DIY Solution to M54-M52TU CCV problems
 

Few days ago the CCV on my 3.0 X5 froze up and started to consume oil and cause engine lean codes-misfires, I have read that these CCV's love to fill with condensation sludge in the winter time, and even though I made sure to never make 5 minute short trips mine still managed to freeze up.
So while looking for a solution to this problem I stumbled upon this thread here : http://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/sh...-in-10-mins!!!

It looked like a good cheap solution to a very common problem. All credit goes to member S14B23 I followed his instructions and took some pictures along the way.

Since replacing my CCV with a traditional PCV all of my problems disappeared, no more engine lean codes and a silky smooth idle, and not to mention no more worrying about my CCV freezing and hydrolocking my engine with oil from the dipstick tube.

I will keep everyone posted as to how this is holding up in the upcoming months, but as of now I am very happy with the results. This took approximately two hours, but I was also replacing my Oil stand gasket while I was in there. I know I performed this on my X5, but this will be 99% identical to E39's, E46's, E53's and anything else with an M54-M52TU engine.

Parts used were bought at Autozone,
PCV valve item # PCV1124DL $2.99
1 Foot of 3/4 internal diameter Hose $1.50
1 Foot of 3/8 internal diameter Hose $1.50
1 box of assorted plastic plugs $4.99
4 various sizes of metal band clamps $1.00

Supplies:
http://i.imgur.com/EiIAaj6.jpg


Next we begin by removing the plastic engine cover and removing the 4 Torx bolts marked by the red dots on the air distribution piece.
http://i.imgur.com/dH9ELPd.jpg


After the bolts are removed spray some penetrating oil onto the 6 little plastic tubes that go into the intake manifold, I used a pry bar to gently pry each plastic tube upward without damaging anything. Keep in mind that the air distribution piece is still connected at the Green dots, after you pry everything up, disconnect the clip near the green dots, keep the yellow dot clip attached because that will lift with the entire assembly, and cut the tube with a razor where the red dots are, be careful not to cut yourself.
http://i.imgur.com/UpUnm4c.jpg



When everything is cut and disconnected, you can lift the entire air distribution assembly up along with the attached hose that we need.
http://i.imgur.com/Hz7U4fp.jpg


Don't worry about these two connections between the intake runners, we will disconnect all of the CCV vacuum lines so these will be useless, cut them off if you like, I just left mine there.
http://i.imgur.com/w4dIsQI.jpg



Now with this piece removed, carefully take off some of the insulation from the vacuum tube. About an inch should do.
http://i.imgur.com/pzjVtLT.jpg



I wrapped some electric tape around the tip to create a tighter fit into the 3/8 ID Hose.
http://i.imgur.com/w9FlsFc.jpg



Then attach the 3/8 ID hose onto the tip of the vacuum tube and tighten with a band clap.
http://i.imgur.com/0dbCfwv.jpg


After that you have to plug the port on the opposite end of the air distribution piece, I found a red plastic cap that fit in very tight.
http://i.imgur.com/JPzNSa9.jpg


Wrapped the plastic cap with electric tape to make sure it doesn't fall out later.
http://i.imgur.com/8Okvpl7.jpg


Now it's time to cut the other connection off, You can cut it anywhere, I just chose to go lower cause I had the oil filter stand off, remember that the OEM CCV is now useless and we don't need the other end of that plastic pipe, I left mine where it was without plugging anything.
http://i.imgur.com/kcrrBzK.jpg



When everything is cut, strip all the plastic tubing off of the connector and insert it into the 3/4 ID hose, tighten with a band clamp.
http://i.imgur.com/NAI3pcL.jpg



Then cut the 3/4 ID hose as short as you can, then fit the PCV valve into the hose and tighten with a clamp.
http://i.imgur.com/BG77JDf.jpg



Now clean all 6 of the air distribution port holes on the intake manifold I used brake cleaner and a rag, I also applied a little grease to make re-installing it easier.
Like I said earlier, don't worry about those 2 connectors between the first and second yellow dots, they will no longer have any vacuum.
http://i.imgur.com/MvCAgLw.jpg



Now line up the Air distribution piece up with the six holes, and gently tap each one back into place.
http://i.imgur.com/YZwOWXB.jpg



After that, connect the new PCV connection back into the valve cover, then measure out the smaller hose and cut it to fit into the other end of the PCV valve neatly.
http://i.imgur.com/cSvAm0y.jpg



Now you go under the car and remove the plastic splash shield and find your CCV dipstick drain hose, which is marked in red.
http://i.imgur.com/P4y0V5r.jpg



You then take off the hose from the dip stick tube(Green dot) , then find a plastic cap to firmly close the metal part of the tube where that hose was (Red Dot).
http://i.imgur.com/WZO9kdb.jpg


CONGRATS! You did it, the factory CCV is now completely blocked off and bypassed by the new "old fashioned" PCV system.
Start the car up and check for any air leaks or unplugged connections.



After you make sure everything is working perfectly, put all your plastic covers back on and enjoy your sweet new PCV system, and if the PCV valve ever breaks, replacing it is literally a 5 minute job, unlike a OEM CCV system.
http://i.imgur.com/WMYg2yr.jpg

Wow.

Can you please link the BF thread again? I want to see some results of long term testing.

If this helps with oil consumption, and is serviceable, you may be on to something. Paging Doru and cn90 as they are pretty much the E39 experts to see their thoughts...

I just replaced with cold weather CCV complete system in the past year but if this is reliable and long term solid, I'm going to do it for sure.

EDIT Nvm I found it.

I've spoken to some E39 gurus though and I thought the consensus was that for long term reliability the PCV isn't enough to keep the vaccuum down in the crankcase, over time its bad for the rings bc of too much vaccuum? Dorin (Doru) and I have discussed this several times, he would be able to chime in on this.

I would love to hear some more insight as well from people that understand this system more, I will continue to further modify this system to achieve CCV vacuum levels, maybe with the use of smaller and tighter fittings I can reach desired vacuum levels. I will keep everyone posted if I mange to make this system better.

Very, very interested in hearing how this works out. I have not yet had a CCV problem, but it is just a matter of time. When changing the VC gasket I accidentally broke the plastic tube running down from the VC elbow connector to the CCV and had to repair it. It was full of "mayo" emulsified oil. As I say, I think it's only a matter of time, and I'd much rather do this than return to the unrobust factory design.

Bavarian, just wondering, was your CCV original? I just changed mine out this year to all cold weather parts including dipstick tube.

Last winter it made some high pitched whining in the cold until warmed up, so I knew it was on its last legs and preventatively did it this summer

I was not only surprised and impressed to see my valve marked 9/2003 (my build month) so my original system lasted 11 years. Impressive especially noting all the CCV failures posted on these boards.

Yes, mine was original, non cold weather, mine did not make any high pitched sounds, just started to misfire at idle, and the dip stick-oil cap had crazy vacuum suction. The main reason I went with this fix is because it is MUCH easier to change if the valve goes bad, and there is no risk of hydrolocking the engine if the CCV freezes and pulls oil from the dipstick into the intake.

This seem as a good short term idea, but doesn't the engine continue making mayo from condensation? Where is all that "mayo" going, the PCV?

The way I see it is there is a much shorter route for the crankcase air to travel, and its right in the belly of the engine which would heat up the pipes more than on the side of the block and create less "mayo", not to mention the slightly stronger suction which moves the air faster not giving it as much time for the sludge to build up.

This setup looks pretty good. Only worry is about the mayo going back into to the intake(if any). Are you able to add an oil catch can to see if there is any mayo coming out from this short system?

I'm sure It would be possible to add a catch can if you extend the hose somewhere, similar to how I did it on my 540, I'll drive around for a while like this and see if there are any negative side effects.

The "best fix" for the M54 engine is the new dipstick design & cold weather CCV.
The new dipstick design addresses the clogging/freezing issue of the return passage of the old design. the cold weather CCV addresses the freezing issue of the diaphragm & lines.
Also, owning a vehicle with this particular system and KNOWING how the CCV works, and how to address the shortcoming is better than changing components (that might not work 100% with the M54 engine).

