Oil consumption after CCV replacement

[02Pilot]

The steam cleaning procedure works. I've done it on countless engines over the years. I like to use an adapter with a small orifice to control the flow of water - you'd be amazed how fast that water will disappear into the engine. Also, adding a little Windex to the water acts as a reduce surface tension and should help to cover all surfaces evenly.

I'm not sure I understand the logical progression from presumed clogged rings and/or failing valve seals to a failing CCV. The problem with the CCV involves oil/water emulsion getting where it shouldn't and blocking the proper flow of gases - I don't see how increased blow-by would promote this. When you tried this mod, did you measure the crankcase vacuum by any chance?

More to the point, what is your oil consumption? This mod is really intended first and foremost to reduce oil consumption; keeping the CCV plumbing clear is a secondary, but useful, additional benefit.

[bmwdirtracer]

For carbon cleaning: You need a very small hose, (NOT the booster hose) to inject water into a hot intake tract, and then you need to severely restrict it, because letting the engine stall might just be hydrolock, and a bent connecting rod. Officially, I highly recommend AGAINST said procedure, unless conducted by someone who's prepared to say he understands the risks. And the owner accepts the risks of this regimen; not the mechanic.

Yes, I've done it, um, many dozens of times, including all my own BMWs. Rev that engine, hot, and then let a little water freeze the deposits away.Most of all, drive the car on a forty mile trip, or ten miles of hard driving, once a week. BMWs fare poorly when they sit on their ass. My M5 revs to near redline at least three or four times a week, through at least two consecutive gears, not including first. after reaching oil temp.

If you can possibly do that safely with the car, you will likely not see white in your oil system again. The M54 is a lovely engine, and exceptionally reliable, given proper beating, every week, to remind it of its purpose in life..

The specified crankcase vent vacuum is 4-6 inches of WATER ( a small vacuum equivalent to far less than 1 inch of mercury, the standard vacuum measurement.) It seems the vacuum increases ~50% with this mod; but if the oil consumption reduces so significantly, with no other apparent issue, this is the best DIY fix I've ever seen

[Jason5driver]

The steam cleaning procedure works. I've done it on countless engines over the years. I like to use an adapter with a small orifice to control the flow of water - you'd be amazed how fast that water will disappear into the engine. Also, adding a little Windex to the water acts as a reduce surface tension and should help to cover all surfaces evenly.

I'm not sure I understand the logical progression from presumed clogged rings and/or failing valve seals to a failing CCV. The problem with the CCV involves oil/water emulsion getting where it shouldn't and blocking the proper flow of gases - I don't see how increased blow-by would promote this. When you tried this mod, did you measure the crankcase vacuum by any chance?

More to the point, what is your oil consumption? This mod is really intended first and foremost to reduce oil consumption; keeping the CCV plumbing clear is a secondary, but useful, additional benefit.

Sorry, I wasn't clear.
With gunked up rings and valve stem seals, the engine will produce even more blow-by/ condensated oil gunk to be pushed through the CCV system.
So, it is kind of like a downward spiral.
The more the CCV system fails, contributes to the CCV system failing even more.
More blow-by = oxidized/baked on oil inside the Intake Manifold, CCV valve and hoses.
So with more blow-by, is there more condensation within the system, thus, freezing more readily...?

I did not have the vacuum measured after connecting the vacuum hose from the CCV valve to the back of the Intake Manifold.
I think the vacuum hose used was pretty small, something like 1/8" ID.

My car's oil consumption is pretty hard to figure, mostly because the oil pan gasket and rear main seal is leaking (thanks to a bad/failing CCV, again).
However, I do need to add approximately 1 quart right before changing the oil.
So, I do not know whether that 1 quart of oil is lost through the oil pan, or burned up through the intake, or the combination of both.

I am not knocking the vacuum hose to CCV method, what I am saying is that it becomes moot if the valve fails/ becomes blocked.
More vacuum is great, but, if it is pressurizing the system instead of exhausting out of the system at a higher pressure because of a bad CCV valve, that can't be a good thing.

[Jason5driver]

For carbon cleaning: You need a very small hose, (NOT the booster hose) to inject water into a hot intake tract, and then you need to severely restrict it, because letting the engine stall might just be hydrolock, and a bent connecting rod. Officially, I highly recommend AGAINST said procedure, unless conducted by someone who's prepared to say he understands the risks. And the owner accepts the risks of this regimen; not the mechanic.

