM. Reason: More... |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Member Emeritus
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Madison, NJ
Posts: 5,230
|
(Picture by Fordblitz linked above... Note that the extra tube held by two screws immediately behind forward fitting is an oil filler that has a sealing cap...it is a filler tube only and has no role in the venting system, unlike the '49-53 type.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,052
|
Hi all; I blocked the pan vent also, then used a plate under the carb, for the negative presssure. Your oil fume supply can be an optional location. The PLUS was NO more oil leaks from seals or joints. Newc
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Poulsbo, WA.
Posts: 356
|
I put a PCV in a 59AB, but I blocked the pan vent opening as I didn't want road dirt kicked up by the wheels to be sucked into the engine. I used an 8BA intake manifold and put a Borg Warner #382 pcv valve into the road draft tube opening using a 1975-94 model Ford rubber pcv valve grommet. The other end goes into the intake manifold under the carb. The reason for the #382 pcv valve is due to its opening and closing caused by the differant engine vacuams while driving.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,272
|
A valve-only PCV system is ineffective at or near WOT, when mainfold vacuum is lowest and blowby is greatest. Thus, an additional PCV system should be used to vent the crankcase to the air filter cannister, where intake vacuum is greatest at WOT.
Jack E/NJ |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 195
|
I struggled with a heavy breathing engine until I worked out that my '42 Canadian military engine had the sealed sump vent as it was designed to have the factory PCV system.
I tracked down an original PCV valve and then adapted it a Edelbrock Super Dual inlet. I've even got a correct NOS mini air filter that goes on the fuel pump stand but unfortunatly its missing its lid so I can't use it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Member Emeritus
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Madison, NJ
Posts: 5,230
|
On the military setup...I found recently that the WWII Jeep MB/Ford GPW restoration places have what seems to be the same basic unit. I'm going to check that out this spring at a military vehicle show I always go to (Absolute zoo of bizarre machinery!) and see how it compares to the Ford one in detail. That piece if similar enough would allow full replication of the system, as all else is simple stuff. The Jeep piece seems visually identical to the Ford one, so I think it likely that if there is a difference it will be only in the aperture size, easily reworked...
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
| Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|
|