This is a huge debate, and one should know exactly the difference between a PCV and CCV (Hint: CCV has a METERED diaphragm and keeps the vacuum in check at all times when working correctly - the CCV is open as the engine starts, closing/opening accordingly as you start driving. The PCV is CLOSED as you start the engine, the spring is NOT metered for the M54 vacuum).

My last CCV job on my e39 was January 2007. I changed the whole CCV to a cold weather CCV & new dipstick design. Engine M54B30, no issues, and we had some very cold winters since. So the original CCV system lasted 4 years and left me stranded away from home. The redesigned system is in the car for 8 years and works great.

I took my pick (and stayed away from home brew PCV/catch can solutions).

I agree with everything you said, it's true that when it comes to this subject everyone has a different opinion, similar to asking what oil people use. This is still a work in progress for me, I got the system to work at almost the same negative pressure as the factory ccv, I have a display of vacuum readings as I drive, and all I've seen change is that the pcv system has a stronger vacuum, but it varies the same way as the ccv as you drive.
I've compared the readings from start-stop, and cursing down the highway, I'm going to make myself the guinea pig and test this on my own car, I know that you have a much higher understanding of this system than I do, but I'm willing to give this a shot and progressively work on it and update my results on here. So far everything has been working wonderfully and I'm happy with this system.

What I would have done, I would have read the system's pressure with the known working CCV at startup, at idle with warm engine and revved (warm engine & buddy at the wheel). Then read the values for same environment with this setup.

That's exactly what I did, measured idle, 3000rpm rev, 0-60, and driving down the highway at 70mph, every single test showed the same sort of vacuum changes with the pcv having around 4-5 psi of additional vacuum. I'm still working on lowering the vacuum on the pcv system. I tried the vacuum tests from two different vehicles, my friend with a 530i that has a 3 month old ccv, and another x5 with a year old ccv, both cars had almost identical readings. I will continue updating progress.

Day three update: Been driving without problems so far, exhausts are still clean with no black residue, and best part of all, NO MORE "Mayo" on the oil cap or dipstick, I have not changed my driving habits. Will continue to update if something else comes up.

Where can you find the vaccuum ratings of these PCV valves is what I wonder?

Times like these I miss the OEM looking boost/vaccuum gauge from my old VW GLI, would be nice to have one integrated into one of the air vents so you could see it while driving.

No idea about finding the vacuum ratings on the PCV valves themselves, but what I've been using to measure my crankcase vacuum is a modified BMW oil cap with a vacuum gauge nipple attachment that my friend made with a spare cap.

Little update for anyone following. Been well over a month and a half now since doing this install. Car hasn't skipped a beat whatsoever, no oil consumption to report, exhaust tips are clean and free of carbon, oil cap still has no goop on it. Same goes for my neighbors 330i that we installed this system on, both happy with the results. -15 degree mornings seem to have no effect on this pcv.

Firstly I want to say great diy post :thumbup:, Infact I recently did this to my e39 m54 due to 2 failed ccv's, and the car seems to idle and run better as a result, but I do have some concerns about the amount of vacuum this pcv set up creates, I noticed when the car has been running or when it's just been shut off the amount of extreme suction/vacuum the oil fill cap & dipstick tube have upon them, granted the rings need vacuum to seal properly but is this much vacuum overkill and could it cause problem down the road, like valve cover gasket issues etc?

And lastly have you had any problems with your mod since your last post?

Hey sorry haven't posted much recently, work and life has been busy. Yes the high vacuum is something I want to work out eventually. As of now the cars that I've done this to have been running perfectly. Haven't had any issues at all, no oil burning, idle problems, or gasket issues. If anything new develops or I come up with a new mod to solve the high vacuum I'll let everyone know. Glad to hear that the mod helped you out!

Good to know, a few months seems sufficient enough and given that a few cars have this set up installed as well is a plus also, besides given the oem junk design this is a much appreciated clean looking alternative, thanks again for your time and ingenuity, and yeah I'll be looking out for any new developments you invent/discover with this set up.

FYI although yes this is a promising fix, the high vaccuum does bother me a bit.

I replaced my OEM CCV (9/2003 stamped on the valve), hoses, and dipstick tube last year in June and used all cold weather insulated parts, including the updated single walled guide tube, and I do expect to get almost as much amount of time on the replacement parts (10 years) as I did on the original. For what its worth my OEM system never hydrolocked, however I do have the MT and my final gearing on the highway is a bit higher in RPM's as well.

Even at 6 year intervals to be safe, the OEM system really is not as terrible as we would think, considering its hard to bypass it without having a potential long term effect of high vaccuum.

I used to have an E23 (1983 735i), the PCV system in that car is simply a tube from the valve cover straight to the intake.
See item #11 below...Talking about simplicity!!!

With the E23 setup, oil vapor is burned in the combustion chamber. However, it is not much, the E23 consumed 1 qt every 5000 miles.

In the attempt to make things better, the BMW engineers manage to make my E53 M54 engine burn about 1 qt every 1000 miles!!! In other words, they go backward from an engineering aspect!


---

E23 (1983 735i): no internal routing of air.
Note that the Intake Manifold sits HIGHER than the valve cover.
So the PCV tube is slanted upward, oil tends to flow down and vapor gets sucked into the I.M. during engine operation.

In contrast, the E39, E53 M54 setup is different: the I.M. sits BELOW the valve cover, thus the convoluted CCV design in the E39, E53 cars.

Engineers sometimes go forward and sometimes go backward in their design. C'est la vie...

I followed Bavarian's example, with the addition of a catch can. Prior to the modification the car was using a lot of oil. 5 months and 10,000 miles later, the car has not used any oil. I have emptied the catch can twice. Each time there was about an inch and a half of brown water and oil mix. Great mod!

^I would recommend this as the best option if you are bypassing the CCV. Catch can with a PCV in-line from the output to the VC, again you'd have to get some vaccuum ratings on the PCV's but this is a great way to keep condensate out of the crankcase.

Care to share any pics of your setup.

Bump: How has this set-up been working for you?

Been working great this whole time, same results as last reported. Sorry for not being as active on here lately. I post a lot to bimmerforums so here is my link there:

M54-M52TU DIY Solution to the troublesome CCV system, (Pic Heavy)

Thanks for the link. The more I read the more I want to do this mod. My X consumes oil and smells like burned oil on the driver's side of the engine. I suspect something has broken in the CCV. An oil smell this bad coming from the VC gasket would be showing up somewhere around the perimeter of the VC to head interface, and I just don't see it.

This car is my son's daily driver and he cannot be stranded at school during the winter with no transport - I already experienced this with a busted expansion tank that was about $600 to fix at the stealership. I'm thinking this is more of a preventive maintenance move than anything!

As far as I'm concerned - X5 community to the rescue!

Might want to check the oil stand gasket for leaks, very common and can be hard to spot. I was actually repairing mine in this DIY. Goodluck on chasing down those gremlins.

So since the original DIY you did connect both pieces of the air distribution piece on the manifold and added a "T" correct? Still running like a champ and no consumption, and the PCV is holding up well?

I just ordered the BMW OEM CCV parts for a CCV overhaul at 115K, simply because the original system is still fine at 115K, so I will stick to the stock setup for now.

However, in the future, if I have to do this CCV again, I may switch to this mod.

For comparison purpose:
- My 1998 528i (M52 CCV setup) consumes nothing between oil changes.
- My 2006 X5 3.0i (M54 CCV setup) drinks about 1 qt every 1,000 miles.

Since the CCV setup is very similar between M52 and M54, I think the oil consumption issue in M54 has more to do with the pistons rings etc. rather than the CCV thingy.


One another note, bimmerforums E39 M54 forum has something similar to the mod in this thread. See the DIY by mcgnms below:

M54 Oil Consumption Solved

^On the original CCV there is definitely a time element to this so cn90 its probably good idea to replace with updated cold weather parts since you are almost at 10 years old on stock system.

Just to get some peppiness back from the engine, less consumption, and increased mpg's sounds great on this mod. I wonder if doing this PCV and pluming a MannHummel ProVent100 in line would be perhaps the "ultimate" solution to the stock CCV?

^^I'm talking about BavarianE39's CCV delete and "PCV inline" solution. He reports less consumption and increased mpg. Not talking about the factory CCV system.

^There are many reports of people who have bypassed the stock system on the M54 (Bimmerforums, E46Fanatics, Bimmerfest) if you read some threads which report increased mpg, and literally zero oil consumption, compared to a working stock system. There are still some who have replaced with updated Cold Weather CCV parts and report oil consumption. I will check mine out when I get home tonight, but I just changed my oil in December and have put about 3k miles on it.

This is the first vehicle I've owned where consumption of oil in between changes is deemed "acceptable" even on a fully working and operational stock system.

BMW put the CCV system on for emissions as far as I can tell and environmental factors, that is more important in my opinion and most likely in their eyes, than fuel efficiency.


Bavarian can you remark about your fuel and oil consumption since installing the "simple PCV" solution, and as well, if you have any perceptions of increased peppiness from the engine as I have seen elsewhere.

I would like to share my experience with PCV mod (Long...):
The car – 2003 3.0 - Purchased February 2010 at 115000 miles from the original owner. Strictly dealer serviced from day 1 (all documented). From the supplied service records, previous owner complained about oil consumption after ~ 70k miles. Per dealer evaluation, consumption within factory specs. Previous owner disclosed to me, that he adds at least 2Qt between 10k miles oil changes.
Having extensive experience with m52 and m54 engines, I did not want to take chances with CCV and within the first two weeks of the ownership, I replaced valve cover gasket, OFH gasket and entire CCV system except dipstick tube with genuine BMW parts. The dipstick tube was removed and properly cleaned from all gunks. I cleaned a fair amount of mayo from the inside of the valve cover and all CCV lines and valve itself was badly clogged with yellow stuff.
Prior and after the service car run perfectly fine – no smoke or any drivability issues. The car is driven daily and I avoid short trips. Car always parked in the garage where temperature never drops below freezing. The oil consumption slightly increased over the past five years to ~ 1.5Qt per 2000 miles.
Over the past two years, car develop small oil leak from the rear mail seal – no drops on the floor, however heavy oil deposit on the stiffening plate and the bottom of transmission bell housing. (Planned to replace rear main seal and torque convertor seal this spring. Even purchased new genuine seals and two stage transmission jack.)
I used Slack-Tube Manometer to measure crankcase vacuum - it was normal 6” – 8”, so I did not suspect issue with inadequate crankcase ventilation. Also, no visible mayo under the oil cap.
This spring I was prepared to replace CCV components again as a preventative maintenance, but before ordering new parts, I decided to try (proof of concept) PCV mod. I followed “BavarianE39” instructions with few minor changes – utilized ends of old CCV lines to make installation completely “Plug and Play”. Also positioned PCV valve vertically. Changed oil (BMW 5W-30) and filter same day at 188900 miles on the odometer.
First impression – Noticeably better throttle response from the stop – I did not anticipate this and it was very welcome change.
This past Sunday marked 2200 miles since installation (191100 on the odometer). The oil level remained at the upper mark on the stick!!!
The stiffening plate and the transmission is bone dry!!!
I did not notice change in MPG
Conclusion – considering age and the mileage of my car I am not planning going back to stock CCV. And no more fear of hydro locking engine during winter!
If anyone interested to experiment with it – let me know and I will post pictures of my setup.

P.S. Cracked open old CCV – after 75k miles nothing clogged, reasonable amount of carbon buildup and rubber diaphragm appears to be in good shape. Checked dipstick return tube - it is not clogged. Go figure if anything is wrong with the stock system.
My son’s 2001-530i hydro locked engine in February 2013 with two-month-old CCV system. That car consistently consumed 1Qt per 900 miles before and after CCV replacement. Parked outside and driven to / from school 5 miles each way.

In response to the” Trader4” point about valve cover design – please compare attached images of valve covers from m30 (old BMW engine with basic crankcase vent system) and m54. Please note that I never took internal plates from any of these covers, so cannot elaborate on what is behind, but as you can see, both valve covers have some internal plates covering ventilation hole.

^axgordon, please share pics of your setup and parts needed to make it look cleaner and completely "plug and play"!

How was vaccuum since converting to the simple PCV system?

At one time we had three BMW vehicles with the M54 engine. All were driven by the same drivers, on the same roads, in the same ambient temperatures. All were purchased new and broken in the same way. All used the same oil. The E53 consistently used more oil, over several years of concurrent comparison. The only difference was that it was a heavier vehicle. The engine was working harder. (Which incidentally meant that it warmed up faster). In terms of oil consumption, I don't think CCV design had anything to do with it.

In mulling this over I have a couple of questions before I take the plunge this weekend:

1. Oil will reduce the octane value of gasoline. This change will presumably put more oil vapor into the intake manifold. Has anyone noticed a tendency to ping/knock with this set-up?
2. I'm wondering if more oil combusted could foul 02 sensors or catalytic converters.

Of course, other cars use simple PVC systems and don't necessarily suffer these side-effects, but I thought I'd ask.

Also, I changed the oil filter housing gasket shortly after I got the vehicle in 2010. At that time there was no burned oil smell, just a lot of leaking at the plate access hole for the oil drain plug. Yes, it could be leaking again!

Ricky,
See attached pictures. I did not measure vacuum after the mod yet. The crankcase remains under vacuum for some time after the engine shut off - i don't see any issues with that.

Imalabil - I do not have clear answer why this mod greatly reduce oil consumption, however this is what many including my self observed. This is clear indication that less oil got burned causing less impact on the fuel octane and less stress for catalytic converters and O2 sensors. My experience based on less than 2500 miles. I will continue to monitor and report to the board.

axgordon, thanks for the pics, they look great. Since that PCV needs to be vertical, call me stupid but could you not put it vertical facing downward and use a 90 degree elbow with hose to eliminate the "hose loop" on the upward facing PCV?

This happens because of the loop of the hose going UPWARD: oil goes down by gravity (not by separation as in the E53 stock CCV valve), and air gets sucked into the loop. So oil consumption is minimal.

Conceptually, this is similar to E23 (1983-1987 735i) with simply a hose slating upward as the CCV, talking about simplicity.

Two things come to mind...

1. For those who want to sell the car in the future, the next owner will likely has some questions for all these "snakes" running around on top of the engine. You will need to explain it to him/her.

2. The E23 (1983-1987 735i) Intake Manifold sits ABOVE the engine.
So the CCV system in that car is simply a tube going upward, see photo for #11 in E23:

axgordon, interested now to hear about the shop owner's opinion on the piston rings. He believed that replacing piston rings on stock CCV setup on M54 would solve oil consumption in higher mileage vehicles? Or alternatively you could keep the low tension piston rings and do the "CCV Bypass/PCV install" like you have done and solve the same issue?

You are correct I just rolled 80k miles a week ago so I'm not as "up there" yet.

trader4,

I am talking about brand-new stock system from showroom. From an engineering standpoint, E23 is more simple than M52/M54 setup.

1. In the E23, the mixture of oil and vapor goes up the slope (the simple tube). Vapor keeps going up while oil, being heavier, drips back down the valve cover area.

2. In the E53 M54 setup, the Intake Manifold sits LOWER than the valve cover.
So the mixture of oil + vapor goes DOWN the slope and pools at the Separator area.
In theory, oil being heavier goes down the dipstick housing and vapor gets sucked into the Intake manifold.
However, when the membrane opens up (under certain vacuum condition), some oil gets sucked into the I.M.

Ricky,
let me clarify this - the oil consumption was corrected by replacing worn out piston rings with a new set of the stock rings from the dealer. The shop owner stated that old rings were worn out and did not seal / removed oil correctly.

I did not experiment or have an answer on possible re-positioning of PCV valve. Personally I am totally OK with the loop... for now:)

No worries, I imagine worn out rings would cause consumption, but is not the rule across the M54 nor is it something I've read that is something that is done often (replacement of piston rings)

If you guys want a real, OEM solution to delete the CCV, using all OEM parts, perhaps the E46Fanatics guys will tickle your fancy: (M56 Valve Cover with integrated oil separator, VCG, oil fill cap gasket, and breather hose is all thats needed), the M56 VC fits on the M54 with no issues.

The Permanent M54 CCV Delete - E46Fanatics

@trader4,

It is not "my PCV" design, it is BMW engineer's design. I have nothing to do with the design.

The X5 M54 CCV setup is dumb. This is because the Intake Manifold sits BELOW the valve cover. In the process of routing oil + vapor mixture, BMW likes it or not, the mixture settles at the Separator.
BMW engineers hope that oil being heavier runs down the other hose to the dipstick tube, while vapor is sucked into the I.M.

Nice thinking but in reality, some oil is sucked in the I.M.

The E53 M54 CCV setup is dumb from day 1. Too complex for a simple CCV issue.
In Honda car, is is a simple valve.
In the E23 from 1980s, it is a simple hose, as conceptually illustrated in the mod in this thread.

Again, it is NOT my design, it is dumb BMW design. Engineers sometimes go forward, and sometimes they go backward. The M54 CCV is an example of backward thinking.

trader4,

I don't make it sound like anything. I don't want to argue with you how the CCV works, you may want to do more reading on the engineering aspect of it.

Most of the oil will go down by gravity, a little bit of oil will stay around at the Separator. When the diaphragm opens, vapor will be sucked in and some oil will be too.

The analogy is: when you open a door to a building and some unauthorized person sneaks in at the same time.

WRONG, look at E23 PCV setup, it is precisely like what you said.
A simple hose slanting upward and that is it. See the photos I posted earlier on E23!!!

My E39 1998 528i with 150K miles with M52 engines drinks no oil between 6K oil change interval. Nothing, zip, nada oil consumption.
Nothing!

M54 is another story...

On the exact cause of M54 oil consumption, I don't know.

As I mentioned previously:
- My M52 1998 528i with 150K miles: zero oil consumption
- My M54 2006 X5 3.0i 5sp MT with 115K: 1 qt every 1000 miles or so.



I came across this video, take your time to watch it. Seems like piston rings issue:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ze_qD22JiU

The M54 engine has low tension piston rings, and once the rings start getting clogged with carbon buildup the engine will start using more & more oil (this might be one reason why some people mentioned after 70 k miles, the car started to use oil - my e39 did the same thing).
using the PCV will increase vacuum, and the apparently the scavenger rings somehow will perform better and hence no or very minimal oil consumption with this setup (CCV). However, it is unsure how long the engine will last with setup. Poolman on the e39 board had a catch can setup, and one piston had burnt valve(s) after driving a few years with no oil consumption. Not sure if it's related to higher vacuum.

However, on another e39 board, O2Pilot introduced another mod using the OE CCV system, by introducing another hose between the plugged off CCV nipple & plugged off intake manifold nipple (back of the engine).
This is the whole post, the fanatics guys always refer to (they use this mod), and post #74 has the resolution. The whole thread (looong) is worth a read.

Also, below is how the M54 pistons look once they start getting clogged with carbon buildup. the user Mlody from the fanatics has an outstanding post about this, and his battle to clean the rings in order to reduce oil consumption. Here is his post

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/attachm...9&d=1406584288

^Great post Dorin, I already use Rotella T6 which has a decently high detergent amount since it is formulated for gasoline and diesel engines and my consumption has slowed down considerably since replacing the CCV last June, my last oil change was performed in December (I don't drive the X more than 10k miles per year). I also add Lucas Upper Cylinder lube frequently and am hoping that also contributes to keeping gunk buildup off the pistons.

Well just completed this mod and I'm a bit concerned - vacuum increase is HUGE compared to before. It's enough to collapse the hose coming out of the PCV valve slightly. I mounted the valve vertically with a loop of 3/8 inch hose. There is so much vacuum I can barely get the oil cap off - much different than this morning prior to the change.

I will say the CCV I think was the original from 13 years and 138K miles ago, so it may not have been working as new.

For those that have done this - did you see a tremendous vacuum increase?

Same here. I did noticed significant vacuum increase at idle. However I didn't notice any negative effects from it. It is over 2200 miles with the mod. No issues. Oil level remain at the MAX.

Just did the CCV the "Stock" way simply because I need to replace the OFH gasket (leaking like crazy at 116K miles), and since I already bought the CCV parts.

At 116K, surprisingly, the stock CCV is still OK, dipstick no blockage at all. Probably because the was had highway miles and not stop and go. So I replaced all factory CCV parts. It took the whole day because of the OFH job in addition to CCV DIY.

Coming from E23 (1983 735i), which has a simple tube slanting upward (the I.M. sits above the M30 engine), the BMW M52 and M54 CCV engineering design is absolutely stupid, cannot believe the German engineers designed this stupid thing.

At the next CCV job 100K+ from now, I will do the mod as outlined in this thread, which is better, cheaper and no fighting with nuts/bolts and convoluted factory setup.

The E53 wasn't designed to meet then current emissions standards, it was designed to exceed them. Reference the ULEV standards, and BMW advertising from 2000-2001. At the time, there was a lot of resistance to the E53 from BMW traditionalists, with calls of it not being a true BMW, and BMW was making points out of the 'safest SUV' and 'cleanest SUV' memes.

The only way I can feel good about my gas guzzler is if my ccv lowers emissions. You know it is my diet coke with my cheeseburger and fries :rofl:

BMW doesn't think, it just reacts to the Green Party
 

This was what drove the massive amount of engine losses in the e36 from Mattel style plastic parts. I used to know all of the numbers, but it hardly matters now.

The Green Weenies (I have a BA degree in Environmental Engineering, so not tossing that out lightly) drove BMW to a set percentage of recyclable material. Well it worked, as nearly a 100% cooling system failure rate caused all of the cooling crap to be recycled. I replaced it all on mine, and went Aluminum and braided hose everywhere. Hey, that stuff can be recycled when I get to 500,000 miles!

The whack jobs always cause "intended consequences" when they step in.

What's worse about all of this is the extremely poor quality of fastening materials and the typical year 2000+ BMW thinking of cheap build by robot and screw any human repair. Getting to the CCV requires a massive amount of work, no matter which approach you take.

However, regardless of what is driving the design, the continuing degradation of material quality coupled with "cheap build, F the customer" thinking is killing BMW. Case in point: over 100% failure rate for X5 window regulators. BMW knew days after the first sale of the E53 that they had a defective design. Yet they tossed more garbage at it under warranty and never changed the design, nor materials in the E53 run.

I have three BMWs, have previously owned several before. But we're done with them. Just plain garbage for the money. What's next? Good question and we're discussing it. But we know what is NOT next!

3000 mile update
 

Just passed 3000 mile with this mod. Amazingly oil level still at the max and absolutely no visible side effects. Hope it will stay this way with no long term impact to the engine health. At 192000 miles, decided to leave it on and hope for the best ;)

Glad to hear man thats great ^ How is she running?

Mine is doing OK so far with far fewer miles. The burned oil smell is gone, too.

Why wouldn't taking the heated insulation off of E60 CCV pipes and installing them on the hoses of an M54 CCV system work? Power wiring somehow I'm sure could be accomplished. Take a look on realoem.com:

03 Vent pipe 1 11157522931 04 Return pipe 1 11157567801

7 Months- 10000 Miles later this mod is still doing great, nothing new to report. Just keeping everyone informed.

Cain't be any long term effects
 

Every car from the mid 60's used this modified design. PCV in valve cover piped into intake manifold. I just made this change to my 2005 X3 had unexplained oil lose and chocolate mayo in valve cover. My boat engine uses this same design PCV in valve cover piped to intake manifold. She is run a lot harder then my X3. Engine is clean(no mayo) no oil lose. Glade I found this post

Good to hear! :)

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

11000 Mile Update
 

This is the most amaizing mod for M54! No oil consumption and no noticiable side effects! It is so nice not to worry about hydrolocking the engine in cold weather and adding oil multiple times between oil changes. My OCI - 6.5 - 7.5K.

ok, sorry to dredge this up, but thinking of going this route, any long term neg. effects?

Just reached 12000 miles with this mod. Currently at 201000 miles on the odometer. Engine runs like new. No mayo and no oil consumption. Highly recommend.:thumbup:

Good to hear, I never have mayo in the summer, but come winter time it's terrible. I'm tired of replacing ccv's every 2 years...

whats up wit is?
 

do the e46 3.0i cars like 330i or 330xi have a pcv or ccv system?

i saw its for some other 3.0i models... would it work for ours?
i just stumbled on it and was curious

Robot Check

Anything with an m54, should be all the same

would that kit be a new ccv or is that bypassing the ccv with a pcv?

It is bypassing the factory CCV system and using a traditional PCV in place. And yes this will work on any car with a M54, M52TU, I've done this on numerous E46's already. My X5 is still on the original PCV valve that's been going strong for over a year now, still no oil consumption or any negative side effects. :thumbup:

^Thats phenomenal and thanks for the constant updates - in a few years if I need to attend to this CCV system I would most likely definitely be doing this mod.

Ok, I did this yesterday, it wasn't terrible, and like a few other people mentioned you have some more vacuum, you notice it trying to take the oil fill cap off after you shut the engine off, but no lights and I'm looking forward to being mayo free!

Yes there will definitely be a vacuum increase after the mod, but so far my engine has been working great with it, keep us posted!

it doesn't last, it's just a few min. after you shut it down, I'm just glad to be done with that garbage ccv!!

You mentioned in an earlier post that you were working on finding/researching a PCV valve with a smaller orifice that would give a lower vacuum signal. Did you have any luck or have you staid with the original PCV part number you showed in a earlier photo?

I ended up staying with the original valve. The engine is running flawlessly and I haven't experienced one hiccup with this design, so I figured I would keep it running like this to see if there would possibly be any downsides in the long run. This engine seems to be loving the extra vacuum.

One nice little side effect from that is that last year my rear main seal had some very very slight seeping, after this mod and the extra vacuum everything has been bone dry between the engine and transmission. seems like its keeping oil leaks at bay.

I love this mod. I am doing it to my 3.0
My only question is , what do you do to the hose you disconnect from the dipstick tube?
After plugging the dipstick tube, does the hose just dangles lose?
Thanks.

I left as much in tact although its not connected to anything, it's not in the way at all.

The hose that connects to the dipstick can just hang there since it is no longer connected to the engine, just make sure to plug the part of the dipstick tube where the hose was connected to since that goes right in the oil pan.

i just plugged the hose with a bolt and clamped the hose around the bolt, and just tie wrapped the hose to the dipstick tube ,just so its not dangling all over the place.

Thank you both for the input. If the weather holds up this weekend. I am doing the same mod to my X.

I use a pcv with the catch can just a piece of mind for me , we get allot of condinsation here with extreme temp changes ,could be 6 c 1 day and then -20c the next day and then add into the fact the engine warms up and makes more codinsationon on top of that.

I use a catch can too. I have been using a pcv valve for a year and about 20 thousand miles. There has been zero oil consumption and no negative effects.

I will be doing this mod, does anyone have a picture of the "catch can" added to this system? Thanks

Let's see if this works:

ok some guys are using catch can others not the ones not using it say that they use no oil or see residue on tail pipe like with the ccv or have to add oil so why the need for the can.??

Catch cans in my opinion are moisture collectors.

I posted a photo of what I drain out of the catch can every 6 weeks or so. If there was no catch can that 4 ounces of oil and water would be sucked into the cylinders and burned with gas. Oil mixed with gas lowers the octane and can lead to misfires. The knock sensor would detect the misfires and reduce timing. The timing reduction leads to less fuel economy. Also that oil and water mix would leave deposits on the top of the piston and exhaust valve. Those deposits also can cause misfires.
The catch can is not necessary for the application, but for $100 I think it is worth it.

wow you paid $100.00 look at this for $15.00=
Billet Aluminum Racing Engine Oil Catch Reservoir Tank Can Hose Indicator Black | eBay

I guess it's all personal preference, the catch can definitely won't hurt anything, mine has been running as is without one and I surely don't have black tail pipes like I did before the delete. I'm going to keep mine absolutely the same just to be a Guinea pig and see what and when will fail first. So far everything is working as intended.

And as far as the $100 vs $15 catch can goes, the Mishimoto one is very well engineered with internal baffles that are very good at separating oil from air vapors. They are a very popular upgrade with the BMW N54 crowd.

ok the way i'm going to do mine is take the drain plug out from the bottom of catch can put a on and off valve then at other end a hose running to oil dipstick tube so when can is full i open valve the oil drains back to engine just my thoughts simpler way of getting rid of the oil look at pic of sample valve

I don't think that is a good idea. You don't want to put the oil water mix back into the engine. The oil stays a lot cleaner with the catch can. You will see for yourself the first time you drain it!

I wouldn`t do that at all and contaminate the oil. you will be putting more water than oil back in not good.

lets think for a minute if the main objective of this mod is to eliminate the milkie build up which comes from condensation there should be no condensation compare to with ccv. all the pics that guys have posted of the oil after they drain the can not one mention about water in the oil especially with the higher vacuum condensation is only in the winter haven't seen it in the summer i could be wrong but that's what i'm seen

winter time is where I get a lot of water in the catch can .its a smaller catch can but im emptying it twice a month 90% water 10% blow by oil. so I wouldn`t want water dumping into the oil
summer time I hardley see any water. its the winter especially here with -20c on average through out the winter.

looking on more info to the water part i had it and now can't find the page damm

Resurrection
 

I'm glad you did dredge it up. A) Keeps the discussion to one thread. B) I'm learnding a lot!

E53 mod?
 

While it is too late for mine, is this something that could be done on an E53?

My apologies if that's an ignorant question.

yes, I just did this to mine, it can be done to anything with an m54 (3.0 )

There have been a few threads where a catch can was part of modification to the CCV system.

M62
 

D'oh!

I'm sorry, I have the 4.6 M62B46 engine. For which, I assume, the answer is "no".

:confused:

I wouldn't say no, someone must have done it, or something similar, you just have to dig.

Yep, I'm working on that as I have time.

The search function does not accept "CCV" because it is "too common".

To be fair, I have found a few things, but I am well aware that anything that include the word "Dinan" has passed into the "nearly impossible for me" category.

Oh, and I should say I'm finding cold country valves, just not for the M62.

Rats!

I just did this mod on my wife's x5 and now have a lean engine code. It smokes slightly at idle and my wife said the engine hissed for about a minute straight when she turned it off today. Does anyone else have high fuel trims with this set up? In using the same part # for the valve as the op.

Sounds like you have a vac leak somewhere, mine does the "hiss" for maybe 1 second after I shut the engine off. Fuel trims are stable, and have not had any vehicle produce smoke after this mod, any chance you installed the PCV the other way around ?

I'll see if I can smoke test it tonight. I don't think I have it backwards since the fat side goes to the larger vc hose.

I did mine and couldn't be happier! No lights and better yet, no sludge!!! if you got a cel after doing it, there's another issue, i triple checked that all my clamps were as tight as possible, because i'd forget one, i just know i would, also see if all the o rings in the air distribution block or tubes, whatever they're called are there and not pinched..

:thumbup:

I did find a vacuum leak around the disa valve with the smoke. Fixed that and the trims came down a little bit. Ltft is now at 8.7 on both banks. It was at 12 before and may come down more with some driving. I'll have to wait and see.

I'm wondering if burning all of the oil contaminated the o2 sensors too. I'm still getting a tiny bit of oil burning smell/smoke at idle.


Sent from my LGLS770 using Tapatalk

I can say that the selection of plugs I got at AutoZone does not have one big enough for the dip stick tube.

Yes, you can get rid of all parts of the ccv. It won't be connected to anything anymore.

Sent from my LGLS770 using Tapatalk

NONE OF THE NIPPLES I GOT WERE BIG ENOUGH EITHER, i USED A PIECE OF HOSE AND A BOLT, CLAMPED THEM DOWN TIGHT.

I re used the hose off the dip stick tube put a bolt in it with clamp tie wrapped the hose to the dipstick tube .its way down there and you cant see it that easily anyways.

