Thanks for your response Lee...after thinking about it, I believe I did the compression test wrong, so those numbers are probably too low. By not taking out all the spark plugs in the begining, the cylinder I was testing would not read the correct pressure because the crankshaft is not freely rotating, because with the rest of the spark plugs in, it's fighting the compression in the other cylinders since their spark plugs are still in.
I'll redo the test and post the new numbers...
1998 Volvo V70 AWD - Dipstick still smoking after PCV change
-
thedawgfather
- Posts: 12
- Joined: 25 September 2008
- Year and Model:
- Location:
-
precopster
- Posts: 7543
- Joined: 21 August 2010
- Year and Model: Lots
- Location: Melbourne Australia
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 128 times
The main reason for removing other plugs while testing for compression is to increase the turning speed of the engine while cranking.
If you have a strong battery and quick cranking was achieved (with compression numbers that low it's likely it was turning fast enough) it's likely that is all this engine has to give.
It wouldn't hurt to try again. You may get 10% more out of the numbers. One of speciialist Volvo garages I was doing work for had a '99 v70 with numbers that low. The car ran and started and of course had the massive blow-by.
With numbers that low your car would be very sluggish and will struggle with hills and will always be gearing down for ascents. You may have become used to it's sluggish ways.
If you have a strong battery and quick cranking was achieved (with compression numbers that low it's likely it was turning fast enough) it's likely that is all this engine has to give.
It wouldn't hurt to try again. You may get 10% more out of the numbers. One of speciialist Volvo garages I was doing work for had a '99 v70 with numbers that low. The car ran and started and of course had the massive blow-by.
With numbers that low your car would be very sluggish and will struggle with hills and will always be gearing down for ascents. You may have become used to it's sluggish ways.
Current cars VW Transporter 2.5TDI, 2010 XC90 D5 R Design
-
thedawgfather
- Posts: 12
- Joined: 25 September 2008
- Year and Model:
- Location:
You are right precopster...the numbers didn't change much by taking all of the spark plugs out.
The car runs and drives fine, but like you say, maybe I'm just used to it?
I ended up releasing the pressure build up with a snorkel off the oil filler cap and a vent tube off of the dipstick tube as wheelsup suggested.
I attached a picture of the snorkel 1.0
The car runs and drives fine, but like you say, maybe I'm just used to it?
I ended up releasing the pressure build up with a snorkel off the oil filler cap and a vent tube off of the dipstick tube as wheelsup suggested.
I attached a picture of the snorkel 1.0
- Attachments
-
- Snorkel 1.0 off oil filler cap
-
erikv11
- Posts: 11800
- Joined: 25 July 2009
- Year and Model: 850, V70, S60R, XC70
- Location: Iowa
- Has thanked: 292 times
- Been thanked: 765 times
Looks like a clean engine bay!
Couple thoughts on the snorkel:
- Won't that fill up with oil?
- Its exhaust seems rather close to the fresh air intake for the cabin.
Couple thoughts on the snorkel:
- Won't that fill up with oil?
- Its exhaust seems rather close to the fresh air intake for the cabin.
'95 854 T-5R, Motronic 4.4, 185k
'98 V70, T5 tune-injectors-turbo, LPT engine, 304k, daily driver
'06 S60 R, 197k
'07 XC70, black, 205k
'07 XC70, willow green, 212k
'99 Camry V6
153k
gone: '96 NA 850 210k, '98 NA V70 182k, '98 S70 NA 225k, '96 855 NA 169k
'98 V70, T5 tune-injectors-turbo, LPT engine, 304k, daily driver
'06 S60 R, 197k
'07 XC70, black, 205k
'07 XC70, willow green, 212k
'99 Camry V6
153kgone: '96 NA 850 210k, '98 NA V70 182k, '98 S70 NA 225k, '96 855 NA 169k
-
precopster
- Posts: 7543
- Joined: 21 August 2010
- Year and Model: Lots
- Location: Melbourne Australia
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 128 times
Might be time to try some "snake oil" 
:D
:DCurrent cars VW Transporter 2.5TDI, 2010 XC90 D5 R Design
-
thedawgfather
- Posts: 12
- Joined: 25 September 2008
- Year and Model:
- Location:
The engine bay is clean because I've had to pressure wash it several times due to oil spraying all over:)
Snorkel 1.0:
-Ideally the pipe is at a slight angle so the oil that does build up will drain backwards from the last 90 degree elbow in the hose, plus I'm hoping that breather filter stops the oil?
-I bet the exhaust will be a problem with the fresh air cabin intake, hopefully it's angled enough away from the intake?
-that's why it's snorkel 1.0....I'm sure there are going to need to be improvements:)
Thanks for your feedback..and where do I get this "snake oil"? Do traveling salemen come around from town to town and sell it out of the back of there buggies?
Snorkel 1.0:
-Ideally the pipe is at a slight angle so the oil that does build up will drain backwards from the last 90 degree elbow in the hose, plus I'm hoping that breather filter stops the oil?
-I bet the exhaust will be a problem with the fresh air cabin intake, hopefully it's angled enough away from the intake?
