Hayden Krank Vent

[gs11ezrydr]

I have noticed some people on the site here have installed this Hayden Krank Vent. I have been doing some research and looking at several tests done on this unit and the Spyke venting system also. I see they claim 2 - 7 HP increases quicker revving, better ring sealing,etc. on some of the sites. The only actual dyno tests I have found claim absolutly 0 HP no quicker throttle response etc. They claim that it no more than a glorified PVC valve at 99$-127$ Except on some of the old Harleys they seem to keep from blowing base gaskets as often.I was just wondering what any of you had to say about this product and what were some of the results you have found if any. Thanks for any and all responses.

 

[posplayr]

http://www.haydensm6.com/kvp.htm

More than simply venting your crankcase fumes, the Krank Vent Plus controls the air under the pistons by maintaining the proper amount of vacuum in the crankcase at any RPM. You'll gain 2-8% of useable rear wheel horsepower. Your engine gains a quicker throttle response. The unit snaps open for easy cleaning, is not restricted to position and is compact and light weight to fit all Harley Davidsons, including the hard to fit 93 and up head-breathers.

Boy that sure sounds like a stretch.

I put a pressure gauge on mine(off the oil filler) to see if there was any blow by and I saw no appreciable pressure on my 1166ed GS1100ED

 

[tfb]

Snake oil salesmen.

 

[Agemax]

2-8% increase in power??????? sounds like a load of BS to me........

 

[Guest]

Regardless of what you think, the Hayden Krank Vent does work, but I have found that it only works for a short time until it wears out the umbrella valve. There is another Crank Vent out there that is supposed to have different lifetime material for the vent valve. It's cheaper than the Hayden, has a lifetime guarantee, and I will most likely get one to test before I give up on the idea. When they are working there is a nice difference that you will notice, but until I find one that is 100% reliable, I wouldn't recommend the expense. Umbrella valves for the Hayden are cheap, but the four cylinder motors eat them for lunch and I'm getting tired of changing them monthly.

 

[AJ]

Regardless of what you think, the Hayden Krank Vent does work, but I have found that it only works for a short time until it wears out the umbrella valve. There is another Crank Vent out there that is supposed to have different lifetime material for the vent valve. It's cheaper than the Hayden, has a lifetime guarantee, and I will most likely get one to test before I give up on the idea. When they are working there is a nice difference that you will notice, but until I find one that is 100% reliable, I wouldn't recommend the expense. Umbrella valves for the Hayden are cheap, but the four cylinder motors eat them for lunch and I'm getting tired of changing them monthly.

Hey OV66, do you think an automotive PCV valve might work?

We should go riding sometime if the weather ever warms up!

 

[Guest]

No, not at all. It has to be an extremely fast one way valve to maintain a vacuum in the crank case. Take a look at these guys though: http://www.et-performance.com/motorcycles.html

 

[Guest]

Ha, the first normal spring in many years, you are too used to winter to Sahara Summer, but definitely on the riding.

 

[posplayr]

Regardless of what you think, the Hayden Krank Vent does work, but I have found that it only works for a short time until it wears out the umbrella valve. There is another Crank Vent out there that is supposed to have different lifetime material for the vent valve. It's cheaper than the Hayden, has a lifetime guarantee, and I will most likely get one to test before I give up on the idea. When they are working there is a nice difference that you will notice, but until I find one that is 100% reliable, I wouldn't recommend the expense. Umbrella valves for the Hayden are cheap, but the four cylinder motors eat them for lunch and I'm getting tired of changing them monthly.

What does work mean? Stops blow by, stops oil leaks, stocks bluepuffs, increases hp(how much)? creates a vacuum in the crank case?


What are you running it on.

 

[Agemax]

What does work mean? Stops blow by, stops oil leaks, stocks bluepuffs, increases hp(how much)? creates a vacuum in the crank case?


What are you running it on.

it doesn't "work" or "stop" anything as far as i can tell. i cant see how it can increase horse power?

 

[Guest]

Allows the motor to create it's own vacuum. I can't qualify horse power, but it does add more low end power and somewhat better gas mileage, that is until the one way valve wears out..