You can see the dip stick tube if you lay on your back behind the drivers wheel and look up past the front drive shaft. Mine did not have a hose clamp on it and I was able to reach up and push it off with a screw driver. I'm pretty sure it was 5/8 " fuel hose I used and plugged it and clamped just a short section then reached up and slid it on. You could also reach up and cut off the existing hose and use part of that. I just finished this mod and used the method in this thread that includes the "t" so that both ends of the intake manifold are hooked up. I thought this was good backup since the hose to back of the manifold is a small diameter and could narrow over time. I just left the dip stick hose dangling and did not remove any of the under manifold CCV apparatus. It really was very clean and simple. Read the whole thread and you will be very confident tackling this!

OK Thanks I'll try to find the dipstick tube and hose later.
I have not done this CCV delete yet...just weighing my options.
Didnt see it earlier but I didn't have ramps so I wasn't crawling around much under there.
Would it be ok to just leave that hose hooked up or would the vaccum cause problems?
I am really more worried about the loosing oil situation. I did look for the CCV but can't see it at all.
Not sure if I'm looking in the correct place.
I had the intake manifold ducting, air box , intake boot, DISA, ICV, drivers side engine cover and the under car splash guard off this morning.
Was replacing the old intake boot. And no I didn't take all that stuff off to replace the boot.
Was thinking of doing this delete to be done with this damn CCV disaster.

If I understand it correctly...and do this delete then later want to change it back all I need is two new hoses to replace the ones that got cut up.

And of course >>>a new CCV unit<<<.


-

You can't see the ccv at all. I would totally take the intake manifold off if I did it again. I've done the whole job twice now and can do it with the manifold off in under 3 hours now. It sounds like it takes 3 hours of bad words of you leave it in anyway so Id take it off.

Sent from my LGLS770 using Tapatalk

:dunno: I am doing good to change out the intake boot, change plugs or do an oil change.

I had to have DIY's for those. Anything rather simple is ok. LoL

I don't know if you'll want to try to tackle taking it all out then. Just putting the pcv is easy enough though!

Sent from my LGLS770 using Tapatalk

Yeah I figured I'd try this if I decide to not get the CCV changed out.
Thanks

It is very easy and recommeded

Sent from my LGLS770 using Tapatalk

Yeah seems like it's easy enough. Just not sure if I want to bypass it yet tho.
I wish I could have seen the CCV yesterday when I was replacing the intake boot. I had it off along with the airbox, DISA, and ICV.
It must be directly under where this CCV delete goes. I missed it tho. I looked at ECSTuning for a CCV and it shows to have only three outlets.
Two of them hook to hoses (to intake and to valve cover) and the other I think goes to the dipstick hose. Appears to only have one bolt holding it on.
This is the cold weather updated and insulated version. So it may be different than others I have seen shown on here.
Honestly don't really want to pay my mechanic to change a valve and two hoses either tho. LoL

There are two bolts holding it to the intake. I don't know if it's possible to see it without a mirror. It is really up in there.

Sent from my LGLS770 using Tapatalk

Just a suggestion, need to take a look at those hoses being used. When I did both of my e53 3.0's the hose will collapse due to so much vacuum. (as mine did) I used plastic fuel injector line and made any hose connection as short as possible. Also tried doing this setup with my son's 325xi wagon did not work, kept throwing lean trim codes. We ran the valve cover hose uphill (so the oil would run down/back into the valve cover) then into the air filter box and capped off the manifold vacuum. One more thing I forgot to mention, the clearance between the engine and hood e46 you will have to use close elbow's to be able to shut the hood. Just remember when it leaves the valve cover it has to go uphill immediately so that gravity will pull the heavy oil droplets back to the valve cover. If you run it straight to the vacuum ports you are defeating the purpose of this bypass.

quick update for me, did mine in feb, changed oil, getting ready to change oil again, and oil level hasn't moved a drop on the stick....zero issues....

Great thread. I just bypassed my CCV a few days ago, sticking to the instruction of the initial post. Everything went fine. The only thing is: I'm getting a strong smell of burnt oil inside the car once in a while. Not always, just after high revs. Smells like someone was grilling chicken inside the car.
It's an E46 320i convertible, M54 engine.

Here's a quick video I made showing a bad CCV for diagnosis, check it out. Functioning CCV should have no strong suction like you see in the video. Defective valve and or blocked dip stick tube can create excess pressure like shown here:

That's the potential downside when the CCV is removed. and when the engine RPM returns to an idle after reving one of the highest likely circumstances to generate your symptom. FYI- I think if stop grilling chicken with burning motor oil it will taste much better.

Just did this today as I got low idle cause of broken plastic hoses if ccv valve so that's easier than ccv valve and easier to replace and if I get better mileage and get rid of carbon on my exhaust it'll be better yes

I guess the smell of burnt oil which I reported earlier had nothing to do with my CCV mod. I replaced the valve cover gasket a week before the CCV modification, I guess there's a light oil leak somewhere, not related to the CCV.

There's a guy on Youtube, Eric the Car Guy, who says that if your car burns a lot of oil and you do this CCV mod, the car will need a couple of hundred miles to burn off the remains of the oil that were in the intake and other parts. May be true as well.

I've done this

Can I get some long-term feedback from people who have done this modification?

1. According to "mlody" from different forums, he did all kinds of CCV mod, and eventually had to replace the pistons rings (all 3 rings), and only this (replacing the rings) solved his oil consumption problem.

2. Now onto this mod. When you look at the Duralast PCV Valve shown on the first page, it is basically a valve with spring inside, once the vacuum reaches a certain point, it opens up allowing vacuum to to suck air into the I.M.
In a way, this design is similar to the BMW stock CCV Valve (which also has a spring). Perhaps the Duralast spring has different design (different In Hg when it opens).
Can some gurus explain why the Duralast PCV valve is better than BMW spring?

- What is long-term report on oil consumption using this mod (or similar mod)?
The more I read the more I get confused.

cn90
2006 X5 M54 6spMT with 122K miles and 1 qt every 500 miles!

The CCV regulates flow to maintain a certain level of vacuum in the crankcase while the PCV just regulates (basically 2 positions) flow according to how much vacuum(level) is in the intake manifold. Completely different. Plus the CCV also uses a cyclone to seperate the water (and oil) droplets and return them to the crankcase.

Sorry I didn't make myself clear.

I know exactly what PCV and CCV mean. But that was not my question.

I am ONLY interested in long-term report: after some 5000-10,000 miles AFTER doing this mod by BavarianE39, what is the oil consumption BEFORE and AFTER the mod. If people can post the following info, it'd be great:

- Year/Model/Trans/Mileage (example: 2006 X5 M54 6spMT with 122K miles).

- Oil consumption BEFORE mod = _________

- Oil consumption AFTER mod = _________

See this thread

http://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/sh...umption-Solved

And this thread who has done it first
Long back
http://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/sh...tal-in-10-mins!!!

And here is you'll see another setup and mileage and cars running on this setup
http://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/sh...c-Heavy)/page4

Thanks but I have read all the threads related to M54 engine oil consumption.
It seems that mlody (aka "Elbow Grease" on youtube) eventually had to rebuild his engine using new piston rings as in the video below:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLJGoCuNDzo

But I think people are changing this ccv even me cause it's failing prematurely cause if that rubber piece inside got damaged cause of oil :(
So they shifted to this mods
Or do you think this modification make him rebuild his engine ?

- My CCV was overhauled recently, all BMW parts so it is brand-new (also cleaned the dipstick housing channels, which were not blocked). Car still consumes 1qt/500 miles.

- I am looking for long-term report on the mod.

- I may do the mod today and report back in 500 miles (another month) re oil consumption.

cn90
This is my experience with this mod:
2003 X5 3.0 Auto
Mode installed - 188k miles
Current odometer - 212k miles
Oil consumption before mode - 1QT / 1200 miles
Oil consumption after mode - 0.5QT / 6000 miles
Engine runs perfectly. No codes!

Thanks axgordon,

You convinced me, I am taking the thing apart and go to Home Depot today to get all the odds and ends.