-that's why it's snorkel 1.0....I'm sure there are going to need to be improvements:)
Thanks for your feedback..and where do I get this "snake oil"? Do traveling salemen come around from town to town and sell it out of the back of there buggies?
Last edited by thedawgfather on 09 Mar 2015, 15:18, edited 1 time in total.
-
Ben850
- Posts: 1613
- Joined: 8 September 2011
- Year and Model: 1996 850 R Wagon
- Location: Michigan
- Been thanked: 7 times
That "Snorkel" is creative, and is venting directly to the area of your cabin air intake.thedawgfather wrote:You are right precopster...the numbers didn't change much by taking all of the spark plugs out.
The car runs and drives fine, but like you say, maybe I'm just used to it?
I ended up releasing the pressure build up with a snorkel off the oil filler cap and a vent tube off of the dipstick tube as wheelsup suggested.
I attached a picture of the snorkel 1.0
Just wanted to point that out. I see you have noticed that while reading back.
If the passage to the sump from the oil separator has been cleared, the only other alteration I have had, or wanted to do, is to simply use a hose from the oil separator back to the induction tube.
- The wagon. The first time.
This was my cleaning and re-routing immediately after taking ownership.
- You can see my routing on the Turbo wagon to the PTC nipple running below the intake.
- PTC nipple with the original induction tube with 5/8" heater hose.
- The blue hose crossing the intake is coming from the oil trap to the PTC nipple.
- PTC nipple on the 3" induction tube. 5/8" blue heater hose.
Below is the N/A ''93. Not as pretty.
- '93 before. It was bad.
- IMG_1129.JPG (167.41 KiB) Viewed 1615 times
- 5/8" heater hose over the injectors for the'93 N/A to the intake tube at flame trap delete.
- IMG_1122.JPG (108.17 KiB) Viewed 1616 times
It had all the normal symptoms of clogged oil separator passage to sump.
Since cleaning that sufficiently, and adding a simple hose to delete the hard plastic tube, all is fine.
I have a '98 LPT like yours that I will be doing all the same things to, likely next month. I will update you then.
One last Photo.
The T-5R I also will be doing the same to seemed to have been hastily modified to be killed as a track car. The previous owner had almost succeeded. I have some frame and body work to do as well.
I will have to get the manifold off to make sense of the hoses, but I believe they are all simply dumping crankcase vapor.
- T-5R Lack of PCV "system"?
1993 850 GLT , You wouldn't know it.
1996 850 Turbo Wagon White.
1995 T-5R Black. New work in progress.
1998 V70 XC Cross Country White.
1994 850 N/A Wagon Black.
1997 850 Sedan Black.
1996 850R Wagon White.
1997 850 Sedan Red ( not white or black!)
1996 850 Turbo Wagon White.
1995 T-5R Black. New work in progress.
1998 V70 XC Cross Country White.
1994 850 N/A Wagon Black.
1997 850 Sedan Black.
1996 850R Wagon White.
1997 850 Sedan Red ( not white or black!)
-
thedawgfather
- Posts: 12
- Joined: 25 September 2008
- Year and Model:
- Location:
Answer these questions please:
(1) It's seems to me that the pressure build up from the top of the engine would be routed down by the hose that going down in between the intake manifold to the oil separator box that once the vapor enters the oil separator box that in fact the oil separates out of the vapor and the oil drains down through the box into the crankcase/oil pan and the vapor rises and gets pulled through the hose that runs out of the oil separator box, around the engine block to the PTC where the vacuum line that comes from the intake manifold (under the heater hose that run into the thermostat) attaches to the PTC nipple and vacuums the vapors into the intake manifold to be combusted in the combustion chamber/cylinders and exhausts through the exhaust system out into the world with all the rest of the exhaust. Now if that's the case, and if I wasn't worried about saving oil, I'd run the hose from the top of the engine to the vacuum nipple on the side of the intake manifold, right? (I know I'd need adapters but I'm talking about the concept)
(2) My other question that wasn't answered yet about the fact that I secure a rubber glove around the oil filler hose and the glove stands up at idle and gets sucked down upon reeving the engine, same as when the smoke from the dipstick tube stopping upon reeving the engine...would that indicate that in fact the vacuum that is provided at the vacuum line attached to the intake manifold is, in fact providing enough vacuum to do it's job?
I'm thinking of my new Snorkel 2.0 modification and I think since there are so many people that are concerned about my well being and that I don't pass out from oil vapors while driving i.e. the fact that the snorkel exhaust is near the cabin fresh air intake, that I'm thinking that I should run a hose connecting the breather filter/snorkel exhaust with a empty nipple on the vacuum tree?
