Patrol 4x4 - Nissan Patrol Forum banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
nissan
Joined
·
11 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am in the market for a catch can, and was looking at the Provent 200, but it looks as if I don't have the room to fit it without moving others accessories already fitted.

So I am now considering the Flashlube Pro which is a lot smaller and will fit ok.

The question I have is the Flashlube just a renamed Provent 100, as it looks exactly the same, and the all dimensions are the same also. If it is the same, will be be suitable to use, as the Provent 100 only has a max flow of 100 l per minute. They do not state a tested flow, whereas the Flashlube says it has been tested to 250l minute, but do not state what there max flow rate is.
 

·
Master Coalroller
nissan
Joined
·
3,242 Posts
Ryco RCC350, ProVent200 and the Flashlube you're looking at are all similar flow for standard engine applications.
 

·
Master Coalroller
nissan
Joined
·
3,242 Posts
I should add, if you don’t use 25mm PCV hose on the 200LPM catchcans they will only flow a little more than 50% anyhow. OEM PCV hoses are 12-16mm, some exotics models may be up to 19mm.
 

·
SUI GENERIS UTE
GQ Ute 1990 Silvertop
Joined
·
5,853 Posts
We are spreading this catch can info across many threads now lol.

Anyway you asked a very relevant question that does need some answers in the full light of its workings.

https://www.flashlube.com/en/products/catch-can-pro.html

Wolfgang Kluenner in not the inventor of catch cans just the owner of the company product Flashlube, a knock off Mann & Hummel Provent, he invented nothing just a very clear copy with 7% difference to keep copyright legal action at bay..

The flow graph is misleading to say the least as we have no idea what the test parameters are like vacuum level or the hose sizes used or anything important related to oil separation, only a bogus efficiency of what against flow. Efficiency is a value divided by another value or out of that value multiplied x 100. So thats not telling us much at all considering the efficiency in this case might be oil separation at best guess on my part. If thats the case then the test is even more bogus as thats a product of vacuum and element size and oil perspiration.

Anyway enough of the math content and speculation. For us and our heavy breathing IDI TD42 we need a lot of vacuum in large hose size to remove the blowby volumes our TD will produce which adds to oil contamination.

We know from simple physics a larger hose removes or flows more volume at lower pressures, so vacuum works the same. So in my opinion and advice i recommend 25mm hose because we have limited vacuum produced by our pre turbo induction system.

Mr Kluenner is right in one point the Provent is designed for industrial diesel applications for max flow for max blowby removal for max oil separation. He suggests a Toyota 200 series diesel produces 70 to 120l/min he is probably right for a 4.5 litre Direct injected modern diesel of about 160rwkw best, and for the single turbo model 120rwkw max with a lot of optimism with those values i might add. We have a TD42 which is a Indirect injected engine and old school tech which has upwards of half again more blowby at cruse rpm. So about 100 to 180l/min blowby for the same optimistic 160rwkw.

So you see we need a provent with 25mm hose to give us the best volume vacuum flow to have a good chance of removing as much blowby soot contaminated gas possible using the best element to remove as much oil as possible.

In conclusion if you have a warmed up TD42 you will need something close to 200l/min to do a proper job with our bypass volumes. For me i trust the Mann&Hummel german engineering and thousands of hours of R&D to trust their design aspects and development for a 25mm hose required for our 180l/min bypass volume with a Provent 200 which is a perfect size for our TD42 with 25mm fittings/hose and connections.

Simple solution for you move your accessories to fit a proper sized oil catch can with the correct size hose. If not just vent to atmosphere into a tin it will do a better job than a catch can with 16mm hose... Or fit a bent steel tube under the sump to use the under car air flow to remove the crankcase gasses for an old school solution, Both these solutions are not ethical or legal now days. So my advice do the job properly or not at all.

Disregard all this if you have a ZD30 engine which is 3 litre and direct injected and doesn't require such a large catch can, so the flashlube and 19mm hose will work just fine for you.
 

·
Registered
'14 Y61 ZD30 CRD M/T ST
Joined
·
1,620 Posts
Disregard all this if you have a ZD30 engine which is 3 litre and direct injected and doesn't require such a large catch can, so the flashlube and 19mm hose will work just fine for you.
Since you now brought it up, OldMav... ;) I bought a Direction Plus kit containing a Provent200 a while back for my ZD30 CRD and installation is next on my do-do list. The kit came with 16mm hoses (the OE hose is 15.5). Do you see any issues with me using the hoses in the kit or should I make a plan to get some bigger ones?
 