QUESTION: I don't plan to use the Duralast PCV Valve (which is basically one-way valve with the spring inside to allow air to be sucked in at certain vacuum value) simply b/c I am afraid if the PCV is ever stucked closed, the crank case pressure will be very high and some seals will be blown, with the RMS being the worst to repair.

So, who uses Duralast PCV and who does not?

cn90, have you read the thread where people add a vac line from the capped off port on the CCV to a capped off port on the back of the intake manifold?

I did and it reduced my consumption from 1qt per <1k miles to about <.25qt per 1k (averaged over the past 4k miles). I also have some seeping somewhere.

The majority of those that do some type of modification or workaround have a CCV system that is malfunctioning, in need of repair. IMO, if there is excessive oil consumption with a properly operating CCV system something else is the core cause.

Based on the mileage most of us have on our X5s it is quite likely we have or will experience CCV issues. I think the best fix is to clean or replace the CCV components rather than modify the system. If there was no excessive oil consumption for say the first 50,000+ miles I don't see the logic that the system is the problem and should be modified.

Oil consumption due to a faulty CCV system is often corrected by replacing the oil separator flap. In extremely cold areas there is a cold weather modification from BMW to address the freezing potential.

Engineering aspects of CCV (mod vs Stock)
 

OK,

I am doing the BavarianE39's mod as we speak.

I am trying to understand why this mod works b/c:

1. I went to Autozone and got the Duralast PCV valve, I just double-checked the design:
a. Blew one way (toward I.M.), it flows.
b. Blew the other way, no flow.
Nothing special, this is the design of the PCV valve, which is basically "one-way street".

2. I also have a BMW CCV Valve lying around:
- Blocked the oil return port.
- Blew at port #2, air came out port #3.
- Blew the other way, no flow.

Don't get me wrong, I am doing the BavarianE39's mod but...

From an engineering standpoint, there is virtually no difference in the 2 designs (Mod vs Stock).
See photo below: vapor + oil is still sucked into the Intake Manifold, so why does this mod work?

The difference between the CCV and the PCV mod as far as I can tell is that the CCV separates oil from the crankcase vapors and sends it back to the crankcase. The PCV mod sends oil to a catch can. I had my CCV replaced when it went bad and have had no issues with it since.

Hi so is that conversion make too much vacum ?

https://youtu.be/IGHvc8TGwn0

cn90, does the PCV mod allow for more crankcase vacuum? If so, maybe it works the same as adding the extra vac line to the CCV port. Probably has to do with the low tension rings.

But you know I got leak in valve cover gasket and oil filter housing with this modification so I'll go with ccv better not to ruin my gaskets just done few months ago :(

I share this opinion.

I replace the CCV and all hoses and clean out the air distribution manifold about every 60k miles. Use the cold weather version of the CCV, the insulated hoses and if you live in a really cold area - retrofit the cold weather dipstick - it eliminates the baffle that gets clogged. At the same interval, I use a can of BG Products "EPR" (aka BG109) to keep the rings unstuck. I have 148k miles on my 3.0i/M54, bought it new, and it uses virtually no oil.

I have 1 car on each system, but I do have a pressure relief built into my PCV conversion for instances where the crankcase might become pressurized. The PCV valve is designed to work on an "open" crankcase. The conversion kinda works but does rely on a little bit of luck and some air getting into the crankcase.

For those with the original CCCV you can get rid of the moisture build up (and freezing) by letting a little fresh air into the system. letting the engine idle for even 1/2 a minute with the oil cap off, just before you shut it off, once in a while makes a big difference, but yes, a PITA but a good test . The better answer would be to drill and tap a small hole at the back of the valve cover and install a small orifice and filter to let a little air in.

I am trying to figure why this mod (more vacuum in crankcase) reduces oil consumption, and I think I have the answer (any engineers in forum?).

Quick review on 4-cycle engine: Intake, Compression, Power (Explosion), Exhaust.

- Compression, Power strokes have positive pressure inside the chamber (thousands of psi), creating blow-by.
- Exhaust is kind of neutral, maybe hundreds of psi or close to 0.
- It is the Intake phase that creates suction in the combustion chamber (thus the vacuum in the Intake Manifold).

My 1998 528i M52 has no oil consumption, even at 165K miles.
My 2006 X5 M54 has brand-new CCV and drinks about 1qt/500 miles. From reading mlody post and blog (aka ElbowGrease on youtube channel), the oil ring (the bottom ring) is low-tension and has a gap of 2.5mm after some 120K miles. This gap allows oil to sneak up and sucked into the chamber during intake stroke.

- My X5 Stock brand-new CCV: when removing oil cap, there is a slight hiss but no big deal, so the vacuum is not much.
- My X5 AFTER CCV Mod: when removing oil cap, there is a moderate hiss, so the vacuum is more than stock.


When the M54 is new, the gap is small (? 0.4mm), so virtually no oil sucked into chamber.
As mileage adds up, this low-tension ring wears out, creating the gap of 2.5 mm.

Anyway, the work around CCV mod that increases crankcase vacuum reduces oil consumption.

So, this is my theory, feel free to correct me. Numbers are arbitrary strictly for discussion...

1- Stock CCV: there is not enough vacuum in crankcase (neg 16 in Hg and neg 4 in Hg = difference of 12 in Hg), during Intake stroke, the differential in vacuum allows oil to be sucked into the combustion chamber ---> oil burned.

2. CCV Mod: now there is more vacuum in crankcase, close to I.M. vacuum (neg 16 in Hg and neg 12 in Hg = difference of 4 in Hg), during Intake stroke, the differential in vacuum is not enough to drive oil into the combustion chamber ---> very little or no oil burned.

Anyway, just a theory and would love to hear from some engineer gurus out there.

- First photo is the principle of 4-cycle engine.
- Second photo is Stock vs CCV Mod.



---

Very good theory! That does make some sense. :) I think also though there is another factor involved that has been addressed by some of the guys doing the mod. I think the BMW engineers got a little bit sloppy on the design of the valve cover baffle and in the way the vent tube comes off the valve cover thinking that the oil seperator would take care of any oil that got sucked in to the CCVC. By doing the mod (depending on how you go about it) there is less chance of the little bit of oil that collects on the bottom of the valve cover tube to getting sucked out.

As far as the freezing/moisture problem I think of it this way, The crankcase is closed so it is filled with moisture saturated combustion gases. The moisture ends up forming dropplets, which get seperated in the cyclone oil seperator, which ironically works much better seperating heavey moisture droplets than it does oil, and returned to the crankcase. The CCCV can only get rid of moisture vapour not droplets, so the only way to reduce the moisture is to let in a little unsaturated atmosphere to absorb it and let it get sucked through the seperater and into the intake as vapour.

I think you are on the right track. I'd offer that the lower oil control ring gets sludged up and sticks to the ring land. In order to be effective, the ring needs to spin. Some of the piston pics on E46Fanatics are disturbing.

My 2006 X5 M54 engine used to drink 1qt/400-500 miles.

Did the LOWER engine treatment (don't have time to do UPPER treatment with AC Delco thingy). This is what I did:
- 3/4 qt ATF in engine oil for 200-300 miles.
- At oil change, used Lubro Moly Engine Flush, ran engine for 10 min, then replaced oil + oil filter.
- Oil consumption is still the same, i.e., 1qt/400-500 miles

Then I did the poolman, Bavarian CCV mod, 500 miles later zero oil consumption!!!


I am very convinced that my theory above (more crank case vacuum ---> much less oil gets sucked into combustion chamber) is correct.

The key thing is the PCV Valve reducing the flow to appropriate level (3/4-inch ---> 3/8-inch). Some people on youtube didn't use the PCV Valve but they used plumbing adapter to bring it down to 3/8" or so. I still recommend the PCV Valve. Just replace/clean it every 10K-15K or whatever interval you are comfortable with.


This is my setup, thank you all for contributing.



---

UPDATE: Zero oil consumption after 500 miles with CCV Mod.

2006 X5 3.0i M54 engine 6sp MT with 122K miles.

1. Did the LOWER end treatment:
- 3/4 qt ATF for 200 miles.
- Ten (10) minutes before oil change, one bottle of Lubro Moly (500 mL) into engine oil. Ran engine at idle for 10 minutes.
- Changed engine oil and oil filter.