Yes, I've done it, um, many dozens of times, including all my own BMWs. Rev that engine, hot, and then let a little water freeze the deposits away.Most of all, drive the car on a forty mile trip, or ten miles of hard driving, once a week. BMWs fare poorly when they sit on their ass. My M5 revs to near redline at least three or four times a week, through at least two consecutive gears, not including first. after reaching oil temp.

If you can possibly do that safely with the car, you will likely not see white in your oil system again. The M54 is a lovely engine, and exceptionally reliable, given proper beating, every week, to remind it of its purpose in life..

The specified crankcase vent vacuum is 4-6 inches of WATER ( a small vacuum equivalent to far less than 1 inch of mercury, the standard vacuum measurement.) It seems the vacuum increases ~50% with this mod; but if the oil consumption reduces so significantly, with no other apparent issue, this is the best DIY fix I've ever seen

How do you severely retrict water going into the vacuum hose?
I just found this video, with the guy spraying water into the intake elbow using a spray bottle...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nOoIuBu5xO4

[javamon]

All, (sorry for length of post)

I recently picked up a 6MT x5 with the m54b30. I noted some mayo under the filler cap, but the P(ost)PI I had completed didn't sound any alarms. I haven't had it long enough to monitor oil consumption, but the other very cold morning, I had a rough start that I think I could attribute fairly easily to the CCV being lightly frozen. However, the point of this post isn't to diagnose the CCV, however, it's to discuss a solution to the original thread (that merges with my desire to preventively replace or improve the CCV system).

I read through this thread and others re: catch cans, and ended up with the following draft solution:

1) Removal of the CCV from the system and capping of the dipstick drain port (removal by removing lines and leaving CCV in place)
2) Installation of a line from the valve cover to an air/oil separator using stock fitting
3) Installation of a line from the air/oil separator to a PCV
4) Installation of a line from the PCV to the stock air distribution piece with stock fitting

This was easily enough done in a couple hours work. I used a Moroso air/oil separator spec'd for the S52 ( Moroso Air/Oil Separator ). Given that I have an S52 in the fleet in the form of a track rat e36 m3, I figured worst case, I throw it on there if it doesn't work on the x5.

I used one of the recommended PCV valves (a Puralator 1050, IIRC), and yes, everything *worked.* But I noted a *lot* of crankcase vacuum. So I purchased a vacuum gauge (knowing I should only need a slack tube manometer as discussed here, but also knowing I was well into " Hg), and yeah, I was pulling 15" Hg at idle. It was certainly sealing the rings and would have stopped all oil consumption, but I was worried about long term effects and other lubrication issues (in addition to seals, which while not leaking presently, do have possibly 130k on them), so I searched for a better solution.

I ended up here - http://mewagner.com/?page_id=444. This is an adjustable PCV, with the option to increase flow through the valve as intake vacuum decreases (what they call a cruise circuit). Pretty slick engineering, actually. It's more targeted toward classic performance, but I emailed the guys who thought it may work for our application. So, I ordered one of these (pricey, I know, but it is what it is) and installed it.

After tuning, I got it down to 8" Hg at idle, moving to 10" Hg in the secondary stage (I did not rig up a vacuum gauge for monitoring while driving). Engine idles fine, and actually, everything does feel smoother and stronger than when I picked her up (could be placebo). But this crankcase vac is still a bit high in my book for a non-racing engine, so yesterday I consulted the mewagner guys to see if they had any ideas.

Noting their valve is usually used when a fresh source of air is present, they proposed a novel solution: keep my setup as is, but run a small line from behind the MAF but in front of the throttle body (read: from the rubber boot) to the valve cover (or anywhere in the crankcase - I would propose the dipstick filler port, to maximize circulation). This would give the crankcase a fresh source of (metered) air. Then I should be able to fine tune the flow and resulting crankcase vacuum with their adjustable valve.

Since it's behind the MAF, it will be metered air, which should eliminate some possible problems. I note that on it's minimum setting, their PCV valve will flow very little (the current 8" of vacuum takes a minute to build, as opposed to the OTS PCV valve which was very quickly up to vacuum) - which means I shouldn't be flowing too much air past the closed throttle at idle such that it's out of the range of the ICV to regulate.

I needed to replace my intake boot anyway, so I think I'm going to test this later this week/weekend.

Any thoughts on this possible solution? The potential issues I see are mainly related to idle - if I flow too much air through the PCV (bearing in mind it will now have a fresh source of air, via the crankcase, from in front of the TB but behind the MAF, thus possibly fully bypassing the ICV), the ICV won't be able to regulate idle properly and would probably throw a code and/or have a crap idle. I could also get a code on throttle because the throttle is flowing more air than it should given the position it's at (I'm assuming this is checked for, but maybe not, given the existence of big bore throttle bodies - as long as everything is metered...)

I would think that I would still get a slight bit of vacuum in the crankcase by virtue of this system, but it would be more on spec in the single digit inches of H2O mentioned earlier in this thread. Ring flutter, therefore, should also not be an issue (any more than it would be at stock). I think.

My alternative is to go with a new cold weather CCV setup, do the mod mentioned in this thread, and try to do a long drive every week or two (the function of the x5 in the fleet is a cold/rainy weather beater that unfortunately will be on short trip duty). I do like the idea of the catch can removing crap from the system, but not at the expense of my VCG and/or piston wrist pins/any other parts that rely on vapor mist for lubrication)...

[02Pilot]

I understand the appeal of trying to re-engineer the system, but I would suggest it's an unnecessary exercise. If you choose to go that route, I strongly encourage you to measure vacuum while driving - I saw measured vacuum double (gradually - one of the major advantages of the small diameter hose used in the mod) when in prolonged decel/engine braking conditions downhill. Obviously, I'm not bothered by a lot more vacuum than stock, but clearly there's a limit to what the seals will stand, which I do not wish to find. On the other side, I don't see any desirability to coming up with a new way to pull a tiny bit of vacuum in the crankcase; the lack of vacuum, combined with ring flutter, is what seems to cause the oil consumption problem in the first place.

Personally, I'd just replace the system, do the mod, and drive on.

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry, I wasn't clear.
With gunked up rings and valve stem seals, the engine will produce even more blow-by/ condensated oil gunk to be pushed through the CCV system.
So, it is kind of like a downward spiral.
The more the CCV system fails, contributes to the CCV system failing even more.
More blow-by = oxidized/baked on oil inside the Intake Manifold, CCV valve and hoses.
So with more blow-by, is there more condensation within the system, thus, freezing more readily...?

I did not have the vacuum measured after connecting the vacuum hose from the CCV valve to the back of the Intake Manifold.
I think the vacuum hose used was pretty small, something like 1/8" ID.

My car's oil consumption is pretty hard to figure, mostly because the oil pan gasket and rear main seal is leaking (thanks to a bad/failing CCV, again).
However, I do need to add approximately 1 quart right before changing the oil.
So, I do not know whether that 1 quart of oil is lost through the oil pan, or burned up through the intake, or the combination of both.

I am not knocking the vacuum hose to CCV method, what I am saying is that it becomes moot if the valve fails/ becomes blocked.
More vacuum is great, but, if it is pressurizing the system instead of exhausting out of the system at a higher pressure because of a bad CCV valve, that can't be a good thing.

I think there are a few questionable assumptions here. First, more blow-by does not necessarily mean more moisture. Atmospheric moisture condenses on the interior surfaces of the engine, clean or dirty. The CCV pulls oily fumes from the engine. Even in an engine with essentially zero blow-by you will get oil-water emulsion in the right conditions.

Second, the last paragraph suggests that vacuum can somehow suddenly become pressure. I do not understand how you envision this happening. The mod adds vacuum to the crankcase. If the CCV fails closed, the mod hose continues to ventilate the crankcase, dumping the vapors into the intake at the port on the back. If it fails open and the line from the valve cover is blocked, mod or not, the oil in the pan will be pulled up into the intake. The additional vacuum of the mod helps to keep the line from the valve cover clear (assuming the crankcase is fully sealed), mitigating the chance for catastrophic failure.

[Jason5driver]

Should I wait to use water to clean the carbon build up until my car's next oil change?

[02Pilot]

If you're concerned, sure, wait. Generally my practice has been: get the engine hot, do the water treatment, and then go drive nice and vigorously for half an hour or so to make sure any residual moisture is evaporated out of the crankcase. I never bothered waiting for a OCI to come up.

[bmwdirtracer]

javamon: Personally, I'd be willing to run a vacuum of 8" of water on the crankcase, or even 12" of water, which is double the standard. But the idea of putting 13-25 times the accepted vacuum on the system does not seem at all wise to me.

[02Pilot]

javamon: Personally, I'd be willing to run a vacuum of 8" of water on the crankcase, or even 12" of water, which is double the standard. But the idea of putting 13-25 times the accepted vacuum on the system does not seem at all wise to me.

It seemed a potential problem to me too, Chris, but even my mod will raise the crankcase vacuum to 5inHg at idle and 10inHg in prolonged decel. I haven't noticed any issues related to this, but obviously it is something to be aware of, especially if there is any uncertainty about the sealing of the crankcase.

[Museman]

Hi all - great thread with lots of useful info. Hopefully this contribution will spark some thought. I'm new to the forum, as I just bought a 530i a week ago. Had to sort out a few issues with electrical that are now fixed and the next thing I was wondering about was the mayo which led me to the CCV and this excellent thread. I've read the other threads besides this on catch cans and switching to PCV instead, but i agree with you that BMW didn't just deisgn it like this for nothing. So here's what I'm thinking - the fix here works but the OEM oil separator sucks anyway. Gunk gets sucked up above the sperator and clogs the valve and causes failure. The thing is just too short.

After looking at this thread - http://vsetrack.com/track_reports/20..._separator.htm
...my plan is;
1. replace the oem CCV and dipstick tube, but cutoff the separator portion right where the right angle meets the top and instead use the long cone separator shown in the link above. It is a BMW OEM part with a better design.
2. If I need to relocate it due to fit or just ease of servicibility, I just connect a hose from the remainder of the CCV (the valve) to this separator and put it wherever I want.
3. Route the reminder of hoses same as stock (but including vacuum hose mod in this thread), and connect the oil drain from the separator to the dipstick BUT (and this is key) put the same check valve cited in the link above (Purolator PV 1009) between the separator and the dipstick tube. That way NO hydrolock is ever possible.

[02Pilot]

I saw that post when I was researching this issue, and I even tried something similar; I still have one of those M5 separators lying around somewhere. Again, you can do it, but I think it's unnecessary. The simple addition of the small diameter hose to the existing system will essentially eliminate the oil-water emulsion build-up as long as the crankcase is properly sealed; if it isn't sealed, no setup is going to solve the oil consumption issue.

This thread is, after all, not a general CCV thread - it is focused specifically on the M54 oil consumption issue.

[Museman]

How's 1/2 a quart every 100 miles sound. That's my current consumption. So this thread is very interesting indeed! But I'm not getting any smoke or anything like that. The engine appears completely normal other than the consumption. It did have a leaky valve cover gasket and I just replaced that, so I am now re-measuring the consumption to see what effect the leaky VCG had. The CCV fix is next. I guess I need to do a smoke text before doing the CCV mod then, right?

[02Pilot]

Absolutely. You must have a properly sealed crankcase or you'll never get it to stop using oil (with a closed system, at least). FWIW, however, that sort of oil burning without smoke, at least on decel, seems virtually impossible - I was getting smoke with consumption 80% less than what you are seeing. Have you done a leakdown test, and if so, what did it show?

[Museman]

Haven't done a leakdown test yet. Guess that will be next before anything else. But it is a mystery. I changed the oil and just got it inspected 2 days ago and it passed emissions. So maybe I was losing a lot through the leaky valve cover gasket?

[02Pilot]

If the CCV system is original, just change it - it's overdue. Then have a smoke test and a leakdown test done. If any leaks in the crankcase seals are found, fix them. Report back here with all the results. If you're losing that much oil, it shouldn't be that hard to track down where it's going.

[EdButler]

Id just like to thank all who contributed to this thread - especially O2Pilot and BMWDirtRacer. I conducted the vacuum line mod on my 3.0i Z4. It was previously burning over 1l per 800 Miles. The tail pipes got quite dirty!

Since the mod, the dipstick has barely dropped 1/4L in 2000 miles. Tail pipes are clean as a whistle. It may be placebo, but the car also feels to have more partial-throttle torque! Ill make sure i get a vacuum reading soon to feed back.

Thanks again

[Jason5driver]

The steam cleaning procedure works. I've done it on countless engines over the years. I like to use an adapter with a small orifice to control the flow of water - you'd be amazed how fast that water will disappear into the engine. Also, adding a little Windex to the water acts as a reduce surface tension and should help to cover all surfaces evenly.