·
SUI GENERIS UTE
GQ Ute 1990 Silvertop
Joined
·
5,853 Posts
Since you now brought it up, OldMav... ;) I bought a Direction Plus kit containing a Provent200 a while back for my ZD30 CRD and installation is next on my do-do list. The kit came with 16mm hoses (the OE hose is 15.5). Do you see any issues with me using the hoses in the kit or should I make a plan to get some bigger ones?
You already have the 200 where a 150 would have been fine for the volumes of a 100 and a bit rwkw DI engine at 3 litres. The 16mm hose is maybe ok i cannot tell you as it depends on what position and angle you have into your induction pipe before the turbo. As suggested you need something like 1Hg vacuum at all times in the can/crankcase to activate the relief valve on the provent. Just to kill it as a suggestion i would use 19mm as that is what the 150 provent uses, as a deductive suggestion with no evidence.

Please remember i have zero experience with this ZD engine and its blowby requirements. A TD42 IDI engine i know just about everything there is to know and then some with experience and R&D with even some redneck attitude..
 

·
Registered
nissan
Joined
·
262 Posts
If you know the principal why and how the catch can works it’s not that hard to make your own .there is a post by geeyoy2 on how to make one
 

·
Registered
'14 Y61 ZD30 CRD M/T ST
Joined
·
1,620 Posts
As suggested you need something like 1Hg vacuum at all times in the can/crankcase to activate the relief valve on the provent. Just to kill it as a suggestion i would use 19mm as that is what the 150 provent uses, as a deductive suggestion with no evidence.

Please remember i have zero experience with this ZD engine and its blowby requirements. A TD42 IDI engine i know just about everything there is to know and then some with experience and R&D with even some redneck attitude..
OK thanks, Peter. I pulled the inlet hose off my intercooler during the last service in Feb and there was near on zero oil in the IC. (My engine has only done just under 13,000km now), so I think I'll fit the kit as is and then fit a temporary vacuum gauge...? If the vacuum is insufficient I'll start looking at options to improve. My thinking is that, since my engine is basically "new" I've got a bit of time still to do some R&D.

BTW I haven't blocked off my EGR yet as I'm not up for having to clear fault codes all the time. The plan is to fit a bigger exhaust and do a remap so that I can then get rid of the EGR. In the meantime, the provent has to keep oil out of the EGR.
 

·
Master Coalroller
nissan
Joined
·
3,242 Posts
Since you now brought it up, OldMav... ;) I bought a Direction Plus kit containing a Provent200 a while back for my ZD30 CRD and installation is next on my do-do list. The kit came with 16mm hoses (the OE hose is 15.5). Do you see any issues with me using the hoses in the kit or should I make a plan to get some bigger ones?
My young bloke put a PV200 using the reduction hose kit on his 07 ZD CRD about a year after owning it, and it worked well keeping the intake dry thereafter.
His whole intake and turbo was soaking with oil sludge prior. We spend a day washing out parts and intercooler in a open cut 60L thinners drum with 10L of petrol.
Was only 170K kms at purchase and 220K kms two years later at sale time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts

·
Master Coalroller
nissan
Joined
·
3,242 Posts
Hopefully not going to far off the topic of the OP. But any advice on the HPD catch can on a ZD30 Common rail?

https://hpdiesel.com.au/products/catch-cans/nissan-patrol-zd30-br-catch-can.html

Think it's using 16 and 12mm piping.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Big dollars for stainless mesh. I’ve tried stainless mesh, and stainless steel wool also. Still have vapor movement through to manifold.
The Ryco, ProVent and others that prove usage of woven filter are the ones that will provide dry intake.
There’s imitation ProVent on EBay with stainless mesh filters for $60 if you want that filtration pay less and purchase there.
 

·
SUI GENERIS UTE
GQ Ute 1990 Silvertop
Joined
·
5,853 Posts
Stainless wool/mesh is only really good for a pre separator before a proper oil separator element. That can would be fine sitting on the top of a TD42 rocker cover with the ass cut out to drain the oil back to the rocker then with a provent attached to its outlet.

It might work on a under 2 litre with low power at best.
 

·
Registered
2001 GU ST TD42t coil cab (gold)
Joined
·
4,099 Posts
Yep, lot of money for a lot of bling, but I've seen no proof that their "stainless mesh" does anything special. If you want a stainless mesh filter go to G James Glass and get a couple of offcut bits of crimsafe flyscreen and make your own. if that is all they are relying on then it is not that special.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,254 Posts
This comparison article in Unsealed 4x4 is worth a read. They use some reasonable test procedure and give graphs for flow rate, pressure drop across the filter for flow rate and an efficiency with that flow rate. Flash lube they say comes out just on top, but when you look at the much lower pressure drop I would have said the Provent 200 is on top, but they are writing the article not me. I note that the Flashlube is more than double the price of the Provent 100 or 200.

There are a few factors not taken into account by the test apparatus and that is the more real world engine bay heat, soot and other particles in the blow by vapour and factors such as hose size and fittings restrictions etc (although they are all tested the same so it is at least comparable). Filter efficiency over time as in a few tens of thousand kms of use may also be expected change, but again I would trust the more proven filter designers experience in this over an ebay or Supercheap special.

What it does definitely highlight is how poor the other fancy looking aluminium cans are, including HPD, Taipan and Calibre. Even if some of these guys make nice exhaust pipes and intercooler kits it doesn't mean they can design a decent catch can.

