Racor CCV-3550-FRD-2

At minimum over a decade on the engine. Beyond that, memory is fuzzy.

As stated, I picked it up well over a decade ago. But a minute ago search of CCV-3550-FRD-2 produced an example retailer that had a decent photo of the kit components:




On top of the valve cover, where the dog house sits.



About every third oil change, so about every 10K.

@AuF250 already addressed this.

As an aside, I was in periodic communication with several engineers at Racor in Modesto California when this CCV filter application was being developed for the 7.3L.. so this would have been about 20 years ago. Notice that the 3550-FRD-2 has "2" appended at the end. The first version didn't work out. Racor announced it, but it was never released. It was this delay (which ended up being a year and a half) that inspired my interactions with Racor.

When the 7.3L was in current production and the hottest, highest selling diesel light and medium duty truck engine in the western hemisphere, Racor had developed a portfolio of both OEM and aftermarket filtration products for it, so Racor was working with Ford and International. As the engineer who designed the open and closure valve cover bracket explained to me, some folks at Ford insisted that the entire CCV filter system had to be self contained on top of the valve cover. Otherwise, the more appropriately sized CCV-4500 would have been the obvious choice. But there was no place to properly mount the 4500 can in the Super Duty engine bay, while maintaining optimal height above sump level. So the packaging constraints were a real challenge.

The solution was to repurpose the littlest CCV-3500 filter developed for small displacement VW TDI four bangers, because it would fit on top of the valve cover and not get bashed under the cowl of the Super Duty "cab forward" design. The trick was to design a trapped turbo heat tolerant housing for it of thermally stable material, that could incorporate a way to change the filter with no head room above the filter. The problem was, the filter surface area was inadequate for the cfm of the engine. And that was a problem because of soot loading. If there were no contaminants in the oil, then even if the filter saturated to the point of bypass, when the engine was shut off, the oil would drain back down again, and the filter would be ready to breath on the next run cycle.

But diesel combustion doesn't make it that easy. Soot billows inside the engine, and as can be seen in the photos above, loads the filters. In the words of the Racor engineers I had literally hour long conversations with about this product... soot is a principle factor in sizing CCV filters to cfm flow rates of diesel engines. Operation windows, or cycle length to shut down and drain back time, are another primary concern, which is why you will see "Intermittant Duty" and "Continuous Duty" filter media options in Racor's 4500 and above series of CCV filter systems. A stationary agricultural or utility pump running 24/7 has no drain back time. An over the road semi with a partner driving team has less drain back time than a consumer commuter pickup.

So even while the intermittant operation of consumer driven personal pickups can justify a smaller filter size due to plenty of opportunities for drain back, and even though the bypass feature in the CCV-3550-FRD valve cover housing can help avoid seal leaks elsewhere when the filter reaches full saturation... the challenge that remains a challenge is soot. When the filter media loads with soot, the CCV housing will go into immediate bypass, meaning no filtration, and more restriction than not having the system at all. Just because atomized soot cannot be readily seen with the naked eye, doesn't mean they are not in the crankcase vapors, dropping out of the aerosol when encountering the filter media, and then bonding with each other into a coagulated block chain of flow stopping goo until restriction.

How is paint sprayed? How are ****** of pigment in paint delivered? How is a bed Line-X'd? How is rubberized undercoating applied? How is sand blasted? How come there is grit on my face from walking along the sea shore on a windy day?

Yes. Regularly removing soot, water condensation, and other combustion contaminants from the oil would absolutely be a benefit. As long as the oil was still changed regularly, since oil in a HEUI engine must also serve as a hydraulic fluid under very high pressures, without foam that would collapse under pressure, and make for a less effective multiplicative force inside the injector.

I don't. I've threatened to, but didn't like some aspect or another about each of the commercial offerings I've seen over the last 20 years, so I just keep changing full synthetic oil every 3,500 miles with an FL1995 until I get around to building my own oil bypass filtration kit. And who has time to do that, when I only drive it 3,500 miles per year. I put the CCV filter on to reduce back fouling the AIS air filter. It works as expected.

Eggsactly. And I don't bother with UOA. At $20-$30 per test, might as well just change the oil, that comes with a fresh batch of anti foaming and other additives to maintain the hydraulic power performance of the HEUI injectors.

This is true. For anyone with chips, salsa, and big mozzarella sticks creating higher cylinder pressures, producing higher than stock horsepower... the filter I am using is not for you.

Of course. Donaldson, Racor, the EPA, the ARB, Cummins, International, Ford, and just about every diesel engine manufacturer, and diesel after treatment manufacturer, as well as universities and labs all over the world, have thoroughly investigated crankcase pressure differentials with CCV filtration and recirculation systems.

A good oil bypass filtration system would reduce the soot carried by the oil.

