[SrpRacing]

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2019/MC-10162078-0001.pdf

This list for 18+ but it also relates to 15+ F150s in a way. Rock Auto needs to update their catalog. Tasca also lists the brown as the only PCV valve.

That valve they sent you is for 3.5L Flex NON Turbo. You need the PCV valve for the 3.5L Turbo Gas.

Emission System for 2015 Ford F-150 | TascaParts.com

www.tascaparts.com

 

[smitty6153]

Strange. RA shows EV281 for the 5.0 which is Brown in color. They show the one I got for both; 3.5Eco and 3.5 NA

Sent from my SM-N976U using Tapatalk

 

[SrpRacing]

Their listings are wrong and need updating. They more than likely merge all engine types in their catalogs.

This is the valve you need.

2010-2024 Ford PCV Valve KR3Z-6A666-A | TascaParts.com

2010-2024 Ford part # KR3Z-6A666-A - PCV Valve

www.tascaparts.com

 

[SrpRacing]

I was able to confirm that 4L5Z-6A666-AA is strictly for NA applications. If you do have this valve on your 3.5L I highly advise switching it to the brown pcv.


You can definitely blow thru both ways with the grey valve LOL.

 

[smitty6153]

I left the brown one in for now. Haven't ordered a replacement yet

Sent from my SM-N976U using Tapatalk

 

[D0ncH]

The PCV is a vacuum metering device. If too much vacuum is put on the crankcase and the valve is removed, you will suck up oil.

It’s best to get one installed when you get the chance. UPR even no longer recommends gutting the pcv valve.

A system that removes the intake manifold connection is the only one suitable for the removal of the pcv valve.

Put a new brown pcv back in and the idle is smoother. Who knew!? Thanks

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk

 

[SrpRacing]

I thought I would go ahead and update this thread(Even tho it’s not mine) with my findings.

I was able to contact one of the Head Ecoboost engineers who now is head of the Ranger platform and he provided me with any/all information I needed.

The brown pcv is simply a higher flowing pcv to help with fuel dillution. The plus of this one PCV is seats completely under boost.
The reasoning behind the oil found in the intercooler was due to the fact that the original pcv had a very low flow. With its low flow, vapors favored the cleanside vent. The original pcv was fords 1st take on limiting the amount of blowby sucked into the chamber. Since the vacuum in the turbo inlet is strong, a certain pcv was selected to achieve its function when cruising.

With the design of the crankcase ventilation, the ecoboost motors will never experience positive crankcase pressure. UNLESS the pcv were to fail ,no vent was provided, internal damage etc. He even stated the stock crankcase ventilation is good for even more power. Example being the GT and Raptor. But if pushing larger numbers then improvements can be made.

Overall I was very thankful with him providing answers I have been searching for months. With the knowledge he provided I will be starting another thread regarding correct crankcase ventilation.

Anyone with a 11-14 F150 3.5 I highly recommend throwing in the improved PCV :KR3Z-6A666-A. Following the change it is best to perform a KAM reset.

2010-2024 Ford PCV Valve KR3Z-6A666-A | TascaParts.com

2010-2024 Ford part # KR3Z-6A666-A - PCV Valve

www.tascaparts.com

 

[DNA Dan]

You have my blessing to hijack all you want! Excellent info. Been running the brown and feel the truck just runs better.

 

[Arkansas Eco]

I thought I would go ahead and update this thread(Even tho it’s not mine) with my findings.

I was able to contact one of the Head Ecoboost engineers who now is head of the Ranger platform and he provided me with any/all information I needed.

The improved PCV was created to correct the crankcase flow thru the crankcase while preventing the crankcase from being pressurized. With it sealing under boost, it actually allows the clean side vent(connected to the turbo inlet) to become more effective. Improved ring seal meaning less blowby and more effective power. Also keeping the oil clean.

With the new design of the plunger, it specifically was design to allow only fuel vapors and not oil to pass into the manifold. The fuel vapors/contaminants passed actually evaporate within minutes if you wanted to test the theory. The idea behind the fuel vapors passing is if the vapor travels fast enough in its form, buildup would never occur or at least slow the process. Later years you notice the pcv hose becoming shorter and closer to the manifold to lessen the chance of the vapor condensing. In its gas form it’s easily combustible.

The reasoning behind the oil found in the intercooler was due to the fact that the original pcv did not have a successful rate at closing under boost. Blowing boost into the crankcase pushing oil out of the clean side vent. The original pcv was fords 1st take on limiting the amount of blowby sucked into the chamber. It was apparently too effective and for those that never drove the truck intended, oil would rise due to contamination. With the revised pcv the only thing being put into the intercooler is fuel vapors from combustion. Little to no oil should be observed and will not effect combustion at all.

With the design of the crankcase ventilation, the ecoboost motors will never experience positive crankcase pressure. UNLESS the pcv were to fail ,no vent was provided, internal damage etc. He even stated the stock crankcase ventilation is good for even more power. Example being the GT and Raptor. But if pushing larger numbers then improvements can be made.

Overall I was very thankful with him providing answers I have been searching for months. With the knowledge he provided I will be starting another thread regarding correct crankcase ventilation.

Anyone with a 11-14 F150 3.5 I highly recommend throwing in the improved PCV :KR3Z-6A666-A. Following the change it is best to perform a KAM reset.

