Crankcase Breather Smoke

[Bill_qaz]

Oliver90, We are all entitled to are opinion.
But I hardly think a heavy breathing classic car is contributing to planet decline or harming pedestrians

You can love your EV's and feel good about you contribution to the environment.
But I can think its a lot of marketing BS and refuse to ever consider an EV.
It doesn't make either of us wrong(or me a ludite) it just different opinions and beliefs.

[svenedin]

Is a squabble about electric battery carriages helping the OP with his engine issues?

Stephen

[svenedin]

This is the manifold 12A1097 that has a tapping for a PCV valve and is also tapped for the stud (or machine screw) to hold a Smiths PCV valve bracket. Also the oil separator "chimney" tappet chest cover. This is filled with wire wool so that the oil from the fumes is separated out (or at least most of it). The fumes are then directed via a special oil resistant pipe to the Smiths PCV valve and fed into the inlet manifold to be burnt in the engine. This would sort out the issue of the "smoke" from the engine. It is exactly the reason this closed-circuit breathing was introduced; to prevent crankcase gases being vented to atmosphere causing bad smells and atmospheric pollution. It was used on engines starting 10ME around 1968/1969 in Minors. A bit later the system was simplified by directly sending the fumes from the oil separator to a variant of the HS2 carburettor with an inlet for the breather pipe. The PCV valve does have limitations; if the blow-by is very severe it can overwhelm this breather system.

Stephen

IMG_9789.jpeg (3.52 MiB) Viewed 1609 times

[stuffedpike20]

Is a squabble about electric battery carriages helping the OP with his engine issues?

Stephen

No, but it is interesting Stephen.

[stuffedpike20]

Imagine the battery production needed when/if everyone buys electric. That’s another point to get !

We don't have a national grid to support if we all went EV
Nor the real estate on forecourts for enough charging points, we can't all have home charging.
Not to mention pollution from increased tyre wear due to the extra weight of EV.

LONG LIVE ICE
[/quote]

All a load of codswallop, IMO.

The change-over tomelectric will not be instant, so only those cars scrapped each year will likely need to be replaced. Very few buy a new car every year, so that argument immediately gets trashed. Batteries, if/when scrapped, are better than 95% recyclable. The cars are already highly recyclable, so no real change there.

It will take several years for all cars to be electric, won’t it? Night-time use of electric for home charging would not overload the grid in the foreseeable future. There are load-spreading opportunities for CPOs (batteries or more renewables installed by then. Just another myth repeated time and time again by the poorly educated EV haters.

By the time all the fossil burners are scrapped, there will be no need for dinosaur fuel pumps. EV batteries are evolving so quickly that recharging will be much faster, needed less often etc, etc. Another myth perpetuated by the dinosaur ICE lovers. Don’t need ‘forecourts’ for kerb-side charging either. That will free up a lot of real estate used by dinosaur fuel suppliers.

Lastly, tyre wear claims are rubbish as well. There is very little difference between ICE and EV tyre wear when driven in a similar manor. Also luddite ICE owners forget/ignore the tiny amount of brake pad wear with EVs compared to ICE cars. Or they are simply poorly educated/informed of the way EVs use their electric motor(s) (in generator mode) to not only retard the vehicle but also to ‘recoup’ (as in recycle) the energy used for accelerating the car - not like ICE cars which waste all that energy by heating up the brakes.

So many stupid arguments against EVs and unjustifiable excuses for retaining fossil burning, polluting, toxic ICEs are simply the luddites clutching straws to try to justify carrying on with destroying our environment in so many ways.
[/quote]

Assuming you are mainly thinking about climate change, unfortunately there is no serious political will to address it.
We have gone from being slightly concerned to talking about adaptation, going straight past fixing the problem.
Using SRM to cool the planet and buy time to phase out fossil fuels; and mechanical trees, and other innovations, to remove accumulated C02 from the atmosphere could see the climate return to 'normal' pre-industrial levels within 50 years or so. But it is highly unlikely to happen.
(Mechanical trees would remove much more C02 than real trees.....which use a lot of water and decrease albedo because trees are mostly dark).

So the ICE versus EV question is not seen as important as things stand, because humans are chosing to fail on climate change.

