That was precisely what Bruce at RIVA’s R&D team suggested; he opined that a bung in their Free Flow tube would be great to route the pressure out the exhaust.
@The Watercraft Journal search mighty mouse solutions. Their cans use what is called a super check AN fitting. Just an AN fitting with a check valve. They started on LS stuff but now have a totally new line up with dodge and coyote stuff
Certainly! The birth of Southern California hot rodding came from GI's returning from the Pacific theater with a few year's of training and a pocked full of cash.
I understand RIVA's ideal product would vent to exhaust, which is obviously more complicated since not everyone modifies their exhaust. Barring that couldn't RIVA put out a version of their existing catch can that just replaces the Filter with a line back to the intake instead of venting to atmosphere? Or is there a way to modify the existing RIVA Catch Can to do this?
@@stevelewis4429d you end up routing it back? Can't imagine it being hard...should be able to remove the breather and runs hose back to he engine on the intake side. That's how most auto ones work I believe. Or is there no separator in the can itself?
Bout time someone shed some light on this. You don’t vent to atmosphere on your Chevy or Dodge why do it on your jet ski. Now comes the different types of oil separators. I did some research and settled on upr. I know there are claims of better ones but testing proved them wrong.
@@SaltyDogPerformance That may be true to a point. But you need vacuum to evacuate as much gas as possible. This in turn relieves pressure and creates efficiency within the motor. This is done on race cars for slight gains on valve operation. They plumb the hoses to the exhaust to create a suction from the top of the valve covers. An open to atmosphere system is weak and not as efficient.
No it’s not, Barrett. The EPA has little to no say on aftermarket parts; particularly as these separators - even on street applications- do not interfere with those few residing in smog-required states. Holley, Moroso, Competition Engineering, etc. all make vented catch cans that are 50-state legal. So it’s clearly not the EPA cracking down on modded street cars.
@@watercraftjournal the EPA is why they are like that from the factory. It’s the same reason a factory turbocharged engine doesn’t have a wastegate that vents to atmosphere. They want every single ounce of oil and fuel to burn up in the engine. That’s why the PCV valves vent right back into the intake. This is also why it’s important to use a catch can in a direct injected engine. The intake ports in the head and the intake valves don’t have the port injectors spraying fuel on the valves which helps reduce the amount of carbon buildup. Direct injected engines get bad carbon buildup and gum up the intake valves and ports. They then need walnut blasting to clean them and get them back up to optimum performance. Aftermarket companies are absolutely changing the way they do business because the EPA has been cracking down hard. Take APR for example. When Holley bought them, they quit selling aftermarket downpipes and have to make any of their tunes work with factory emissions systems in place. Same goes with catch cans. They don’t want them venting to atmosphere because it’s another thing they could get dinged for. Long gone are the days of being able to slap a “off road use only” sticker on a product and get away with it.
First, NOBODY is talking about factory stuff here. Only Kawasaki has an oil separator, and yes, it’s plumbed back into the intake. And do you want to know why? Because recirculating positive crankcase atmosphere burns unspent fuel (the baffled can is expected to collect and return the oil). Yes, it’s more “environmentally friendly” but it’s dramatically more efficient- it’s called a “closed loop evacuation system.” But again, the video topic is NOT about factory equipment. There is no shortage of current aftermarket blow off valves, waste gates and oil catch cans that vent to the atmosphere- be it in the automotive or powersports aftermarket. To claim otherwise is both ludicrous and ignorant. Again, the SEMA-sponsored RPM Act is actual active legislation prohibiting the EPA’s oversight on components with off-road usage designations, as well as limiting EPA influence over modifying on-street vehicles. As a member of SEMA and PRI I get all of the literature on this topic regularly. Regardless, the topic at hand is the benefit of oil catch cans for PWC and all of your points are misapplied, incorrect or non sequitir to the subject being discussed.
You’re not taking into consideration that the EPA is cracking down hard and that’s why you see companies making recirculating catch cans. It has nothing to do with negative crankcase pressure.
