One of the challenges of installing headers is that they interfere with the downdraft tube. My solution was to cut off the downdraft tube and plumb it to the back of the intake manifold with a tube going into the midpoint of the balance tube. Then I found an oil filler cap on eBay that seemed purpose made for using that as an intake. I do not know if they are available commercially or if mine is a nos.
I am a believer in keeping the PCV valve vertical. After cutting off most of the downdraft tube I welded a large washer over the end and the washer had been drilled to take a standard grommet. With a few fittings scrounged from the local hardware store, a brass tube to make sure the intake gases were released in the middle of the balance tube (thank you to Frank Hughes for that idea!). The back end of the balance tube on the intake manifold was drilled and tapped to a 1/8" npt. I have attached some pics to show the process and I probably did a bit of overkill on the dice of the tube. It would have been easier to bend a smaller tube.
Nice neat upgrade to the system ,should be applicable to most engines that have single draft tube .
Attached is a pic of the oil breather cap. This cap has a very tight taper seal so it does not need an "O" ring to seal it. The air filter fits on the existing nipple on the breather.
I'm certainly a believer in the PCV mod and have done it to our '47 C-6, '54 Jetliner and will be doing the same set-up as Gary's on the Hornet before it goes back on the road. The Jet has well over 10K on it and it doesn't discolor its oil any more than any "modern" engine does. I changed the oil just before the 4000 mile round trip to Colorado, using Valvoline full synthetic 10-30. It now has 4500 miles on it and I see no reason to change it 'til at least 5K since it's just slightly "golden" colored. Full flow oil filtration is a comfort as well.
Frank
http://mewagner.com/
I use these for my conversions.
[URL= http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm97/studebaker2/Ruths%2052%20Wasp%20Engine/DSCN0428_zpszu7ejl8z.jp g" target="_blank">
http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm97/studebaker2/Ruths%2052%20Wasp%20Engine/DSCN0428_zpszu7ejl8z.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
All of this plumbing reminds me of something!
K,
I have considered the ME Wagner device and may yet use it on the Hornet. As you know, money is no object for me but I have doubts that a fancier, more expensive valve (they [i]are[/i] pretty!) would do a better job than a common one. If someone here would jump in and convince me, (other than ME Wagner as I [i]know[/i] what their opinion is) it would help me decide. A testimonial from actual results would speak the loudest.
Frank
Frank,
I also installed one of the ME Wagner PCV valves, while eliminating the draft tube. First of all, I switched valve covers, so that the plain (no hole) cover was under the headers in back. That way I could neatly plumb the PCV connection toward the front. I mounted the valve horizontally near the front motor plate. Just to be extra sure I wasn't getting oil in my line, I also added a small oil/air separator between the engine and PCV.
I guess the reason I justified it in my own feeble mind, was that every other (non-adjustable) PCV valve was designed/engineered for a particular car and engine, none of which were the Hudson or the big six powerplant. I just didn't want to make a guess, and not have the ability to quickly make tweaks to it. After the initial installation and set-up, I think I've made one adjustment to it, and am quite happy with the performance these days.
Just me two cents,
Doug
Gary,, Nice work. Do you have a part number for the small air filtrer you have on the oil filler cap?
Bruce
Installed on another make once, but removed. Tricky to size and not lean or richen mixture. Lot of checking, jet and/or pcv changing. But change oil almost every 1500 miles so sludge not a big problem I think?
Attached link maybe of help to others?>>
http://www.aa1car.com/library/pcv.htm
My two bit's worth on valve selection:
In my "research" to identify an appropriate valve for my PCV systems, I assigned certain selection criteria with importance in the following order: Engine displacement; presumed operating rpm range; mounting position; commonness (is that a word?) and price. What I found is that a given valve often covers a surprisingly wide range of applications, lending to the notion that it's a pretty crude and non-critical device. For example, one version covers GM engines ranging from 3.0L to 7.4L, realizing, of course, that the operating rpms of those two are likely quite different. Others are even more widespread.
I believe that engine condition plays a large part in effectiveness of the valve.......if you are "converting" an experienced engine with considerable blow-by potential, you may not have good results. In my case, both engines were fresh rebuilds with 0 miles.
I've threatened to affix a pressure/vacuum gauge to the crankcase of one of my Hudsons to observe pressure changes under various operating conditions. It's my opinion that the pressure should never rise above prevailing atmospheric, but only testing will show that.
Bottom line: I just don't think it's as critical as the seller of a fancy one may have you believe, however, I wouldn't advise against that decision......as I said, I may yet use one of those.
Frank
The article is helpful. I also added the Full Flow oil filter setup that Frank Hughes engineered for the Hudsons. So I hope that now with the full flow filtration plus keeping the bypass filter for some extra oil filtration will help avoid sludge issues. Also picked a valve that was on a similar dispacement "newer" engine. One thing to note it that it was more of a challenge than I expected to keep a slope on the solid line such that oil would drain back into the valve cover and avoid needing and ail/oil separator that some have needed. Challenging but possible.
"Challenging but possible". Maybe even convincing your wife that you own a '41.
Leave a reply