---> No change in oil consumption: still 1qt/400-500 miles!


2. Did the CCV Mod (Duralast 1124 Valve as in the photos).
- After 500 miles, zero oil consumption, unbelievable.
So this CCV Mod rocks!!!

Thank you all for saving my motor!!!

I think there is pilot modification only hose from vent in ccv to the back of the manifold and you got same effect of vacum
I think it's done by 50s kid on e46 on YouTube

IMO there is no connection to eliminating the oil consumption and that it is good, or bad, for the engine. Would anyone do this on a new car?

This has been discussed to great length on other forums. According to them, the M54 has low tension oil rings. Increasing crank case vacuum helps these rings seal, stopping oil consumption. Oil consumption seems to be hit or miss on M54s, but this has been a documented issue since they were first released. I'd wager that is why there is the extra capped vacuum port on the CCV and the corresponding capped port on the intake manifold. Funny enough, running a vacuum line from the CCV to the intake manifold (as shown in realoem) significantly helps, if not cures, the oil consumption issue.

^Josh did you do it on yours? Which one of the ports did you run it to? I really dont want to do the CCV job again since I only did it 2.5 years ago but this may be a good way to do it since I already upgraded to cold weather parts.

I replaced those small vac lines at the back of the manifold and the vac caps earlier this year.

It has been documented that this mod can stop oil consumption. Has it been documented if the practice is good or bad for the engine? Anybody checked if there are downsides elsewhere? Anybody know if this has been driven by saving money verses cost of rebuilding BMW system? Or, by someone that is a CCV 'expert'? What I read is it is a theory, according to, odds are, etc.

Not taking a position either way just pointing out there may be potholes on this road worth consideration.

The cold weather parts don't help that much in really cold weather. Moisture build-up freezes in the vacuum manifold instead of the CCV.

@bcredliner You do make a good point, it is a bit scary that most of the guys doing the mod don't really understand how either system works. Like I said earlier, in most cases there is a bit a luck/magic involved as well. ;)

It might be better, it's easy to innovate if you don't know it can't be done.

That is why when I do something about this, I am going to replicate a different stock system. M56 SULEV. One hopes the engineers that deployed it knew the answers to those questions...because it did get approved and implemented. I'm just going to copy them.

@lo-jack
It's best to inform yourself about how things work and know how you want to change them, not to try to copy. It might be the same engineers that designed the M54 CCCV ! What I am really curious about is why the crankcase needs to be completely closed in the first place? emmisions maybe ? to meet what spec? what is the reasoning ?

From the "Way too much info Department"
 

Closed crankcase venting systems (CCV) are a US Federal emissions requirements from the 70's as part of the requirements to capture the evaporation (venting) emissions (began in the late 60's for CA vehicles). They require a manufacturer to reduce the output of engine combustion vapors, gas evaporation, etc. The test is a vehicle in a plastic bag. Every year this capture requirement level was raised throughout the 80-90's. Before then everything was vented to the ground. Welcome to US DOT emissions regulations, now Euro and hence worldwide. See India and South America for non compliance. Gee I wonder if those vehicles had a different system due to no country mandated regulations required?

StepenVA, I think you mean "positive crankcase ventilation" PCV not CCV

I think the idea behind the CCV is to keep the recycled gases as inert as possible to reduce NOS emmisions similar to how an EGR works. Sucks for moisture though! ;( even a small amount of atmospere let in would allow the whole thing to work a lot better. I imagine the engineers where given zero tolerance though.

A PCV is a part answer to the CCV challenge. In the US we just call them PCV systems as domestic manufactures use(d) a replaceable tube/vent/orifice that used to be a annual replacement item. In the '65 model year they were required. In 1968-70 days: intake tube in the air cleaner allows filtered air in, PCV tube vented fumes into the intake and hence into the combustion chambers. Way too uncontrolled for emissions now days. A few are still around in 2000's.
ALL the easy systems are long gone....

NOX is a byproduct of combustion (air/fuel burn). The EGR was introduced to lower the temp and completeness of the burn as NOX increases as the flame wall travels to the very end of the chamber. So they introduced a part of non combustible mix to the intake side to solve that issue for 1972+. Worked OK until someone invented the ability to measure air/fuel ratios on the fly called an O2 sensor, which allows the ratio to be more controlled across the RPM/load ranges. We can and have kicked this one around way too long as it is off topic and is only interesting to SAE geeks.

We are stuck with what the engineers dreamed up and was Federalized for the US and Euro market. It works as designed. We are the last owners (most of us) so we have to suck it up and replace/clean and keep a watchful eye out for what is mostly a winter challenge. (No I did not forget about the oil consumption issue challenge with some applications/engines. Just don't have the issue personally, so I am not expending any grey matter on the issue) :rofl:

Yeah I did. I used the smaller of the two ports on the firewall side of the intake manifold. There is only one capped port on the CCV. You can get to it in place, but you need to remove the intake box/hoses, icv, and wiring junction box

@Sroor9001, I know all about those "O2Pilot" mod and "50sKid" on youtube. I want to do a definitive mod and am glad I did this mod. Once you have all the parts (hoses, clamps, Tee), you can do this on 30 min. Very very easy mod.
I am now 500 miles AFTER the CCV Mod, zero oil consumption (used to be 1qt/400 miles).

@all: re CCV vs PCV. Both systems accomplish the same goals:
a. CC blow-by gets routed back to the Intake Manifold ---> combustion chamber.
b. Oil returned to the sump.

The method is slightly different on how the gas is routed back to the Intake Manifold:

1. CCV: the spring/diaphragm has a pre-set value, once the vacuum difference exceeds ___ in Hg (let's say hypothetically, it is 10 inches Hg), the diaphragm opens.
- Let's say at idle, the I.M. vacuum is -15 inches Hg, CC is - 2 inches Hg, now the vacuum difference is > pre-set value of 10 inches Hg: the diaphragm opens, allowing blow-by gas to enter I.M.
- So, depending on how much CC gas is being produced, the diaphragm opens On-Off to allow air ---> I.M.

- FAUCET ANALOGY: similar to you turn on the faucet: "On" and "Off".


2. PCV: there is always a flow, but controlled by the spring/pintle design.
Note the difference between Vacuum vs Flow Rate, they are 2 different things.
- The vacuum difference controls the position of the spring/pintle system.

- FAUCET ANALOGY: similar to you leave faucet "On" just a hair so there is some dripping, sometimes you turn the faucet up a bit to get more flow, and turn it down to a slow dripping flow.

Japanese cars such as Honda still use PCV and emission is as good as other mfg's.
Personally, I like PCV system better b/c it is easier to maintain.

Thanks I did this but returned back to ccv cause I got leak on valve cover gasket and oil filter housing so I've bought ccv
Tried 2 pcv valve got leaked any way I'll do oil catch can if I didn't get ccv which I preferred no vacum than extreme vacum
I hope everything is running well for you if it's too cold right now I hope my ccv withstand at least 2-3 years

And just the standard BMW braided vacuum hose worked right? I may have to finagle it in place as I have the cold weather valve so that insulation might be covering my capped port, but this will probably be on my spring to-do's - if I have to I'll remove the valve and replace hoses or valve if necessary. It wasn't a fun job the first time but I imagine a second time might be easier, maybe I'll have to get the other things out of the way like OFHG as preventative while its open.

I still am not completely sold on the PCV fix as I think it might add a bit too much vacuum to the crankcase.

Wow haven't been on here in a while and this thread has sure blown up! I am happy to report that my original pcv valve is still going strong, I sold my x5 to a good friend of mine and it has accumulated 30,000+ miles on this original pcv valve. Still absolutely no oil consumption or any issues pertaining to this mod. Also no issues to report from other people around me who have done this mod, even in these cold temps everyone has no complaints!

The vac line wasn't braided, just plain rubber (11727545323). I have the cold weather version as well. I used a scalpel and cut a small square incision into the jacket for the port. I used a picture of a warn weather valve to help locate the port.

I performed this mod on my 2.5L BMW 525i, 5 speed. Very well maintained but the oil consumption was concerning. Shall monitor. Great write up.