(1) It's seems to me that the pressure build up from the top of the engine would be routed down by the hose that going down in between the intake manifold to the oil separator box that once the vapor enters the oil separator box that in fact the oil separates out of the vapor and the oil drains down through the box into the crankcase/oil pan and the vapor rises and gets pulled through the hose that runs out of the oil separator box, around the engine block to the PTC where the vacuum line that comes from the intake manifold (under the heater hose that run into the thermostat) attaches to the PTC nipple and vacuums the vapors into the intake manifold to be combusted in the combustion chamber/cylinders and exhausts through the exhaust system out into the world with all the rest of the exhaust. Now if that's the case, and if I wasn't worried about saving oil, I'd run the hose from the top of the engine to the vacuum nipple on the side of the intake manifold, right? (I know I'd need adapters but I'm talking about the concept)
(2) My other question that wasn't answered yet about the fact that I secure a rubber glove around the oil filler hose and the glove stands up at idle and gets sucked down upon reeving the engine, same as when the smoke from the dipstick tube stopping upon reeving the engine...would that indicate that in fact the vacuum that is provided at the vacuum line attached to the intake manifold is, in fact providing enough vacuum to do it's job?
I'm thinking of my new Snorkel 2.0 modification and I think since there are so many people that are concerned about my well being and that I don't pass out from oil vapors while driving i.e. the fact that the snorkel exhaust is near the cabin fresh air intake, that I'm thinking that I should run a hose connecting the breather filter/snorkel exhaust with a empty nipple on the vacuum tree?
-
Ben850
- Posts: 1613
- Joined: 8 September 2011
- Year and Model: 1996 850 R Wagon
- Location: Michigan
- Been thanked: 7 times
OK,
# 1. If you look at the photo of my '93, that hose was not even utilized yet as a means of ventilation.
I believe it may have been added later to relieve pressure from valve seals.
If it were (venting), sending it directly to the induction tube would not be a good idea.
I have been collecting service manuals over the past couple years. I have not yet found the one in which this system is dealt.
#2. No. Since you have now provided a "Snorkel", it is no longer a closed "System" as it was designed.
The applied vacuum is no longer doing what it was designed for. That being said, the solenoids actuated by said vacuum are also invalid.
# 1. If you look at the photo of my '93, that hose was not even utilized yet as a means of ventilation.
I believe it may have been added later to relieve pressure from valve seals.
If it were (venting), sending it directly to the induction tube would not be a good idea.
I have been collecting service manuals over the past couple years. I have not yet found the one in which this system is dealt.
#2. No. Since you have now provided a "Snorkel", it is no longer a closed "System" as it was designed.
The applied vacuum is no longer doing what it was designed for. That being said, the solenoids actuated by said vacuum are also invalid.
1993 850 GLT , You wouldn't know it.
1996 850 Turbo Wagon White.
1995 T-5R Black. New work in progress.
1998 V70 XC Cross Country White.
1994 850 N/A Wagon Black.
1997 850 Sedan Black.
1996 850R Wagon White.
1997 850 Sedan Red ( not white or black!)
1996 850 Turbo Wagon White.
1995 T-5R Black. New work in progress.
1998 V70 XC Cross Country White.
1994 850 N/A Wagon Black.
1997 850 Sedan Black.
1996 850R Wagon White.
1997 850 Sedan Red ( not white or black!)
-
Ben850
- Posts: 1613
- Joined: 8 September 2011
- Year and Model: 1996 850 R Wagon
- Location: Michigan
- Been thanked: 7 times
OK,
# 1. If you look at the photo of my '93, that hose was not even utilized yet as a means of ventilation.
I believe it may have been added later to relieve pressure from valve seals.
If it were (venting), sending it directly to the induction tube would not be a good idea.
To this day, there is no venting from the head of my '93. No smoke. No blown seals since cleaning and " Flame Trap" delete. (n/a)
I have been collecting service manuals over the past couple years. I have not yet found the one in which this system is dealt.
#2. No. Since you have now provided a "Snorkel", it is no longer a closed "System" as it was designed.
The applied vacuum is no longer doing what it was designed for. That being said, the solenoids actuated by said vacuum are also invalid.
# 1. If you look at the photo of my '93, that hose was not even utilized yet as a means of ventilation.
I believe it may have been added later to relieve pressure from valve seals.
If it were (venting), sending it directly to the induction tube would not be a good idea.
To this day, there is no venting from the head of my '93. No smoke. No blown seals since cleaning and " Flame Trap" delete. (n/a)
I have been collecting service manuals over the past couple years. I have not yet found the one in which this system is dealt.
#2. No. Since you have now provided a "Snorkel", it is no longer a closed "System" as it was designed.
The applied vacuum is no longer doing what it was designed for. That being said, the solenoids actuated by said vacuum are also invalid.
Last edited by Ben850 on 09 Mar 2015, 19:08, edited 1 time in total.
1993 850 GLT , You wouldn't know it.
1996 850 Turbo Wagon White.
1995 T-5R Black. New work in progress.
1998 V70 XC Cross Country White.
1994 850 N/A Wagon Black.
1997 850 Sedan Black.
1996 850R Wagon White.
1997 850 Sedan Red ( not white or black!)
1996 850 Turbo Wagon White.
1995 T-5R Black. New work in progress.
1998 V70 XC Cross Country White.
1994 850 N/A Wagon Black.
1997 850 Sedan Black.
1996 850R Wagon White.
1997 850 Sedan Red ( not white or black!)
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post