interesting...I wonder how many problems were associated with it being in the upside down setting? That would/could account for increased carbon or soot/sludge buildup.

Agreed. To me, my guess is that this entire contraption (OCS flipped either way, hoses, clear drain tube, etc...) is due to EPA and the need to catch and burn any and all HC's.

They want what little vapor that comes out of there to be run back through the motor, via intake. That would be a noble concept if it actually worked as such. Instead, they had to attach a trap to catch the heavier stuff (OCS thingy).....just so the rider can dump it into the soil instead of letting a very minor amount of vapor escape into the atmosphere.

So, my choice was do I want to play the "dump the concentrated pollutants while no one's looking" game, or do I want to avoid running that vapor across any and all sensors that effect the run-ability of the bike because of the EFI?

I may end up putting a small filter on the end but again, that would just create a place for the vapor to condense and drip.

Just thoughts.........

Heres a thought for you engineers.... maybe it's a question. We've heard about the engine failures, and speculation it could be caused in part by carbon buildup. The bikes come with a hotter plug than other engines of this nature, and the same nc250 engine used in other applications. I refuse to believe it is due to the fuel. IF the engine was not designed with the OCS in mind, and it was an add-on for the US and or Euro market, maybe it doesn't play well with the overall engine and is introducing carbon, oil sludge mist to the intake, which cannot be burnt off, due to lower temps, and also introducing fuel to the oil, creating cylinder and bearing washing, etc, all leading to failure. In this case, it would be logical to remove it. Do the Chinese versions have it?

I'm no engineer, nor do I play one on TV, but I do have a tendency to ponder far too much. I'm going to keep on pondering this one too. Like you mentioned, I can't help but think it's an add-on for our market.

The odd thing is the blue RX3 I just picked up for Mrs 2LZ has 411 miles on it and not a spec of anything, nor discoloration in the clear tube and her OCS is in the "unofficial" position from the factory. Weird.

I'm going to keep mine open to vent for now and keep hers the way it is and see what happens and how the oil changes smell.

In order to be certified by the EPA, motor vehicles must have a "closed" fuel system.....no venting to the atmosphere, or it can't be sold in the US or EU.

In two weeks, 2017, the Euro 4 standards will go into effect in the EU that will have much more stringent emissions standards......and require ABS brakes.

This affects all new bikes. Since the RX3 has already passed the Euro 3 standards, it should be OK, at least for another year.

The RX 4 will have to meet the Euro 4 standards or it cannot be sold in the EU.

No one knows whether or not the EPA will adopt Euro 4 standards in the US.

jb

So the the pic of the OCS that jbfla has posted is the "official" position.
My bike came in the unofficial position and I flipped it after some discussion by folks here
And at CSC when it was under discussion a while back.

I agree with the closed system, but it's not a euro bike, its a chinese bike. I was wondering if it was an add on to achieve emission compliance. If it was not designed with and for the engine, it could have a negative outcome...i.e., sludge, carbon etc.

AD,

The biggest negative outcome (and the worst for the engine) is to directly vent the crankcase gases back into the engine.

I have been spending a considerable amount of time reading about oil catch cans and air/fuel separators.

They are beneficial for the performance and longevity of an engines.

Many race cars are adding them.

The OCS on the RX 3 is an attempt to keep the most harmful byproducts of combustion and oil mist out of the engine.

If the fluids that collect in the OCS collection tube were fed back into the airbox, the airbox and the rest of the engine internals would experience a build up that would eventually effect the engine's performance.

The fluids would also affect the fuel/air mixture.

The problem, IMO, is as 2LZ mentioned, what do you do with the fluid in the collection tube?

Dumping it on the ground, or letting it drip, is nearly as environmentally unfriendly as venting the crankcase directly to the atmosphere.

As for the RX3 not being a Euro bike, it will have to be, if it is to be sold in the EU.

The RX 3 is already a "world" bike. If it wants to continue to be, it will need to meet the world standards.

jb

Here's the latest oil analysis:

This is with the 90C (194F) thermostat and the OSC canister in the stock configuration.


http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...psr9cgmjay.jpg

The fuel in the oil is less than 0.5%

That is practically none.