What adaptor do you use?
And, how is it used?
Are you hooking it up to a Coke bottle?
Thoughts about just using a spray bottle with water, and spraying into the intake elbow tube when the car is idling...?
What about using Seafoam?
Is spraying Seafoam inside the spark plug ports Ok, in order to help clean out the carbon build up?
I found this great You-Tube video from a shop that typically encounters low compression on M54's.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_Vo4fm0JDPY

According to the shop, the M54 typical gets gunked up piston rings, so the shop injects some A/C Delco Engine and Injector Cleaner into the spark plug ports, runs the engine to warm temp, and blows out the carbon.
Thoughts...?

[bmwdirtracer]

Seafoam, or Lubro-Moly Jectron, or Chevron Techron, is just fine. However, the idea is this: You get the engine to full operating temp. All the valves and deposits are good and hot. You then allow as much cold water or other fluid into the combustion chamber as the combustion cycle can stand. You must be STUDIOUSLY focused on preventing the stalling of the engine, via hydrolock!!!!!

Therefore, the usual restriction device, to me, is my fingernail squeezing the hose. Rev the engine, do not let it stall. Shock the hot metal, which will make it let go of the deposits.

As for my contribution to this thread, EdButler, I am a student here. I try to learn the information which O2pilot has caused to be created. Thank you for that thought, but my buddy O2pilot has taken me much beyond my training, and I'm trying hard to follow along as we venture into territoty 20+ times my ability to comprehend. But when it works, we must accept the results.

[02Pilot]

Thanks for the kind words, Chris, but really I'm just a tinkerer who can't leave well enough alone. I take mechanical conundrums like this personally, as if it's a contest between me and the machine. And I don't like to lose.

I'm just glad that we seem to have discovered something that works reasonably well and is easy enough to implement that others have been able to take advantage of it.

[Dave1027]

I found an easy way to do the mod.

You may know I did the mod a few weeks back but I did not like the hose I used but it was all the parts store had at the time. I redid the job today with heavy 3/16 inch hose (I used 28 inches of it) that fits properly.

The hard part of the job the first time was getting the hose onto the CCV nipple. I found out today that it's an easy task if you do it from under the car. All you have to do is jack up the front and remove the belly splash shield. Then you have easy access to the CCV nipple. It's as simple as reaching up and pushing the hose on. Takes a few seconds!

[z53dimon]

02Pilot, thank you very much for sharing and testing this nice idea!! My only concern is: is there any risk of oil being sucked from crankcase into intake manifold by the vacuum line? I understand that nobody faced it, but in theory that would be possible, right?
And also, would this mod be safe on high RPM, like 4.5 - 5 k on highways ?

Sorry for stupid questions, but would be really glad to get answers on it.

Thanks!

[02Pilot]

The only way oil gets pulled out of the pan into the intake, modded or not, is if all the other sources of air are blocked off. When the unmodded system fails in that way (and that is one of the failure modes) it's because the line from the valve cover to the CCV is completely obstructed; the same is true for the modded system. The difference is that, with the mod in place, that line is less likely to develop emulsion deposits, so if anything, with the mod there should be less chance of oil being pulled from the pan into the intake.

I have run my car up to the redline more times than I can count with the mod installed and haven't experienced any issues. At larger throttle openings the vacuum is lower, so it shouldn't present any problem.

[bmwdirtracer]

Last week, I had an E60, with an M54. Car was towed in. customer complaint was extremely heavy smoke on start up and acceleration, no power up hills. Customer stated he'd been told by 2 different "master" (sic) mechanics that he needed "a head gasket, and most likely, an engine".

I started the car, and revved it....and the thick smoke was oil, not coolant. So I hooked up my 5 foot slack-tube manometer to the valvecover. Started the engine; got just a little bit of smoke, and absolutely normal crankcase vacuum of ~5" of water.

Then I revved it, briefly....and the manometer nearly got sucked into the engine! 5 feet of water, vacuum, instantly!

I shut it down, ordered the entire CCV set-up; cold weather, 4 pipes and the valve.

And after the work, and a hard test drive, the car was perfect. And the customer was very happy, because he had been convinced he need an engine.

While this is only a bit related to the extremely in-depth analysis and modifications discussed on this thread, I wanted to share the story, because it might save someone a terribly expensive misdiagnosis.

I will add that IF the car should come back with oil consumption complaints, I will have no hesitation in adding the vacuum line which has been so very well documented on this thread.

[z53dimon]

Thank you very much guys, will do the same for my car