[Wes]

This is the manifold 12A1097 that has a tapping for a PCV valve and is also tapped for the stud (or machine screw) to hold a Smiths PCV valve bracket. Also the oil separator "chimney" tappet chest cover. This is filled with wire wool so that the oil from the fumes is separated out (or at least most of it). The fumes are then directed via a special oil resistant pipe to the Smiths PCV valve and fed into the inlet manifold to be burnt in the engine. This would sort out the issue of the "smoke" from the engine. It is exactly the reason this closed-circuit breathing was introduced; to prevent crankcase gases being vented to atmosphere causing bad smells and atmospheric pollution. It was used on engines starting 10ME around 1968/1969 in Minors. A bit later the system was simplified by directly sending the fumes from the oil separator to a variant of the HS2 carburettor with an inlet for the breather pipe. The PCV valve does have limitations; if the blow-by is very severe it can overwhelm this breather system.

Stephen


IMG_9789.jpeg

Thanks for this. I'll update when i get my "band-aid" pieces

[Wes]

[/quote]

Assuming you are mainly thinking about climate change, unfortunately there is no serious political will to address it.
We have gone from being slightly concerned to talking about adaptation, going straight past fixing the problem.
Using SRM to cool the planet and buy time to phase out fossil fuels; and mechanical trees, and other innovations, to remove accumulated C02 from the atmosphere could see the climate return to 'normal' pre-industrial levels within 50 years or so. But it is highly unlikely to happen.
(Mechanical trees would remove much more C02 than real trees.....which use a lot of water and decrease albedo because trees are mostly dark).

So the ICE versus EV question is not seen as important as things stand, because humans are chosing to fail on climate change.
[/quote]

I too think we're past the point of no return. I'm curenttly working on SAF, Sustainable Aviation Fuels, but even when/if these plants come on line its only a few % of the total fuel burn. For many years i worked on Hydrogen for power plants but that space has gone quiet. This will only become mainstream when there are big profits involved and thats not going to happen soon enough. the vast majority pf people want "stuff", and to travel, and not pay taxes... We're doomed!

[jagnut66]

So the ICE versus EV question is not seen as important as things stand, because humans are chosing to fail on climate change.

Hi,
Just strikes me, if you're so anti-ICE and regard all of us as planet hating Dinosaurs, what are you doing owning a classic car?
Or is that up for sale, so you can profit from the idiot Dinosaurs??
Best wishes,
Mike.

[jagnut66]

PS: I wish the OP luck with his engine and hope it doesn't take him too long to save up for a rebuild.
If that takes too long there are running engines for sale that might keep the Morris mobile.
Best wishes,
Mike.
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/it ... tn__=!%3AD

[svenedin]

PS: I wish the OP luck with his engine and hope it doesn't take him too long to save up for a rebuild.
If that takes too long there are running engines for sale that might keep the Morris mobile.
Best wishes,
Mike.
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/it ... tn__=!%3AD

Good idea. I think the OP's engine will limp on for a long time if used lightly but it's not worth spending a lot of money on "crutches" for it when a better condition old engine could be swapped in.

Stephen

[stuffedpike20]

Assuming you are mainly thinking about climate change, unfortunately there is no serious political will to address it.
We have gone from being slightly concerned to talking about adaptation, going straight past fixing the problem.
Using SRM to cool the planet and buy time to phase out fossil fuels; and mechanical trees, and other innovations, to remove accumulated C02 from the atmosphere could see the climate return to 'normal' pre-industrial levels within 50 years or so. But it is highly unlikely to happen.
(Mechanical trees would remove much more C02 than real trees.....which use a lot of water and decrease albedo because trees are mostly dark).

So the ICE versus EV question is not seen as important as things stand, because humans are chosing to fail on climate change.
[/quote]

I too think we're past the point of no return. I'm curenttly working on SAF, Sustainable Aviation Fuels, but even when/if these plants come on line its only a few % of the total fuel burn. For many years i worked on Hydrogen for power plants but that space has gone quiet. This will only become mainstream when there are big profits involved and thats not going to happen soon enough. the vast majority pf people want "stuff", and to travel, and not pay taxes... We're doomed!
[/quote]

I don't think we are past the point of no return, but surely SAF will just bring in Jeavon's paradox? The cheaper we make something, the more of it we use in the end.
Flying, as I understand it, has two effects. The condensation trails reflect sunlight back into space, but also trap heat at the earth's surface. The trapping of heat is greater than the reflection, therefore flying is bad....especially flying at night, because there is no reflection then.