UNSEALED 4X4 ISSUE 057


They didn't test the new RYCO version of the Provent 100, or there is a new aluminium one on the market that uses a Unifilter foam filter element, I don't know how effective that would be in comparison. It would certainly be nice to be able to wash out and re-use the filter element.

Peter, I have been thinking about using a washable Unifilter element in a Provent, do you think that would be an effective or efficient oil vapour coalescing filter? I know Provent have probably used what is the best most efficient filter, but they are bloody expensive element to replace.
 

·
Master Coalroller
nissan
Joined
·
3,242 Posts
Good link Geordie. Pity they didn't include the Ryco. I'm pretty happy to read how their research shows up the same differences I found whilst redneck R&D on my own designs.
I'm glad i succumbed to the Provent 200 over building my own, the only mod I've done with the Provent is put a shim under the vacuum relief valve spring to increase the it's opening resistance.

First time I've ever read an article in an online mag lol
 

·
SUI GENERIS UTE
GQ Ute 1990 Silvertop
Joined
·
5,853 Posts
The article is pretty good with the editor pointing out high filtration effect to pressure drop against flow. The conclusion is ok depending on what you put your focus on. To me knowing the working of a turbo fitted diesel and low vacuum effect my focus would be pressure drop to filtration against flow. Looking at that focus the ProVent 200 kills the others hands down and why it has been recommended for our TD42.

But as suggested you have to use 25mm hose to take into account the volumes we need to remove here. Considering IDI and the flow capacity with low vacuum using big induction hoses we need at a higher tuned TD42. If you compare pressure drop at 100 to 200l/min both the Provent 100 and 200 are the clear winners. For the Mann & Hummels units they have their limits and why these high end engineers recommend their max flow rates. Obviously they have their focus the same as i have suggested.

Editors of articles do a good job but they are not engineers and sometimes miss the main criteria in the engineering focus. Interpretation is a funny thing with tests, focus is often lost in the data.
 

·
Registered
nissan
Joined
·
11 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Thanks for all the technical information. I read all the articles, but do not fully understand all the technical aspects of it.
I should have stated at the start that my vehicle is a 3ltr CRD.
The main reason for asking if the Provent 100 was the same as the Flashlude is that if it is then the Provent is a lot cheaper, and I would buy it instead, but not sure if it is suitable for my vehicle.
I have seen a couple of Youtube videos with Roothy talking about how good the Flashlude can is on a Patrol, with its flow rate of 250l per minute, but have not seen anything about the Provent 100 being suitable for a 3 ltr Patrol,
As I said at the start, that they look exactly the same, with the exact same dimensions and same filter, which in theory means that the Provent 100 should have the same flow rate as the Flashlube.
 

·
SUI GENERIS UTE
GQ Ute 1990 Silvertop
Joined
·
5,853 Posts
Your 3 litre ZD is a DI engine which doesn't have the bypass a IDI TD42 has. Looking at the published mag results and putting the focus on the bypass flow capacities of your 3 litre which is well under 100l/min at cruse speeds. The ProVent 100 is the clear winner here for pressure drop and maybe depending on how the test was conducted suggests the flashlube has better filtration at these lower flow rates. Now for price focus the Provent wins with a considerable margin.

For me i would still go for the clear engineered product and not the copy but i am a very engineer bias person. Mann & Hummel are german and these guys are known for their pedantic R&D focus. I would suggest the test was not done with the test criteria Mann&Hummel used hence different result focus. Besides without prejudges to Wolfgang Kluenner who is a top design research scientist who has developed some nice stuff for LPG issues with or for CSIRO, but he would not have the test facilities or the experience in this diesel area in my opinion.
 

·
Master Coalroller
nissan
Joined
·
3,242 Posts
I’m pretty happy to suggest that flow is relative to cylinder volume, with a slight regard to performance modifications.
For an unmodified ZD30 I would be looking at the FlashLube or a ProVent 150. A ProVent 100 may suffice but in an OHC engine I would rather err on the side of caution due to the large task the oil performs in the head, and more so for the crankcase gas reduction than manifold sludge.
Your best bet is a ProVent 200 though. We mounted the 07 model right up next to the passenger firewall, fabbing up a small plate that hung it in a vacant spot. They don’t weigh much so can mount fairly easy without risk of dislodgement.
 

·
Registered
'14 Y61 ZD30 CRD M/T ST
Joined
·
1,620 Posts
Your best bet is a ProVent 200 though. We mounted the 07 model right up next to the passenger firewall, fabbing up a small plate that hung it in a vacant spot. They don’t weigh much so can mount fairly easy without risk of dislodgement.
I have a 2014 ZD30 WITH AN AUX BATT AND ABS PUMP, and I managed to find a spot for the Provent 200 and designed a suitable mounting bracket. I just need to get my ar$e into gear and have the bracket laser cut.
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top