2010-2024 Ford PCV Valve KR3Z-6A666-A | TascaParts.com

2010-2024 Ford part # KR3Z-6A666-A - PCV Valve

www.tascaparts.com

Thank you ! I have had zero issues since installing the brown a few months ago 👍🏼

 

[winchested]

I put my black one back in. Don't see a difference.

Could be because I run the dual valve catch can?

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

 

[SrpRacing]

I put my black one back in. Don't see a difference.

Could be because I run the dual valve catch can?

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

I was actually going to go into detail on that in another thread. To shorten it...Those running a dual valve setup will notice no difference between the two valves because of how the can is routed and the amount of check valves used. There is no real benefit of running a dual valve now.

 

[winchested]

I was actually going to go into detail on that in another thread. To shorten it...Those running a dual valve setup will notice no difference between the two valves because of how the can is routed and the amount of check valves used. There is no benefit running a dual valve. If anything they’ve actually made the ventilation less effective.

The check valves they claim are “high flowing” are not high flowing at all and have a very low flow coefficient. Not only that but the check “ball” valves they use weigh more than the plunger used in our PCV valves.

Well the benefit is I'm not baking on oil carbon on my valves...

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

 

[SrpRacing]

Well the benefit is I'm not baking on oil carbon on my valves...

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

I completely agree and understand. I’m not talking down on the effectiveness of catching the blowby. I was just simply stating the design approach makes the crankcase ventilation less effective when releasing pressure. Running a can on either side would keep the stock flow and allow the crankcase to follow it’s designed ventilation.

The stock design flow goes from atmospheric to negative the further you go into boost. Which is exactly what you want.

 

[WooBoost]

Or delete the PCV like I did

There might be some truth to SRP data. He hooked up gauges to the oil cap. I ran dual RX and had vac pump seal leak and even rear main. This did not happen until I put GT turbos on running more boost. Around 50 k I think? Too much pressure building up IMO

 

[DNA Dan]

Not all check valves are created equal. What about the UPR ball type check valves? They are way tighter and lighter to operate than the PCV weight.

 

[SrpRacing]

Not all check valves are created equal. What about the UPR ball type check valves? They are way tighter and lighter to operate than the PCV weight.

The standard UPR check valves that have the Teflon internals actually functioned better than the “upgraded” ball type. The Teflon internals kept the functionality of the pcv valve but of course flow was slightly interrupted. (More info to come). The internals were lighter than pcv plunger.

 

[winchested]

The standard UPR check valves that have the Teflon internals actually functioned better than the “upgraded” ball type. The Teflon internals kept the functionality of the pcv valve but of course flow was slightly interrupted. (More info to come). The internals were lighter than pcv plunger.

The so called “Upgraded” check valves actually require a lot more effort to open and to stay open. They are not zero cracking At all. That is very false. The standard check valves had a much lower cracking pressure than the upgraded. Our pcv valve actually has a cracking pressure of .2psi. That’s VERY low. You can use that for reference. Anything that has a higher cracking pressure renders the pcv inoperable.

Because they went with a ball design it’s incredibly difficult to pull open and allow flow. You can even test this yourself. Suck on the pcv valve and realize how easy it opens allowing full flow. Now try the “upgraded” check valve. Notice how it cracks then does not open anymore? You can even feel/hear the ball jumping around struggling to open. That’s a big no no and is ultimately making the pcv ineffective to do its job. Now imagine two or three of those on long lines. Now that the valve is farther away from the source of vacuum, it’s job is now even harder to open.


Crankcase pressure with the standard check valves was still reading atmospheric to positive( due to flow restrictions), BUT it was lower than with the upgraded check valves Mx

There's only 1 on each line flowing away from the can.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

 

[SrpRacing]

There's only 1 on each line flowing away from the can.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Yes that’s correct. I was more so getting the point across having more than one check valve, that is barely operable by itself, in a system. Not only that but larger lines require more vacuum to allow them to function and having them placed far from the source taxes the amount of vacuum needed as well. I observed this on 5 different vehicles all with the same results.

I even contacted UPR about what I was observing between the two check valves and all they gave me was a cold shoulder. That if I’m not happy with my product to move to another.

By all means anyone can keep running that setup, but you are just getting less than stock crankcase ventilation.

 

[winchested]

Yes that’s correct. I was more so getting the point across having more than one check valve, that is barely operable by itself, in a system. Not only that but larger lines require more vacuum to allow them to function and having them placed far from the source taxes the amount of vacuum needed as well. I observed this on 5 different vehicles all with the same results.

I even contacted UPR about what I was observing between the two check valves and all they gave me was a cold shoulder. That if I’m not happy with my product to move to another.

By all means anyone can keep running that setup, but you are just getting less than stock crankcase ventilation.

Ah good to know thanks. Been running mine near 100k km, seeing no leakage on the engine which is good.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

 

[WooBoost]

The reasoning behind the oil found in the intercooler was due to the fact that the original pcv did not have a successful rate at closing under boost. Blowing boost into the crankcase pushing oil out of the clean side vent. The original pcv was fords 1st take on limiting the amount of blowby sucked into the chamber. It was apparently too effective and for those that never drove the truck intended, oil would rise due to contamination. With the revised pcv the only thing being put into the intercooler is fuel vapors from combustion. Little to no oil should be observed and will not effect combustion at all.

Even 11-14 trucks with the brown PCV get fluid in the intercooler though