Would like some feedback from people that have had FP turbo failurs and if they they were running a VTA style catch can set up.

FP is claiming a catch can set up similar to the STM style (two -6 lines off the valve cover to a catch can and not recirced back to intake manifold vaccum) will cause premature turbo failure.

I have never heard this before and could not logically understand why this would happen.... Is the pressure needed in the crankcase to work oil through the turbo? I just dont understand this logic. I am a guy who just experience an FP turbo failure 400 miles in with an STM catch can set up. Just trying to understand FP's logic here.

 

I experienced the failure you had with stock pcv system, with less than 10 minutes of engine run time, and zero driving time. FP blamed my exhaust housing. IDK what to think. I know you and I talked breifly about this, so Im definitely game to see others results.

 

that is the dumbest thing i have ever heard. its a scapegoat, nothing more. what possible logic could he use to back up such an absurd statement?

 

x2

My car has 44,600 miles right now. Bought it brand new in April 3, 2007 . At around 8k miles I started VTA without a catch can. Around 32-35k miles I upgraded to HTA Green and still using the head as the oil pressure source. Oem turbo when removed had zero shaft play. HTA green just checked it 2 days ago when removing the intake pipe to switch back to SD setup and it had zero shaft play.

And if this matters anything, I use Diesel oil in my car (Amsoil hdd).

 

I totally agree, but it is what FP said. No joke. So I bring it to the Evo masses.

 

"well you see, with vta you defy bernoulli's principle and create a positive vortex, thereby making it impossible to create a hydrodynamic wedge, thus resulting in lubrication failure of the journal bearings."

 

Sig worthy right there. :-) lmao

 

Improper oiling causes turbo failures. Improper build up causes turbo failures. Foriegn object injestion causes turbo failures. Proper crank case ventilation does NOT cause turbo failures.

Porsche runs vacuum pumps on the crank cases in their newer turbo cars from the factory because it works. Turbo's get lubrication from the oiling system on the car, not from crank case oil blowing in the intake. If this was not the case, then every OEM that put a turbo on a car would have an oiler fogging the inlet. I gotta throw the bs flag on this one.

 

im guessing a seal went and they are claiming either excess crankcase pressure caused it, or a lack of vacuum in the crankcase wouldnt allow the oil to drain out of the chra and caused it.

 

Tons of people use VTA catch can setups...As far as I know this is the first time I've seen some post saying this is the reason FP said their turbo failed....interesting....

 

I was thinking the lack of vacuum as well...Too bad FP isn't a vendor on here anymore to explain this...

 

interesting how it only affects fp turbos.....

 

Damn, see this is why I wouldn't pay $1900 for a ball bearing upgrade. It's better to just call up Full Race and get a new EFR series turbo. OP I was trying to think of something logical but I think this is going to be your only option.

 

Both failures mentioned in this thread were the HTA 71 turbo, 211ratsbud and asubennett both had failures, and FP blaimed the failure of 211ratsbud's on a out of spec hotside, and of the OP's of a catch can setup? First it was, you gotta use special oil, then no you gotta buy our crazy expensive oil line that really only costs 15 bucks, now it's catch can's?

 

I was debating an fp turbo at one point. Glad I stuck with a 6266.