As you might Know i'm using an 85c thermostat with a homemade bypass.

As an example, I do 150 miles commuting over 5 days. 10 trips in total.

The amount I collect in the OCS tube varies from about 1/2 to 1 Inch of fluid.

The picture bellow is the fluid (about 2 weeks worth) in a test tube. You can see that the fluid has separated in to three layers.

Layer 1, seems to be fuel

Layer 2, seems to be emulsified oil *

Layer 3, seems to be water *

* like a dick, i went and shook the test tube before taking the photo :doh:. Layer 2 was a bit thicker before and layer 3 was completely clear, no clouding.
:tup:

Attachment 7264

Great results!

On the recirc of gases into the intake and discussing buildup on the walls, that didn't take into account the main reason I vented mine completely out...and that's because in a fuel injection system, there's sensors involved that aren't in a carburated model. I don't want that swamp gas coating any sensor probes.

I have yet to see if the RX3 has any intake sensors but in the injected cars I've wrenched on, there's MAP/BARO or MAF sensors, along with intake air temp and density sensors that would be subject to this gunk.

There is a reason vehicle manufactures have those "recommended cleaning services" at so many mile intervals :hehe:

Every so many thousand miles (depending on the vehicle it can be as much as 10,000 miles) I do a "4 stage cleaning process"... involves cleaning the sensors, cleaning the TB and Induction chamber, cleaning the fuel system, and cleaning the piston also...

Really easy to do with a can of Electrical/Contact Cleaner to clean all the sensors,

A can of Berryman, Gumout, BG44K or Techron or Reline SI-1, or (you get the idea...) every 3 or 4 full tanks of gas usually keeps the Fuel System/Injectors clean,

And the rest can easily be taken care of with an Air Compressor, a Fuel Induction Canister/Tool (or a can of Asmoil Power Foam) and your favorite can of cleaner for that service... try some AC Delco Upper Engine Cleaner, BG ISC, Penray, Pyroil, 3M, Wynns, or maybe some "SeaFoam" if you feel like wasting some $$ while still getting a smoke show.

Keep everything running like new for years, and you get to keep the Tree Huggers happy by routing your evil emissions back into your engine even tho it gums up sensors and other parts :hehe:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfNTZp6OrQ0

After reading Dave Searle's Open Road column in the Oct 2016 issue of Motorcycle Consumer News (and his Sept column) I am convinced that I want the OSC in place, with the long side on the top.

I install a fuel line shutoff (as suggested by someone) to make it easy to drain the collector tube. I had to "shim" it with a piece of fuel line.

Dan, I tend to agree that there is a good purpose for the OSC.

(Just received the digital version of Oct MCN)

I am going to complete the 1,000 miles experiment, then reinstall the OSC to stock configuration, along with the higher temp thermostat.

jb

OCS is an acronym for Oil Contaminant Separator.

without fully understanding it, and not being an engineer, it "seems" that open to the atmosphere has a downside of increased emissions, but a positive of: lower amounts (by a lot) of fuel in the oil, less viscosity breakdown and better for the engine. Why did you go back to stock with these readings?

FWIW, this experiment proves the benefit of paying for an oil analysis. We are using what is, for us, a new engine. CSC has been super conservative in their maintenance schedule. The question is 'what is reasonable' for oil changes and what kind of wear will be seeing in an engine that lives at 7K rpm or more. I saw a similar benefit from using a higher temp thermostat, less fuel in the oil and better viscosity. As far as I am concerned this was $25 well spent. If others can benefit from these results, that's OK with me. Now I'm ready to go 2K miles between oil changes and if the next analysis is good I'll be ready to extend that interval. Heck, Joe and his gang go 5K miles without a problem so why can't I?

IMO, having the crankcase vented directly to the atmosphere is the best for the engine.

In the October issue of MCN, the article on blowby gases says 60% of those gases are oil mist, which increases the carbon buildup inside the engine.

The TW200 has the crankcase gases go directly into the airbox.

Here's the result: (the photo was taken after I had scraped off about half of the carbon deposits)

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...psc8oio0tv.jpg


This leads me to believe that venting the crankcase directly back to the airbox is the worst for the engine.

I think using the OCS is a compromise, although if the fluids deposited in the OCS drain tube leak out on the ground, it's nearly the same as venting to the atmosphere.



I reinstalled the OCS to the stock configuration because I want to try the higher temperature thermostat, and see what difference that makes.

Depending on the results, I will probably change back to venting to the atmosphere (technically illegal is the US).

jb

After I quit messing about ;), I will go to 2,000 mile oil change intervals.

I believe Spud has posted that he does 2,000 mile oil changes....and valve clearance checks.....

....which reminds me, I'm due to check the valves again......:cry:

jb

As far as I am aware how you vent your crankcase will make no difference to the amount of fuel or water contaminant remaining present in your oil.

It is all to do with speed of evaporation. The hotter your oil the quicker the contaminants evaporate. The ideal situation being to boil it off almost as quickly as It has been deposited in your oil via the blow by gases.

Last winter my oil level was actually rising due to the oil temp being too cold to evaporate the contaminants off fast enough. The fact that I was doing mainly short commuter trips didn't help (1/2 hr each way). In spring and summer, the problem lessened and eventually stopped

Now I have a higher temp thermostat which in turn raises the oil temp the problem, so far, has not returned (5degs C this morning).

I agree that venting directly to the air box is a bad idea and venting to atmosphere is best. but for me, I'm happy with using the OCS compromise.

:)

I agree. I'd like to go to the higher temp tstat, as my rides are at least an hour or more in duration, in excessive heat, and my oil level still rises. So for the cooler months, it'll get worse. Problem I see is that the hotter tstat is not plug and play, I remember reading that some modification to the tstat housing is in order, correct?

The 90C thermostat from wattman is larger than OEM. It's pretty easy to enlarge the thermostat housing so that larger thermostat will fit.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Motorcycl...DSCF0531-M.jpg
the OEM housing has a ledge
https://photos.smugmug.com/Motorcycl...DSCF0534-M.jpg

remove some of the ledge any you can now install the wattman 'stat
https://photos.smugmug.com/Motorcycl...DSCF0535-M.jpg

Pyoungbl has done a great professional job with removing some of the ledge from his thermostat housing :tup:


But is possible to get the job done with some basic tools, I used an electric hand drill and a small grinder attachment. :)


If I remember correctly, your original thermostat will still fit and work after you have made the modification should you wish to change back.


A simple thing that you could try that's easy whilst you decide is to make some radiator covers.
:tup:
See here http://www.chinariders.net/showpost....&postcount=208

I'm using these as extra to my 85c thermostat with no problems :tup: