Originally Posted by speakerfritz

we are talking about two different things…let me clarify

a. Moving the S&s return filter to the basis. This would give me room for the ccv filter in the engine bay. I don’t think there is a temp cost penalty since the return filter routes hot fuel. Any concerns for static freezing of the fuel in the filter would not be any different from static freezing in the engine bay.

b. The racor ccv filter. Overkill pointed out that racor recommends keeping the filter case warm or hot. I think this means when you shut the engine down…a warm or hot filter case would let the goop run down to the drain better. The racor discussion is suggesting that if the case of the filter quickly cools…goop accumulates on the inside walls of the filter housing. I don’t know why this goop wouldn’t slide down to the drain during the next engine run but Racor is so concerned about it that they sell a filter heater. So my thought was if I put the filter in the engine bay at the firewall …it would stay hotter longer than if I frame mounted it.

now…I still don’t know if I am going to return the ccv to the intake or keep it free air. Engine seems to run better with the free air model.

so right now…if I return to intake I plan to use the racor filter element. If I leave it free air I’m going to replace the favor filter with a roll of perforated sheet metal with 1mm holes.

i don’t think I care about racors filter case concerns if I don’t use their filter.


as a side note…I have noticed linear back pressure with the s&S return filter meaning the lift pump pressure seems to climb which I think is due to the s&s return filter backing up. Which is probally why s&s went to a higher micron return filter and spe created their sensor solution…having said that…I plan to use a multi port manifold for the return filter and put a sensor on it. My long term vision is to put a large 2 micron return filter with a multiport manifold and have a sensor as well as having my lift pump return terminate on the manifold. I am also thinking about adding a return path using a filler neck hose with a fitting and moving the manifold close to there with everything that needs a return line having their own return line to the manifold instead of the current arrangement in which s&s , the lift pump people, etc, wants to t fitting the existing return line at the engine bay .


just some random thoughts and I hope it answers your question.

Originally Posted by Overkill2

https://ssdiesel.com/new-product-pre...p4-bypass-kit/

It states in there that Parker Racor couldn't keep up with S&S's demand for their filters.

Originally Posted by speakerfritz

I have a few on the shelf and have not trouble ordering them.

But…I’m thinking of moving to a larger capacity filter.

Originally Posted by speakerfritz

So do you have a 2011 thru 2016

or 2017 and later

different filter architecture's

Originally Posted by speakerfritz

Drain is pointless on the pressure side of a pump.

you will only get water in a water filter if the filter is on the suction side.

Originally Posted by speakerfritz

Let me know if you ever get water in a water filter on the pressure side.

Originally Posted by speakerfritz

a. Moving the S&s return filter to the basis. This would give me room for the ccv filter in the engine bay. I don’t think there is a temp cost penalty since the return filter routes hot fuel. Any concerns for static freezing of the fuel in the filter would not be any different from static freezing in the engine bay.
.

Originally Posted by speakerfritz

Drain is pointless on the pressure side of a pump.

you will only get water in a water filter if the filter is on the suction side.

Originally Posted by Overkill2

So Fritz, I'm thinking of going in a new direction...

I've been looking at SBE's external catch can and especially their CCV recirculating box...

I sent them an email asking if the external catch can is two way flow, in and out as it has a second threaded port on the top with a allen head plug on it, but all I got was to consider their CCV box and that they don't recommend using other systems parts, Mishi's adapters for the valve cover, with their can. Plus I do not think that Chance's wife really knew what I meant... To satisfy my own curiousity, I will call and talk to someone to see if the can be used as flow in and back out can like my Mishimoto oil catch can.

But I do really like their CCV box because the design looks solid and functional, and made to take apart and clean... while I like the Mishi catch can, it's a PITA to drain a lot in the winter and it's smaller than the SBE can. If I went with the larger SBE can, if it's even an option, I'd still have to get under the truck to drain in the winter. While both are not cheap, I'm leaning towards the CCV box... by itself and no Mishi catch can anymore.

Originally Posted by speakerfritz

the only thing I don’t like about the spe box is that it returns fluids back to the sump….so condensed unburnt fuel vapors roll back into your oil pan….this is what I am trying to get away from as that is exactly what the stock setup does.

I need 100% of what is evacuated out of the ccv not to go back into my sump.

big fuel dilution problem with us metro drivers

Originally Posted by speakerfritz

the only thing I don’t like about the spe box is that it returns fluids back to the sump….so condensed unburnt fuel vapors roll back into your oil pan….this is what I am trying to get away from as that is exactly what the stock setup does.

I need 100% of what is evacuated out of the ccv not to go back into my sump.

big fuel dilution problem with us metro drivers