Not true. RIVA and JP's catch cans are open-circuit (vented to atmosphere). Heck, even top fuel oil separators can be closed circuit or open circuit. Yes, there's pros to open circuit in specific applications, but for the vast majority of PWC, a closed circuit is superior.
@@watercraftjournal and they are not by definition catch cans they are called breather cans.i have built alot of turbo drag sleds pushing h.p in the 700 h.p range.the twin cyl big bore live and like an open can.the inline 4 like a closed loop we vent them to the exhaust depends on the bore and stroke we are using
I have heard about catch cans since I bought a 300 a few years back. I have 56 hours and ZERO oil in my intercooler. ZERO. I do all maintenance and keep the oil level at half the dipstick or lower. I have had friends put cans on from several manufacturers. All but the Riva spewed oil all inside the hull. 1 had zero baffles in it. All the internet yahoos who claim they build engines for Formula 1 is just that. Internet blowhards. Mine is bone stock. I do not have an issue with proper oil level. IF and I say IF I ever put one on it would be the Riva. EVERY OTHER one I've ever seen was JUNK and the guys who made it are clueless.
That's why we have a vacuum pump on our race car engines, they make more hp with negative crankcase pressure. I think Nascar started that decades ago.
So wait, I’m confused. Lol I have a 2018 Yamaha GP1800. Should I get just an engine breather or a catch can with? Lol
So who makes a good separator/catch can you are recommending?
No one offers a true oil separator.
Negative case pressure also helps ring seal
Ding! Ding! Ding!
@@watercraftjournal the only other way I'd do it is vent into exhaust. The venturi will make more vacuum as gas velocity increases with rpm
That was precisely what Bruce at RIVA’s R&D team suggested; he opined that a bung in their Free Flow tube would be great to route the pressure out the exhaust.
Going off memory here, some vendors make them with a check valve to vent positive pressure but hold vacuum.
Interested to know who.
@The Watercraft Journal search mighty mouse solutions. Their cans use what is called a super check AN fitting. Just an AN fitting with a check valve. They started on LS stuff but now have a totally new line up with dodge and coyote stuff
I like taking tech from one industry to another. A good bit of auto racing was taken from aerospace for example.
Certainly! The birth of Southern California hot rodding came from GI's returning from the Pacific theater with a few year's of training and a pocked full of cash.
I understand RIVA's ideal product would vent to exhaust, which is obviously more complicated since not everyone modifies their exhaust. Barring that couldn't RIVA put out a version of their existing catch can that just replaces the Filter with a line back to the intake instead of venting to atmosphere? Or is there a way to modify the existing RIVA Catch Can to do this?
No the RIVA catch can remains the best option in the market
Interesting
Very
So I have the Worx catch can fitted to my 2022 gtx230. What your thoughts on these??
What was my first line, Steve?
Owe hahaha. Sorry mate. Ok. I'll take a look at how to vent it back to the motor.
Did you figure out a solution. The worx is what I went with as well. Personally I thought it looked the best.
@@stevelewis4429d you end up routing it back? Can't imagine it being hard...should be able to remove the breather and runs hose back to he engine on the intake side. That's how most auto ones work I believe. Or is there no separator in the can itself?
Bout time someone shed some light on this. You don’t vent to atmosphere on your Chevy or Dodge why do it on your jet ski. Now comes the different types of oil separators. I did some research and settled on upr. I know there are claims of better ones but testing proved them wrong.
EPA is why you don’t vent to atmosphere on a street car.
@@SaltyDogPerformance That may be true to a point. But you need vacuum to evacuate as much gas as possible. This in turn relieves pressure and creates efficiency within the motor. This is done on race cars for slight gains on valve operation. They plumb the hoses to the exhaust to create a suction from the top of the valve covers. An open to atmosphere system is weak and not as efficient.
No it’s not, Barrett. The EPA has little to no say on aftermarket parts; particularly as these separators - even on street applications- do not interfere with those few residing in smog-required states. Holley, Moroso, Competition Engineering, etc. all make vented catch cans that are 50-state legal. So it’s clearly not the EPA cracking down on modded street cars.