If you look across that line on the chart, you can see the percentages from the previous 5 oil analyses.

jb

Great! I also see that the viscosity has improved as well as the flash point. As far as I am concerned, the 90C thermostat is a major improvement and well worth both the time and money. I'll be sending off a sample soon, just need decent weather to actually put miles on the bike.

Peter Y.

Looking good.
I notice the flash point and viscosity have also increased.

Supplement: notes that Peter is of like mind. Must be something in military mind set

Solid results, JBFL! Looks like the 90 degree thermostat might be the ticket!

Yes, I hope so.

But this is far from conclusive; too many variables, not enough samples, no "control" vehicles.....

I'll have one or two more oil analyses to see if the results hold up.

jb

I have hesitated posting about this air/oil separator catch can for several reasons:

There are less expensive ways to accomplish the same thing. You can purchase 3 or 4 stock OCS' for the price of the the replacement one.

The stock OCS functions exactly the same.

Where I have it mounted is subject to damage. It was the easiest place to mount it and I am still exploring alternate mounting positions.

I haven't finished exploring other catch can options.

However, I am convinced that some type of catch can, the stock RX3 OCS or a replacement, is beneficial for the health of your engine.

This is the Rutland Motors Oil Catch Tank from the UK

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...ps5dzmgab4.jpg

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



It is ~25 UK pounds. With shipping, and depending on the exchange rate at the time, is about $55 US.

The stock OCS from CSC is $13 US:

http://www.cscmotorcycles.com/Oil-ai...-p/z25-107.htm

You can read about the catch can Here:

http://oilcatchtank.com/

And order one here:

http://oilcatchtank.bigcartel.com/

Before you rush to buy one, continue reading, then make your own decision.

The catch can is mounted in the same location as the stock OCS:

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


Since it protrudes in front of the frame, it is subject to damage from road debris, especially in off road riding.


Here is another installed photo:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...pspra8p04g.jpg


The other necessary task is to close the hole in the air box. I used a 1/2" rubber cap, purchased at a local auto parts store, fastened with a hose clamp.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...ps1qekba6j.jpg

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


The first photo of the mounted catch can shows the amount of fluid collected after about 150 miles.

IMO, sending that amount of oil (60% +) and combustion by products back into the engine is not beneficial for the engine.

In previous posts I have mentioned the consequences of doing so.

Here is the stock OCS in a configuration that accomplishes exactly the same thing.....and it is nearly free. The only cost would be for the 1/2" rubber cap and hose clamp for closing up the air box.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...psrev0vgmh.jpg


You have to decide how you feel about releasing the filtered gases into the atmosphere, and what to do with the liquid collected in the catch can.

And as mentioned in earlier posts, altering the stock emissions configuration is illegal.

I make no recommendations.

There may be less expensive options to the Rutland Catch Tank, besides the stock OCS, that I have not finished experimenting with.

jb

Smart ...like the way you say for experimentation only...;)

Great write-up jb. Thanks a ton!

Back to a much more simple and dated issue in this whole OCS thing....in the "official" position, the bent hose off the motor dang near kinks and I'm afraid that it will really stifle the vapor flow...which I would think may ADD to the fuel in the oil problem by creating a resistance in the escaping gases.

I've left Mrs. 2LZ in the "unofficial" position (factory set) and the bent hose is much more natural in it's shape. I think may leave it like that, plug the air box and then run the "filtered gases" out the backside.

Revisiting this whole thing.....I have 12k miles on my bike and have no more issues as I flipped it as shown in JB's pic(nice write-up)
And installed a fuel shut off valve barely cracked open to not allow buildup in
Tube.

My only issue as stated by previous poster is the "S" shaped crankcase tube kink
Which has a pin hole in it from crankcase pressure making a hard turn at that junction.

So I have ordered a new "S" crankcase tube but when I install it I am going to mount somehow to eliminate the kink.

I no longer have mystery oil level rising going on with suspected fuel as I had earlier experienced when my engine was young.

Original and version 2.0

This thread never gets old! I'm currently venting back n2 the airbox with no noticeable issues....but this sure makes you think.... Bouncing these ideas around makes us all better owners, makes for enjoyable reading and banter and is why this site is the best forum for us.....well done to all:tup: