'En Valve'

[enrique]

Hello,
While reading a copy of the 'Old Cars' magazine I came upon a
product called the 'En Valve'. It's a replacement PCV valve that
the manufacturer claims is suppose to keep the engine cleaner.
I went ahead and purchased one and put it in my truck. '55 with
a 350cid. It seems to be working all right. I just wanted to know
if anybody else has heard of this product and have they ever inst-
alled one on their vehicle and what was their opinion of it?
The manufacturer has a web site: www.envalve.com
Thank you for your thoughts
Henry

 

[nutlock]

i dont man ..... personally i'd never pay 60 bucks for a pcv valve ...no matter what it claims to do ...but i also don't believe in fuel and oil additives.....

anyone else have an opinion on the subject

 

[jers69c20]

You mean the bouy's at Chevron are fibbing about TECHRON? Perish the thought. I agree additive addicts are the same megavitamin gobblin maniac's.

 

[lead65sled]

Some things that concern me about this product:

* The theory is somewhat flawed. An engine already has a slight vacuum in its crankcase from the PCV system. Envavle proposes to add a vacuum to a system that already has one; the best you can realistically achieve is to increase that vacuum.

* The fundamental claim is inaccurate. Envalve does not propose to eliminate blow-by, but merely to suck out the gases after blow-by has already occurred. You should understand the difference if the product works as well as they say.

* The "math" doesn't add up. In the OEM system, the gases are sucked back into the intake and burned. With the En-Valve, it is suggested that it will suck out even MORE gases, and continue to burn them through the intake system. There is no fundamental change in design; it merely suggests better efficiency in removing the gases. If the gases are still getting burned -- indeed, more of them -- then how do emissions improve?

* The statistics are of questionable worth. There are no reference links to primary sources, no scans of emissions reports, no copies of government studies. If all of this information will support the product, then why is it not readily available? Also, many of the statistsics and test results on the website are irrelevant to the question of emissions testing.

* There is not one single photo of the product anywhere on the site. A little odd.

* Cars often fail emissions tests due to a bad PCV valve, and replacing the $3 valve will allow the car to pass the test. There is not one study on the website showing the test results from a clogged PCV valve vs. a new one vs. the En-Valve in back-to-back testing. This would be a ridiculously easy test to conduct and it would do an excellent job in clearly illustrating the benefit of the product. So why does it not appear?

All in all we'll have to treat this product with a healthy dose of skepticism. Since it performs essentially the same job as a PCV valve, whether with greater efficiency or not, I don't see how it could cause any real harm. However, I am also skeptical that you'd ever see a benefit from it and How many stock PCV units can you buy for the 40 - 60 buck price tag.

All in all I'm really curious to know if logic applies to this product or is it magically providing benefit.

 

[DrMaserati]

>Some things that concern me about this product:
>
>* The theory is somewhat flawed. >

>* The fundamental claim is inaccurate. >

>* The "math" doesn't add up. >

>* The statistics are of questionable worth. >

>* There is not one single photo of the product anywhere on
>the site. A little odd.
>
There is not one study on the website showing the test
>results from a clogged PCV valve vs. a new one vs. the
>En-Valve in back-to-back testing. This would be a
>ridiculously easy test to conduct and it would do an
>excellent job in clearly illustrating the benefit of the
>product. So why does it not appear?
>
>All in all we'll have to treat this product with a healthy
>dose of skepticism.
>
>All in all I'm really curious to know if logic applies to
>this product or is it magically providing benefit.


How refreshing. A voice of reason. Thank you. But there is one very important aspect you forgot to emphasize.

The ONLY people you hear saying all these wonderful things about the product are those selling it. That alone says volumes.

JP

 

[pilgrim]

I saw the En-Valve advertised on the web while researching pcv valves about 5 years ago. One of my vehicles had always seemed to be overpowering the pcv valve with oil vapors...even since it was new.....thus the valve cover was always wet with a little oil. In fact the entire engine stayed damp, as if pressure was building in the crankcase. If I used oil thicker than 10w40, a puddle would form in the air cleaner. On a later model of that vehicle GM used a different pcv valve which allowed more flow & helped correct the problem. But... After talking with my local mechanic, (mechanic said some import vehicles come from the factory running full intake manifold vacuum on the crankcase...with no pcv valve). I purchased 2 of the en-valves...one for each of my vehicles, & installed them. They did at least help with oil leaks & blow-by. For the en-valve to function as designed you have to plug the hose to the breather filter, so the envalve can establish & maintain a vacuum in the crankcase. As I recall it seeks to maintain a 6" vacuum on the crankcase. If you've got major oil leaks or a bad valve cover or dipstick gasket it may not be able to establish the correct vacuum. It will also cause air (& dust) to leak in where oil used to leak out. I have no clue how it effected emissions at the tailpipe. But....it's now 5 years later & so far so good. For what's it's worth....I like the en-valve & the concept, though I'm an amateur & may not be aware of potential downsides.

update 1/25/18 - have had 3 vehicles running en-valves for about 10 years now.....no problems so far....noticeably less oil leakage from upper crankcase areas than when running PCV valves. Looking to replace a couple of the en-valves which are beginning to age.

 

[Jeff1984]

I saw the En-Valve advertised on the web while researching pcv valves about 5 years ago. One of my vehicles had always seemed to be overpowering the pcv valve with oil vapors...even since it was new.....thus the valve cover was always wet with a little oil. In fact the entire engine stayed damp, as if pressure was building in the crankcase. If I used oil thicker than 10w40, a puddle would form in the air cleaner. On a later model of that vehicle GM used a different pcv valve which allowed more flow & helped correct the problem. But... After talking with my local mechanic, (mechanic said some import vehicles come from the factory running full intake manifold vacuum on the crankcase...with no pcv valve). I purchased 2 of the en-valves...one for each of my vehicles, & installed them. They did at least help with oil leaks & blow-by. For the en-valve to function as designed you have to plug the hose to the breather filter, so the envalve can establish & maintain a vacuum in the crankcase. As I recall it seeks to maintain a 6" vacuum on the crankcase. If you've got major oil leaks or a bad valve cover or dipstick gasket it may not be able to establish the correct vacuum. It will also cause air (& dust) to leak in where oil used to leak out. I have no clue how it effected emissions at the tailpipe. But....it's now 5 years later & so far so good. For what's it's worth....I like the en-valve & the concept, though I'm an amateur & may not be aware of potential downsides.

update 1/25/18 - have had 3 vehicles running en-valves for about 10 years now.....no problems so far....noticeably less oil leakage from upper crankcase areas than when running PCV valves. Looking to replace a couple of the en-valves which are beginning to age.

This was My Grandfather's valve. Emil Newarski. It actually worked great. It doesn't make much sense. When installed if you put your finger over the dipstick hole your finger gets sucked to it. It substantially increased. He passed away about 6 years ago. I have some left. Probably hold on to them.

 

[Jeff1984]

This was My Grandfather's valve. Emil Newarski. It actually worked great. It doesn't make much sense. When installed if you put your finger over the dipstick hole your finger gets sucked to it. It substantially increased. He passed away about 6 years ago. I have some left. Probably hold on to them.