Wrong Valve Cover

[64 Cheyenne]

I bought a VC off of ebay for $20 supposed to be for 99up.This is a Renix one,am I right?

My belief is that I need a VC and hoses off of a 4.0 from 97up to help cure my blow by oil puking issues on my 88 Chief as seen here.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=17699

 

Pics

 

 

 

 

So what years up am I looking for to get a flat baffled pan,not one with the "towers"?

Did I get sold the wrong VC?

[Automan2164]

Looks like the wrong one to me, someone else might have to chime in for complete accuracy.

 

Rob L. :dunno:

[aemsee]

Definitly wrong one.

[Oizarod115]

that looks like the renix one, 87-90

 

the later style one is stamped? metal and is curvy, it doesn't have the raised lines down the middle it has smooth lumps

[64 Cheyenne]

Got a Pic?

[HOrnbrod]

Yep. that's the cast aluminum cover for the 91+ HOs. BUT it will work on your Renix, they all had the same 16-hole mounting . Looks pretty clean too. :D The problem is you have to have the HO hoses that go with it, the correct brass adapter fittings for the intake manifold for the larger HO hoses, and use newer gasket correct for this cover (it doesn't have the steel spacers). JeffMJ modded one of the 97+ steel covers w/o the towers on his Renix and it appears to have cured his blow-by problems. Either the late model steel of cast aluminum covers will work on a Renix, but you need all the hoses, intake manifold adapter fittings, and correct gasket for either one to fit correctly.

 

EDIT: Here's Jeff's post: http://www.comancheclub.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12871&hilit=valve+cover

[maddzz1]

Yeah, that has the "tower" type baffles like a renix, but the hoses on the top are for the HO style 91-??, not positive which year they switched to the single, long baffle

[64 Cheyenne]

That is where I started this mod. I wanted to do as JeffMJ did.

My understanding is that I need to do away with the "tower" style replace with the "flat baffle" style.

As you said hornbrod,I could make this one work.Which leads me to ask why couldn't I just replace my rear vent hose with a larger one to cure my problem?

I think I could do this,but I think I'd like the added insurance of using the better updated design.

[fiatslug87]

That's not a renix valve cover,

Here are my three renix ones (90, 89, 88), the ribbing is different (see red circle above) and the bungs appear larger and more off set in yours.

OOps, everyone beat me to it while I was taking the pics.

[Oizarod115]

this is what you want!

[64 Cheyenne]

The fittings AND THE COVER ? the fittings I understand, those are what I'm looking for. Will those fit on any of my old Renix covers?

What cover is that in the pic with the red arrows?

[HOrnbrod]

As you said hornbrod,I could make this one work.Which leads me to ask why couldn't I just replace my rear vent hose with a larger one to cure my problem?

I think I could do this,but I think I'd like the added insurance of using the better updated design.

 

With my pre-stroker stock engine, I had some pretty bad blow-by problems. I did just as you ask, replaced the hoses with the late model larger rear front and rear hoses and retained my alum cover w. the tower vents. The fittings on the alum cover are either 1/4 turn to lock, or push through a grommet. I opted for the grommet fittings as I think they give a better seal. The larger hoses did completely cure the blowby for me. I am still using this setup on my stroker too. I can not speak for the full vent design in the steel cover as Jeff did, never tried it, but mine's doing just fine as is. I wanted to retain the cast aluminum cover as it's a good candidate for powder coating, polishing, or whatever. :D