| Author | Message | ||
     M2anonymous1 |
Sandstorm - Which catch can is shown on your bike photo? It looks like a JAZ can made of aluminum? Thanks........ | ||
| Sandstorm |
Yeah...it's the JAZ catch can, but it's not aluminum. I just painted it silver to get rid of the dull black finish. | ||
| M2anonymous1 |
Well done Sandstorm.......... | ||
| Sem1 |
Russ (Ara), Thank you for your response, and sorry for taking so long to reply. I modified my breather system again. This time I copied the idea from Reepicheep (thanks!) making a couple of minor changes. I have the dual nipple breather right above the Forcewinder just like he does. In addition I put oil separators to the lines going to the breather. Also, like he suggested, I put a T to the lowest point in the loop and ran a line to a catch can that I have mounted on a sprocket cover bolt. Unfortunately, I have not been able to test run the new setup; I am waiting on the proper tools for replacing my primary shaft seal. Cheers, Semi P.S. Sportyeric, thanks for describing Toonies & Loonies!  | ||
| Bluzm2 |
HOLY SAND CASTINGS BATMAN! I got my Blast rocker cover tops yesterday. Holy s**t are they rough! My current RB's are polished, I'll need to do a ton of work on these buggers to get them in shape for buffing. Neil, I now see what you mean about boring the new hole. I think I'll give one to a friend and let him do it in the machine shop. Looks like you should machine the grommet surface flat anyway. I'll take some pics and post tomorrow if I get a chance. Brad | ||
| Coop |
I rerouted my breather lines out of the airbox today, I tee'd them into one line that runs down hill and back to about the battery, then into another tee, the top line goes up and comes down the other side by where the oil tank drain plug is and is open with no filter, the bottom line goes down and tucked behind the chin fairing with a petcock, if this sounds like a bad idea to anyone please let me know and I will try something else. | ||
| Ara |
Coop, putting that Pasteur loop in the open line probably obviates the need for a filter, especially with the length of lines you're using. I have a preference for not teeing the breather lines together to preserve volumetric efficienty, but many others think that this is excessive attention to detail  and use tees in one way or another. If you're careful about sealing the hole in the airbox (don't trust that the hose will seal it properly what with all the vibration our bikes produce) I'm sure your system will work fine. Russ | ||
| Blake |
Ara, Good suggestion about sealing the holes left vacant in the airbox. That is easy to overlook. Concerning the effect of T's on crankcase breather efficiency ("volumetric efficiency" refers to how efficiently a cylinder fills with air/fuel charge): The breather lines are T'd together inside the airbox in their stock form. | ||
| Ara |
Blake, is the definition for "volumetric efficiency" necessarily that specific, or can the term be used in a more general sense? With regard to the fact that the factory uses a tee-fitting in the stock breather system, I would observe that this may be as much a reason for questioning that arrangement as for defending it! Since many S1/S2/S3/M2/X1 owners have experienced puking problems with the stock system and since the stock system feeds puke into the intake, it seems clear that all is not right with the factory's "solution" to the breather problem. But that's what the BadWeb is for, and thank goodness! Russ | ||
| Blake |
Ara, To answer your question directly, I'd have to say that "volumetric efficiency" is very specific and requires a comparison of two distinct masses of compressible material as related intrinsically to some physically constrained volume. What you are wanting to characterize in the breather outlet is a flow capacity, just like is done for cylinder heads. Want more?  Volumetric efficiency (ev ) is a figure of merit which is independent of cylinder size and is defined as follows: Where Mi is the mass of fresh mixture (air and fuel) actually supplied to the combustion chamber, ri is the density of the mixture at pressure pi, and temperature Ti (the inlet pressure and temperature), V1 is the combustion chamber volume at BDC, and V2 is the combustion chamber volume at TDC. We can see that the quantity (V1-V2)ri is simply the displaced volume (V1-V2) times the inlet density (ri). And since volume (V) times density (r) yields mass (M), we can say that (V1-V2)ri is simply the mass of mixture at the inlet temperature and pressure that would exactly fill the displaced volume. Since "inlet" pressure and temperature for us non-turbo types is atmospheric pressure and ambient temperature, (V1-V2)ri is simply the mass of mixture (Matm) that would fill the displaced