More or less yes. Not quite steel wool, per se (as that would separate into strands) but a steel pot scrubber type of scrunchy thing.

 

With all due respect, it was conjectured. There wasn't, at least I didn't see it, any quantification about how the contents of the fumes or in what concentration or anything we could use to say "If it goes beyond this, we have to worry.". If anything, it was a zero tolerance of soot statement.

While that sort of statement is very alarming, it doesn't tell me anything really. How much is really in the going through the CCV tube? How much till it is not acceptable? Again, zero tolerance seems to be the answer. In fantasy land, no worries. But in real life, shouldn't we know when we have to worry and when we can let it go?

First 2 questions, under high pressure. As to question 3, would that kill you and at what concentration or would you advocate living in a bubble?

Agreed. However, at some point, we reach the point of diminishing returns.

If you are doing that every oil change, I would agree. That said, I have done it to ascertain how far I can stretch the oil change. Using T4 15W40 Rotella gives you about an $80 oil change. My few UOAs I did to establish a baseline allowed me to double the OCI. By the time you figure in my time spent to change the oil, clean up and dispose, finding out the T6 oil changes, which cost more but allow me to do less work actually saves me. Even if it was a push, why do I want to do more work?

OK. So does the research tell you how much is beyond tolerable and other information we can use to make the decision?

 

Go have a read of the information Parker published on Crankcase Ventilation.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...qNvsf2x3lSKRm1

 

Well, that is one piece of information I didn't have. [/QUOTE]• Soot Particles; 0.3 to 0.5 µm[QUOTE]. Thanks.

The other part I am curious about is while they have other stuff in the CCV, Soot is the concern, right? What I am interested to know is how much soot are we talking about. At what level does it become a problem and what is our average level so we know whether to do something (best would be vent to atmosphere) or just leave it as "Well, nothing's perfect.".

One of my favorite reports is the one from BOSCH. On Pages 10 and 11, you can see how much wear occurs with untreated fuel, how much is target, what it takes to get there and thus calculate how much it is worth to put in the additives based on how much it will wear if you don't. In my calculation, I figured that the increased wear cost was LESS than the cost of the additive so I could take a pass on the additive. OTOH, if it extra wear costs $2000 and the additive, over that lifespan costs $200, the path is clear.

THAT is what I am looking for as far as CCV. We know soot is bad. We don't know how much is being pumped out so it is hard to say what to do next.

 

The amount of blow-by on 7.3’s varies from engine to engine. From barely a mist under certain conditions to a mosquito fogger.

I think youd have to try to quantity ‘your’ engine to make a decision.

 

I would say that I have more than "barely a mist" and less than a "mosquito fogger". It does have a constant flow of CCV, that much is certain. How bad that is for the motor would be what I definitely do not know. If it is a little, it is probably easier to route back. If it is a lot issue, easier to vent to atmosphere instead of hoping to clean much of it and cycle some back.

 

I think ill just plug mine

 

This one looks the same except for the custom hose https://www.ebay.com/itm/CCV3550-RAC...75.c1#viTabs_0

 

Hope you arent being serious?

 

not at all
trying to inject some hunor in this overly serious discussion

 

How about injecting some oil aerosol into the discussion next time, eh?

With microns of soot in suspension.

 

All of this conversation about blow by rates. There is a tool to measure it, and the spec is 4" of water.
ETA: Brake cleaner on IC pipes and boots is good, follow it up by an addition of hair spray and it makes them hold better.

 

CCV hood stack

"What's that coming out of your engine bay?" "oh, nothing"

 

Interesting but I guess I don't see the practical point on a pre-emission motor where untreated exhaust comes roaring out of tailpipe already anyway. Worrying about the crankcase blow by is like re-arranging the deck furniture on the Titanic. The oily residue inside the intake tract is really the nuisance issue to the individual owner.

 

I disagree with that Titanic reference. The purpose of the CCV trap is not for emissions so whether it is pre or post emissions doesn't matter for this purpose. The purpose is 3 fold.

1. It prevents the oil from hurting the rubber boots
2. It prevents the oil from causing the boots to slip.
3. It removes some of the soot in the oil fumes.

As someone pointed out, the material is different and resistant to the oil. As also said, if you clean the mating surface well, it should not be a problem. That negates 1 and 2. As to 3, I think we can all agree that soot isn't a good thing to have in the engine. Currently, I don't see a standard that informs us on how much is tolerable or how much is coming out or even how much will be removed. So the only remaining question is how much soot is going in, coming out and how much we can live with. What we don't have is a way to see what the point of diminishing returns will be. That leaves us with 3 choices.

1. Stock where you don't do anything
2. Vent to the atmosphere where you will get drips or vent to the exhaust
3. Attach one of the filters that we have no idea how to calculate the worth other than it is trying for a "Zero Tolerance" on soot.