@@watercraftjournal the EPA is why they are like that from the factory. It’s the same reason a factory turbocharged engine doesn’t have a wastegate that vents to atmosphere. They want every single ounce of oil and fuel to burn up in the engine. That’s why the PCV valves vent right back into the intake. This is also why it’s important to use a catch can in a direct injected engine. The intake ports in the head and the intake valves don’t have the port injectors spraying fuel on the valves which helps reduce the amount of carbon buildup. Direct injected engines get bad carbon buildup and gum up the intake valves and ports. They then need walnut blasting to clean them and get them back up to optimum performance. Aftermarket companies are absolutely changing the way they do business because the EPA has been cracking down hard. Take APR for example. When Holley bought them, they quit selling aftermarket downpipes and have to make any of their tunes work with factory emissions systems in place. Same goes with catch cans. They don’t want them venting to atmosphere because it’s another thing they could get dinged for. Long gone are the days of being able to slap a “off road use only” sticker on a product and get away with it.
First, NOBODY is talking about factory stuff here. Only Kawasaki has an oil separator, and yes, it’s plumbed back into the intake. And do you want to know why? Because recirculating positive crankcase atmosphere burns unspent fuel (the baffled can is expected to collect and return the oil). Yes, it’s more “environmentally friendly” but it’s dramatically more efficient- it’s called a “closed loop evacuation system.” But again, the video topic is NOT about factory equipment.
There is no shortage of current aftermarket blow off valves, waste gates and oil catch cans that vent to the atmosphere- be it in the automotive or powersports aftermarket. To claim otherwise is both ludicrous and ignorant.
Again, the SEMA-sponsored RPM Act is actual active legislation prohibiting the EPA’s oversight on components with off-road usage designations, as well as limiting EPA influence over modifying on-street vehicles. As a member of SEMA and PRI I get all of the literature on this topic regularly.
Regardless, the topic at hand is the benefit of oil catch cans for PWC and all of your points are misapplied, incorrect or non sequitir to the subject being discussed.
You’re not taking into consideration that the EPA is cracking down hard and that’s why you see companies making recirculating catch cans. It has nothing to do with negative crankcase pressure.
SEMA’s RPM Act would say otherwise. And so would the actual professional engine builders that I specifically talked to.
All catch cans are sealed ones that are vented to the air are called breather there are pros and cons to both
Not true. RIVA and JP's catch cans are open-circuit (vented to atmosphere). Heck, even top fuel oil separators can be closed circuit or open circuit. Yes, there's pros to open circuit in specific applications, but for the vast majority of PWC, a closed circuit is superior.
@@watercraftjournal and they are not by definition catch cans they are called breather cans.i have built alot of turbo drag sleds pushing h.p in the 700 h.p range.the twin cyl big bore live and like an open can.the inline 4 like a closed loop we vent them to the exhaust depends on the bore and stroke we are using
Oil separators, catch cans or breather cans - most builders, racers and manufacturers will interchange these names more regularly than their socks.
@@watercraftjournal only the backyard guys because if you ask someone for a catch can or breather can you will get the wrong part or made incorrectly
I wouldn't call Moroso "backyard" - and I know them personally.
I have heard about catch cans since I bought a 300 a few years back. I have 56 hours and ZERO oil in my intercooler. ZERO. I do all maintenance and keep the oil level at half the dipstick or lower. I have had friends put cans on from several manufacturers. All but the Riva spewed oil all inside the hull. 1 had zero baffles in it. All the internet yahoos who claim they build engines for Formula 1 is just that. Internet blowhards. Mine is bone stock. I do not have an issue with proper oil level. IF and I say IF I ever put one on it would be the Riva. EVERY OTHER one I've ever seen was JUNK and the guys who made it are clueless.
Glad to hear it!
Most catch cans would be better than nothing though. IMO.
True
I wanted to comment on this a while ago when you talked about how great the Riva catch can was.
Of all of the offerings in the PWC aftermarket, the RIVA kit remains the best.