cylinder volume if that volume were held at atmospheric pressure and temperature (atmospheric density). So we can say for our case that... If the engine can suck in, via exhaust scavenging and a well tuned inlet, more mixture than Matm , it would have a volumetric efficiency greater than 1.0 (>100%). In other words it would inhale more mixture (charge) than it would if the piston were sitting still at BDC and the chamber were filled at atmoshpheric pressure and ambient temperature. Kinda like an invisible mini turbo charge. If the actual cylinder fill is less than what the chamber at atmoshpheric pressure/temperature would hold, the volumetric efficiency is less than 1.0 (<100%). More than you wanted to know right? Sorry, I got carried away.  | ||
| X1glider |
Blake, quit spamming my e-mail with your multiple posts! Wazzup wit dat? | ||
| Blake |
Seems to me a more efficient breather exhaust would carry more oil with it than a less efficient (lower flow rate) setup. Plug it up entirely and you'd have no more oil puking. Just the possibility for some blown seals and gaskets. I see the oil pukage problem some experience as being related to the following possible factors: 1. Overfilling of engine oil. 2. Excessive blowby due to poor ring seal. 3. Poor performance of the breather circuit design in preventing keep oil mist at high engine speeds from mixing with the breather exhaust flow. 4. Excessively high temperatures may support oil vapors which then condense in the breather tubes. 5. Combinations of the above. | ||
| S2pido |
MOM! MOM! Blake is MATHING us again. Make him STOP! Make him STOP! sniff, waaaaaaahhhh, sniff | ||
| Ara |
HOLY MACKERAL! Blake, you remind me of my high school math teacher - one good question, and he'd digress until the bell rang!  Anywho, I'll try to use engineering terminology more circumspectly in the future. As for the breather system and the puking problem, these engines being what they are it seems to me that the goal should be to simply handle the breather gases as efficiently as possible while doing something intelligent with the liquids. Feeding both the liquids and the gasses into the intake is obviously an EPA compliant solution - and one worth avoiding regardless of the cause. Over the last year or so I've noted a number of reasonably good solutions on the BadWeb, most of which are superior to the factory/EPA solution. One truly unique characteristic about our bikes - different for sure from the Japanese makes, I think - is that each of our bikes behaves a bit differently. Because of this I've come around to the conclusion that there's probably no universally correct solution to the breather problem. The basic goals, as stated above, are broad enough to cover the waterfront, but experience as recorded here is invaluable. I've forgotten how I discovered the BadWeb, but I'm very, very glad I did. Russ | ||
| Peter |
Blake, Did I really agree to split a room with you at Bonneville......?  PPiA | ||
| José_Quiñones |
The way to fix the problem is keep the oil that was lubricating the rockers from staying in the heads any longer than they absolutely have to. Otherwise it gets pushed out the breathers. So you want the oil to go back to the crankcase as fast as you can. The XB pretty much has fixed this from what I have heard. | ||
| Blake |
Peter, There WILL be a quiz. | ||
| Peter |
Well I hope it consists of "Where's the bar...?" PPiA | ||
| Scot |
An odd thing has happened to my breather puking problem. I have a 2002 x1w with devonator and ASB catch can. The puke I was finding in my catch can was a milky gunk barely recognizable(sp.) as oil. I than had a rear rocker box leak and both front and rear gaskets were replaced by the dealer. From that day on I only find pure oil in and around my catch can and the puking/mess is considerably worse and is always oil that looks new and clean,not milky. I did check my oil level and its between 1/3 and 1/2 way up the dip stick. Anybody have any ideas or theories ? | ||
| Blake |
Scot, How long has this been happening? Milky gunk indicates significant amounts of water, which would be normal. When you say "1/3 and 1/2 way up the dip stick" are referring to the "full" mark, or the entire exposed length of the dip stick? If you are referring to the full mark, then it sounds like your umbrella valves or oil drain passages in the rockerbox may have been compromised during the gasket replacement. If you are referring to the entire length of exposed dipstick, then you are likely over-filling your oil. The level when check on a hot, just shut down engine, should be between the two marks (low and high marks). | ||
| Pilk |