 

[AJ]

OV66 knows I am skeptical, certainly about horsepower improvement claims of 2 to 7 hp, but, in his defense, it is common in drag race engines to use vacuum pumps to reduce crankcase pressure. Here's a link (one of many) http://www.dragstuff.com/techarticles/vacuum-pumps.html
If the Hayden valve can actually help pull a vacuum, then maybe it helps improve horsepower too.
http://www.dragstuff.com/techarticles/vacuum-pumps.html

 

[Agemax]

OV66 knows I am skeptical, certainly about horsepower improvement claims of 2 to 7 hp, but, in his defense, it is common in drag race engines to use vacuum pumps to reduce crankcase pressure. Here's a link (one of many) http://www.dragstuff.com/techarticles/vacuum-pumps.html
If the Hayden valve can actually help pull a vacuum, then maybe it helps improve horsepower too.
http://www.dragstuff.com/techarticles/vacuum-pumps.html

why would you need a vacuum pump to reduce pressure? if it is vented then any pressure will be naturally expelled into a lower pressure atmosphere.
OV is saying that it creates a vacuum in the crankcase, not to suck the pressure out?............

 

[AJ]

Added note: The crankcase volume in a conventional two-up/two-down inline 4 cylinder engine is pretty constant, since two pistons go up as the other two go down, offsetting the displacement.

You need the engine to create a lot of variation in crankcase volume for something like the Hayden valve to really pull a vacuum. For example, V-twin Harley engines use a single crank pin, so the pistons somewhat rise and fall together (offset in phase by the 70 degree (?) V-angle of the cylinders). When the pistons fall, they push air out the breather. If you have a check valve that prevents air from going back in, then a vacuum is pulled as the pistons rise again. The vacuum reduces drag on the pistons and probably helps keep the oil from foaming so much.

I know that Harley motors "breath" a lot of air out the breather tube. You can really feel it. I don't feel nearly so much out of an inline 4. Perhaps the Yamaha crossplane engine would get more benefit.

 

[Guest]

I have not set up a vacuum gauge on the crank case. With the bike on the side stand running and the oil cap unscrewed, you can watch the oil cap bobble as it is sucked back into the hole. If you split the Hayden vent at the O-ring while you are doing this, the cap falls right off. That would indicate to me that some vacuum is being created even at idle. It may be just enough to offset the effects of blow by though it can't stop it. I do know it has some benefits that are noticeable or I wouldn't fool with it. The Hayden vent design isn't the answer the valve wears out too fast, hopefully there is a reliable one out there. I'm backing out of Crank Vent discussions. Too many opinions by people who have never done it.

 

[Agemax]

Added note: The crankcase volume in a conventional two-up/two-down inline 4 cylinder engine is pretty constant, since two pistons go up as the other two go down, offsetting the displacement.

You need the engine to create a lot of variation in crankcase volume for something like the Hayden valve to really pull a vacuum. For example, V-twin Harley engines use a single crank pin, so the pistons somewhat rise and fall together (offset in phase by the 70 degree (?) V-angle of the cylinders). When the pistons fall, they push air out the breather. If you have a check valve that prevents air from going back in, then a vacuum is pulled as the pistons rise again. The vacuum reduces drag on the pistons and probably helps keep the oil from foaming so much.

I know that Harley motors "breath" a lot of air out the breather tube. You can really feel it. I don't feel nearly so much out of an inline 4. Perhaps the Yamaha crossplane engine would get more benefit.

i am not trying to cause an argument here i just cant get my head around these allegations. if a vacuum is pulled as the pistons rise then they are experiencing MORE drag, as they are trying to pull away from a vacuum.

also the informative link you posted is interesting but they are talking 30hp gain on a 555ci BBC engine, that is 9000cc (give or take a few). so a 60ci, or 1000cc motor in theory would gain close to 3bhp, but in reality the internal workings of the smaller,lighter bike engine would not create the necessary "reciprocating mass" inside the engine,proportional to the gii ci engine.

i think i am confusing myself now............

