Advice Needed - Catch Can for Ford Ranger Bi-turbo 2.0 Diesel

I want to ask the community that should I fit a catch can for my new car?

Here is the background. I just bought a new Ford Ranger Wildtrack and really love it. My intention is to keep it for the long term(longer than the 5 years factory warranty). I tested drove both the 3.2L single turbo and 2.0L Biturbo variances and decided to go with the 2.0l, because smoother and quieter ride, more power, modern engine design, better fuel economy, etc.

The main downside regarding the 2.0L engine, during my research, is the potential longevity of it. But it seems it is just some anecdotal evidences from someone’s mate’s distance second cousin, who had a problematic one. Nothing, that I could find out, is pointing to a common/systmetic fault, although this particular engine has only been around for about 3 years or so.

I have been reading up the potential carbon build-up issue for modern direct injection engines, especially turbocharged. It is an inherited issue regarding the direct injection technology, comparing to port injection ones. The main reason for adopting the tech is to meet the ever-growing demands for cleaner engines.

Everyone seems to agree that a properly designed and fitted catch can would definitely benefit the longevity of the engine. The main reason against it appears to be “if it is so good, why the Ford(or any other manufacturers) engineers do not install one out of the factory”. To this question, the most convincing reason is that the car manufacturers do not want to put in something that requires regular maintenance to work and rely solely on the customers to do the right thing, i.e. the can needs to be drained every few thousands of kms, or it would cause more problems.

So I would like someone with the right knowledge to give me some advice on
1. Should I fit one straight away or wait till the warranty is up? Considering I want to keep the car for long term, the initial cost is not the problem and I will endeavour to drain it regularly.
2. How much should I pay for a proper one(supply and install)?
3. Any recommendations on brands and installers? I am in the inner suburbs of Melbourne.

Thank you very much in advance.

Poll Options expired

  • 13
    Install a catch can ASAP
  • 0
    Don't do it. Waste of money
  • 0
    Install only when problems occur in the future
  • 1
    Don't mind either way


  • +1

    I've had a Provent on my 3.2 Ranger since the day after I took delivery. IMO other than the cost there's no downside to installing one. I think the kits are around $350 - $400 and are an easy DIY.

    • Thanks. How often do you drain it? Has it caused any issues with warranty or when you take your car to the dealer for servicing?

      • I don't do a lot of km (especially last year) so around every 7,000km or so. Get maybe 200ml out each time. I've never had any warranty issues but it's presence has never been raised at service

  • +1

    1) I don't know. Make some general enquiries with the dealer workshop manager.
    2 & 3) I run a Forge catch can on the Skoda (petrol). It's good but I think the diesel guys run a Mann & Hummel ProVent and it does look a better unit. The kits are usually under $400.

    One thing I'd recommend is an easy way to drain it. When I do mine I have to undo a bracket and then remove a drain plug. It doesn't sound like much but I do mine every 1000km and it's 200ml every time. Ideally you want a petcock and some tube to somewhere convenient for a 1litre milk bottle or similar so you can dispose with waste oil.

  • +2

    Get a provent kit. No downside. They don't do it from factory for some silly emissions reason more than likely. Volvo marine diesels use the provent from factory.

    Also, just for future reference, you can't get a port injected diesel. When people are comparing direct vs port injection, it's in regard to petrol engines.

    • Good point about the no port injection diesel. I did not know that

  • -1

    Oh dear. A 2 litre twin turbo ute with a towing capacity of 3,500kg?

    • Will need to see how longevity goes, but the performance tests I’ve seen the 2L wins. It’s probably to do wth the extra gears in the gearbox.

      Don’t forget it’s 3500kg towing*. Where the * stands for not in the real world. The GCM isn’t high enough to tow 3500kg and have anything more than a handkerchief and half a tank of fuel in the ute.

    • As I mentioned, the 2.0L feels much better in comparison. As technology goes, I think this is the future in comparison as well.

      I have no plan for towing anything heavy. I don’t believe for a second that 3.5t is doable unless the car is heavily modified.

      Take a deep breath, and trust the engineers have worked out most of the problems in this engine, since they have quite a few years from a few different cars.

      • +1

        The problem is , engineers have "purposefully" had to design engines to meet "emissions criteria" at the sacrifice of the performance and longevity of the engine.

        The only thing they have worked out is how to meet government regulations and design a car that won't suffer big expensive problems until after the warranty period finishes up and unfortunately Direct Injection engines suffer the most.

        When you force an engine to suck back in the shit its spitting out (unburnt petrol fumes mixed from combustion cycles filled with oil molecules and exhaust gasses) a million times a second through the PCV and Crankcase breather and any EGR valve recirculation system there is only so much a system can take before negative byproducts of said process become apparent.

        Its all done for "the environment" and so people don't breathe in toxic gasses which is understandably so , year on year engines get more advanced as does the combustion cycle and technology as a whole but being realistic , petrol engines and diesel especially are just not built to not produce emissions and function 100% at the same time. kind of like humans in general really.

        not all but some modern day performance cars come with air/oil separators which is similar to how an oil catch can functions however it is more beneficial to have a dedicated can for the PCV and for the Crankcase with regular disposal once a baseline has been set.

        but the reason this isn't done from the factory in order of importance.

        1. 95% of customers won't empty it leading to warranty issues (i.e they don't know how , don't have the tools , cant reach it , too scared etc)

        2. added cost to the factory added cost to the consumer (people are already tight with cars as is , tell them to spend another $1k on it for "longevity" and they will tell you to go jump. if something lasts 5 years+ its someone elses problem once they sell the car.

        3.if the vehicle meets current emission standards = it doesn't matter , corporations got bigger things to worry about.

        4.increase servicing costs which are stupidly high as is ($299 for a capped service on new cars , heres looking at you ford.) add on another $30 for a mech to empty out the can , yeah right.

        if you want something done right , you do it yourself.

        • +1

          So the problem is not the engineers who are doing the fright thing and reducing emissions, it’s customers who still think they don’t need maintenance on a complex piece of engineering.

          • @Euphemistic: absolutely

        • thanks for the info. I guess I will just be a good customer and do the right thing. It is my hard earning cash after all.

    • What's the issue?

Login or Join to leave a comment