[Bill_qaz]

Is a squabble about electric battery carriages helping the OP with his engine issues?

Stephen

It came after the op had stated he bought a catch tank to try as a cheap temporary solution. To keep him mobile until a permanent fix.
The rest is just banter (if its stays non personal)

[michael4]

To the OP...

I had a smokey old A35. Someone suggested I run it with the oil level way below half on the dipstick. I tried and it did reduce smoke from the breather. I have no real idea why.

I gave it away. Damn thing kept bumbling around the neighbourhood for ages.

[oliver90owner]

Oliver90, We are all entitled to are opinion.
But I hardly think a heavy breathing classic car is contributing to planet decline or harming pedestrians

You can love your EV's and feel good about you contribution to the environment.
But I can think its a lot of marketing BS and refuse to ever consider an EV.
It doesn't make either of us wrong(or me a ludite) it just different opinions and beliefs.

That’s OK. Your choice, but (IMO) both anti-social (the toxic tail=pipe emissions) and climate-change denying. As a motor mechanic, you are likely looking at the reduced maintenace required by EVs and the extra expertise required for any necessary traction battery issues (few and far between). I don’t have that problem.

That presumably means that you have no intention of ever buying a new car after 2035, when new ICE cars will not be allowed, for sale, in the UK. Another 15 years after that and most of the ICE cars will be ready for the scrap heap, fuel for them will be prohibitively expensive, etc, etc. and fossil fuel stations will be few and far apart. A good choice, if that is what you intend to do!

[Wes]

To the OP...

I had a smokey old A35. Someone suggested I run it with the oil level way below half on the dipstick. I tried and it did reduce smoke from the breather. I have no real idea why.

I gave it away. Damn thing kept bumbling around the neighbourhood for ages.

hmm thats an interesting thought. I always keep topped up to the Max!

Thanks to to Jagnut, yep bumbling for a few more months/years yet i feel.

[Wes]

I for one am neither anti EV nor am I a climate denier. Not by a long chalk. What I am is verdantly anti "green wash". And being a mechanical engineer on the inside of the renewables market etc i see a lot of it.

[Bill_qaz]

Oliver90 As you just posted IMO
So its just your opinion/belief, so crack on if it makes you feel better and believe you are doing your bit to save the planet.
But don't judge others who you know nothing about.

• Global Share: When comparing the roughly 60 million tonnes from UK cars to global annual emissions (around 37 to 40 billion tonnes), UK cars alone account for roughly 0.16% of worldwide emissions. All UK domestic transport combined accounts for roughly 0.3%.

UK car use will have a tiny effect on global and classic cars are even smaller % of that.

[Wes]

I for one am neither anti EV nor am I a climate denier. Not by a long chalk. What I am is verdantly anti "green wash". And being a mechanical engineer on the inside of the renewables market etc i see a lot of it.

FWIW I work from home i.e. zero commuter miles, I rarely travel abroad and when I do i like to use the train, cant recall last time i was on a plane. but I do do about 500 miles a year in a car that was built in 1964. So i'm going to hazard a guess that my Carbon footprint is a lot better than a lot of self righteous, EV driving, long haul holidaying people I know.

[59Elva]

I’m confused why someone who appears fervently against the continuation of ICE would own a Minor. While fuel and material efficient they never incorporated any but the most rudimentary emissions controls.
The carbon content of the earth is fundamentally constant. Very little is falling from space or bubbling up from volcanos. What we are digging or pumping up from underground was once on the surface during a period that some scientists say was a greener and more verdant environment. Humans are adaptable they survive in Siberia and Saudi Arabia. Even if climate change brings back the T-rex Im sure we’ll survive. After all England was primarily the developer of the elephant gun. We just need a bigger bullet.

[les]

Perhaps he doesn’t own a Minor