Scot, Blake has it. I'd bet a dark brew that an oil return is blocked by improper placement of gasket at lower rocker box, or junk is in one of the holes.  On the up side, you can fix it in about an hour and a half, with beer break.  Pilk | ||
| Scot |
This problem has been occuring for the last 2000+ miles, at approximately 2500 miles on the bike the rocker box failed and the dealer replaced the gaskets.The oil level is being measured when hot and is probably closer to 1/3 full to the full line.The bike is still under warranty so I suppose I'll see what they think first.The dealer is Modesto buell so I'm probably in luck that it's them working on it. Scot | ||
| Jeffl |
Alright guys. Here's a stupid question: If this breather puking issue is so common then why hasn't Buell done something about it? My 01 M2 is puking more than ever now that the rocker box gaskets have been changed out. Perhaps it's an umbrella valve. I talked to a Buell mechanic at my local dealer and he said to just tee the two breather bolts together and drop it to atmosphere. He said it's a real bitch to get in there and replace the rocker box cover gaskets. What I'm wondering is if he's just being lazy and doesn't want to do the work or if he really has a solution. He also mentioned adding a Krankvent, something about vacuum pressure... Any ideas there? Check this out:  This is the insides of an XL airbox. The two breather bolts are replaced by bolts that have krankvent valves in them This looks like a good solution. What do you all have to say about this? I'm upset that I have to be creative to fix this problem. My bike barely has 6000 miles on it and it's still under warranty. I don't think I should have to deal with this. Buell should. | ||
| Ara |
Jeffl, A lot of guys here have opted for the Jazz catch can/breather. Since your bike pukes quite a bit, it would be a very good option for you. Look back in the past archives of the Breather section. You'll find a lot of options and wisdom. Crank Vents have been discussed, too. My impression is that they're more marketing hype than engineering reality. Russ | ||
| Aaron |
There's a fix for the breather puke problem that does not require buying redundant umbrella valves, which is esseentially what those things are. Something about chamfering the umbrella valve holes and slightly enlarging the drain back hole. I haven't done it, never had the need, but I understand it's effective. Someone will pipe in with better intructions, or I bet they're in the archives. | ||
| Petel |
Aaron. I`ve just modified my stock 2002 M2 breather system.Ive re-routed the front breather hose back out of the standard suitcase and joined it with a "T" piece to the rear hose. The single hose then runs the length of the bike just beneath the seat and exits at the rear passed the back wheel. No catch tank or breather filter at the moment and I hav`nt had time to do a test ride. The suitcase is sealed properly and the overall length of the 3/8" hose is over 3ft. Can you see any problem with this set-up? I`ve used this system cos it looks stock,can be changed back to stock in 10 minutes and cost me £4.55 ( um about $6. ) Thanks for your time Petel. | ||
| Leeaw |
Petel, I did the same and ended up with schmutz on the rear hugger. I brought it up and over the heads, and down below the engine because I did not like the mess. EDITED*** I forgot to add that this happened with and without a breather filter. Aaron's suggestion on routing puts the mess on the ground. | ||
| Aaron |
The only potential issue I see is with traps, i.e. anywhere the hose has to turn around and go upward, theoretically oil could pool up there and then get blown out all at once. I've never really had the problem myself, but it seems like it could happen. You might stick a breather filter on the end just to collect the liquid component. I bring both hoses straight down from the heads, tee'em under the carb, and then go down in front of the pulley to a breather filter. Works fine. | ||
| Kahuna |
I've spent way too much time and money on the breather issue ( a hose all the way to the back, then a filter, then an ASB catch-can, etc etc ) and finally got fed up with oil being spewed through the breather filter and then through the filter of the ASB catch-can filter. My final solution ( that would have saved me dollars ) was to route the hose to just under the rear brake resevoir and pointing straight back. never had a problem ever since. Seems to all blow away without making any mess. | ||
| José_Quiñones |
Gee this would make a great article for the next Battletwin??????? Discuss the problem in the current XL/Buells and what people have done about it. Then show how HD/Buell "fixed" the problem with the use of the reed valve, the new pushrod covers and the one way valves on top of the heads of the XB and Blast engines. How does it sound, Mr. Technical editor? |
