2002 volvo s60 2.4t PCV still blocked after service/replacement

[vtl]

Old turbo P2s didn't have a check valve in banjo bolt, this is pretty much must have. Newer ones came with the improved banjo bolt, however engine can suck up a retainer that keeps the check valve inside the bolt. Then you have to redo the head. 2005 has that inferior bolt, I just pulled one from my donor engine. The first PCV kit I've got from FCP or IPD about 7 years ago, in 2012, did come with the newest bolt that has the retainer mounted through the bolt, not just welded. It's P/N is 31325709. It has wider opening, too.

Original bolt on donor engine had the valve partially clogged, it is not fully sealing the PCV line on boost. Bolt can be more or less easily replaced, just remove PS pump and move alternator closer to the engine fan.

That said, I'm also getting a blow-by gases under boost recently



PCV is fresh, only 2 y.o. The oil is 4 qt 10w40, 2 qt 5w30 plus 1 qt of 5w20 topped up (to fight high winter viscosity/bad city MPG). STFT/LTFT are where they should be, engine has no vacuum leaks.

Pretty sure it is worn piston rings and out of round, glazed cylinders. At 220k I decided to rebuild the donor engine, just becuase a man has to do at least one in his life As a temporary counter-measure, I'm installing oil catch can and drilling PTC hole wider to give it a lesser air restriction.

Also, this "under boost" garage PCV test does develop boost, around 3-6 PSI, depending on engine (2.4/2.5) and tune.

[- Pete -]

Old turbo P2s didn't have a check valve in banjo bolt, this is pretty much must have. Newer ones came with the improved banjo bolt. ( -snip- )
It's P/N is 31325709. It has wider opening, too.

it is not fully sealing the PCV line on boost


As a temporary counter-measure, I'm installing oil catch can and drilling PTC hole wider to give it a lesser air restriction.

Pardon my ignorance, but my understanding of the banjo bolt’s purpose is to allow oil accumulated in the intake plenum to drain slowly through the PTC nipple, down through the black box & then back into the crankcase. Ya?

So with the old design (hollow w/no valve) banjo bolt, on boost there is always some parasitic loss exiting the plenum through the banjo bolt, pressurizing the PTC nipple etc. Or, another way of interpreting it would be that with the hollow/no valve banjo bolt, under boost, technicallly the crankcase is being fed some PSI off the intake plenum? Ya?

New design - once boost PSI has built to a certain level the valve closes eliminating the parasitic loss. Off boost it’s open & allowing gasses/liquid to drain back down to the crankcase.

Is this the importance of having the revised 31325709?

Funny story - I actually went to the dealership mid PCV/cam seal/oil coated underbody cleanup job last week just to get the updated banjo bolt & cam plug I’d forgotten to order from FCP. I could not make this up. I get to the parts counter & the guy went to get the updated banjo bolt I had called earlier for. He got it, as well as the original style hollow bolt that I already had. Then he told me that “you don’t want to use the updated one in the early P2’s. There’s like 8 different banjo bolts available, you need to get the correct one for your VIN” I brought up the check valve & that it’s a frequently discussed topic & he said “nope, don’t wanna do that on an 01/2.4T. It’s all about CFM, the newer one won’t work.” he said. “I’d just clean up your old one & reuse it”. I mentioned that even FCP stated the updated bolt was direct fitment. He batted his hand in the air & said “awe FCP, don’t waste your time with their parts search, it’s always wrong.”

So drilling the banjo fitting, I think I get the point of that - easier drainage & less likely to become clogged.

Where are you going to place the catch can & where will it be ported into? I looked up catch can setups a while back for Volvo’s. Can’t recall what I came up with.


My aircraft mechanic friend suggested the possibility of a plugged cat as being the culprit for the blowby. Ironically, I rescanned the car today after it’d been driven ~60 miles & sure enough, a cat code had been populated 16.4 miles prior to me pulling codes.

[abscate]

I’ve put plugged cats into my Venn diagram of bad ECUs, bad fuel, and plugged fuel filters. Very rare but talked about much more than they occur.

That’s a personal bias , little hard data to back it up.

[vtl]

Is this the importance of having the revised 31325709?

Correct. The bolt is also feeding vacuum to the crankcase (when it can), oil mixture is a by-product.

So drilling the banjo fitting, I think I get the point of that - easier drainage & less likely to become clogged.

It may be less critical on a 2.4T, which develops less boost. 2.5T w/ stage 1 has lot more. I even went ahead and drilled PTC nipple to allow more CFM. Yeah, my idling vacuum is weaker now, but under the boost crankcase should breathe easier. I'm not concerned too much with the clogging, Red Line seems to do fine in this engine.

Where are you going to place the catch can & where will it be ported into? I looked up catch can setups a while back for Volvo’s. Can’t recall what I came up with.

Catch can needs to be heated, in winter for sure. So:

I redid hoses, it now uses 14 mm ID silicone, for less air flow restriction and better CFM. Can sits in between PTC nipple and long pricey PCV hose.

My aircraft mechanic friend suggested the possibility of a plugged cat as being the culprit for the blowby. Ironically, I rescanned the car today after it’d been driven ~60 miles & sure enough, a cat code had been populated 16.4 miles prior to me pulling codes.

Don't think my new 3" downpipe installed about a year ago will clog that fast.

[- Pete -]

VTL, thanks for sharing that. I have more reading homework to do. This whole time I've been thinking of the PTC nipple as being the fitting that the banjo bolt secures to the intake manifold.

When the new banjo bolt gets here I plan to hook up a boost gauge to the dipstick tube so I can see if the crankcase is being pressurized from blowby. I will take measurements before and after changing the banjo bolt.

[ndphotonl]

Interesting thread, bookmarking this. I also have a 2.4T S80 (2001), but still can't make up if I need the updated banjo bolt or not...I did a full PCV service not too long ago.

[cfelberg]

Pete, sorry for the late reply , I didn't realize there were more responses. Yes, I used part # 31325709 as mentioned above. I used a digital manometer in Kpa mode fitted to oil fill. I took the measurements before and immediately after replacing the banjo bolt.

[- Pete -]

Did you port in through the filler cap or filler neck?

You don't happen to have a photo of your setup do you?

[vtl]

One day I'll finish it (pictures taken 3 years ago):




This is a differential pressure sensor MPXV7002DP connected to Arduino. I was planning to attach it permanently to PCV and display the readings somewhere. My Driver Distraction Display (https://github.com/vtl/volvo-ddd) did not materialize yet back then, so the project was shelved, but now I have an LCD to display crankcase vacuum (or lack of).

[cfelberg]

I used the filler cap. I ported a tube through the filler cap used with the volvo style funnel and cap combo as it conveniently has a hole already in it. I took readings initially from both the filler cap and dip stick tube and they were both the same.