Great convo.
I'm still sold on having a PCV system on my 216 for several reasons. I like the fact that normally produced vaccum is used to evacuate the blowby at all engine rpm, even idle. This would seem to be a huge improvement over the simple road draft system that needed air moving across the downdraft tube's opening to get the same effect. At engine idle and low speeds there wouldn't be enough "draft" so I guess evacuation must have depended upon simple convection.
In looking at engineering drawings/spec's you can see how the Stovebolt ICE evolved.
With regards to the PCV system, it seems they went from a top fresh air intake and bottom blowby exhaust to the complete opposite and this is how modern engines also deal w/it.
Is the newer way more efficient or just cheaper for the manufacturers to implement?
This is makeing me rethink my approach to implementing a PCV system to the 216.
I could seal up the vent slots in the valve cover and move the PCV up to same and either install a small air filter at the road draft tube or route a hose from the road draft tube up to around the air cleaner.
My high mileage 216 makes quite a bit of blowby and it steams/smokes through those VC slots well after shutdown. I would think having those gases venting out is a good thing. Would a vented oil cap be enough to allow these gases to vent and would the vented cap effect the ability of the engine vaccum to pull blowby up from the crankcase?
Just thinking out loud here.
Dave