 

[AJ]

i am not trying to cause an argument here i just cant get my head around these allegations. if a vacuum is pulled as the pistons rise then they are experiencing MORE drag, as they are trying to pull away from a vacuum.

also the informative link you posted is interesting but they are talking 30hp gain on a 555ci BBC engine, that is 9000cc (give or take a few). so a 60ci, or 1000cc motor in theory would gain close to 3bhp, but in reality the internal workings of the smaller,lighter bike engine would not create the necessary "reciprocating mass" inside the engine,proportional to the gii ci engine.

i think i am confusing myself now............

Also not trying to cause an argument either, but it is an interesting discussion.

You would not be "causing drag" by having vacuum under a piston, although you are thinking (correctly) that you would have differential pressure that would create an opposing force as the piston rises. But you will also have a higher pressure differential as the piston falls (for both intake and ignition strokes), so maybe it's a wash there.

If you have a vacuum, you won't have turbulence created in the crankcase, which is more than just the pressure differential above/below the piston.

In a vented design, the falling piston has to push air out a complex pathway hitting moving parts (crank with weights), up through a small channel to the head where it vents. It does the reverse as it sucks air back into the crankcase as the piston rises. All that translates to lost WORK. If you block off the flow, you won't do that work. That, together with reduced drag of moving parts in lower air pressure is probably responsible for any potential horsepower realization. You're not making more horsepower, you're just losing less horsepower that can now be applied to the crankshaft as output power.

I think the rest of your rough calculation is correct.
555 cui car engine = 9100 cc
1000 cc Suzuki engine (but spinning twice as fast) ~ 2000 cc equivalent

If you could conceivably pick up 30 HP on the car engine, then maybe you could pick up 2000/9100 x 30 = 6.5 HP. That assumes that it actually works

 

[Agemax]

Also not trying to cause an argument either, but it is an interesting discussion.

You would not be "causing drag" by having vacuum under a piston, although you are thinking (correctly) that you would have differential pressure that would create an opposing force as the piston rises. But you will also have a higher pressure differential as the piston falls (for both intake and ignition strokes), so maybe it's a wash there.

If you have a vacuum, you won't have turbulence created in the crankcase, which is more than just the pressure differential above/below the piston.

In a vented design, the falling piston has to push air out a complex pathway hitting moving parts (crank with weights), up through a small channel to the head where it vents. It does the reverse as it sucks air back into the crankcase as the piston rises. All that translates to lost WORK. If you block off the flow, you won't do that work. That, together with reduced drag of moving parts in lower air pressure is probably responsible for any potential horsepower realization. You're not making more horsepower, you're just losing less horsepower that can now be applied to the crankshaft as output power.

I think the rest of your rough calculation is correct.
555 cui car engine = 9100 cc
1000 cc Suzuki engine (but spinning twice as fast) ~ 2000 cc equivalent

If you could conceivably pick up 30 HP on the car engine, then maybe you could pick up 2000/9100 x 30 = 6.5 HP. That assumes that it actually works

ok, fair comments. but........ doesn't the internals rely on turbulence to enhance the splash oil feed. and as stated in your link oil feed to small end bearings is compromised. that is no problem on a 1/4 mile drag engine but what about a 100 mile non stop thrashing through the twisties?

also, i have 2 vents in my engine, the oil filler and the stock head cover vent so venting pressure would be less of a complicated passage,

 

[AJ]

ok, fair comments. but........ doesn't the internals rely on turbulence to enhance the splash oil feed. and as stated in your link oil feed to small end bearings is compromised. that is no problem on a 1/4 mile drag engine but what about a 100 mile non stop thrashing through the twisties?

also, i have 2 vents in my engine, the oil filler and the stock head cover vent so venting pressure would be less of a complicated passage,

Agreed. I'm actually pretty skeptical. Especially about using it on a 2-up/2-down 4 cylinder engine.

Plus, the $100 Hayden valve would pay for more than a few pints for me and my friends! Cheers!

 

[posplayr]

More reading on Krank Vent

http://www.et-performance.com/faq.html

http://www.jpcycles.com/instructions/pdf/432-271.pdf

http://www.google.com/patents/US5967178

See the description in the patent, it is a type of one way check valve that works best for 1 and 2 cylinder motors. Where the rise and fall of the pistons would create a pressure imbalance in the crankcase.

There should be minimal effect on an GS Inline 4