Oil catch can comparison - test results - The Mustang Source - Ford Mustang Forums

Go Back  The Mustang Source - Ford Mustang Forums > Mustang by Model Year > 2010-2014 Mustang
Oil catch can comparison - test results >

Oil catch can comparison - test results

Notices
2010-2014 Mustang News on the Previous Generation Mustang

Oil catch can comparison - test results

Old 7/27/14, 01:11 PM
  #1  
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
 
dmichaels's Avatar
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: CT
Posts: 2,460
Thanked 109 Times in 100 Posts
Oil catch can comparison - test results

I see the other thread got shut down, so hopefully this one can be dedicated only to actual testing results as myself and Monte start to get some...

First, I am in no way affiliated with either JLT or RX at this point in time. I'm running some independent testing to support the good of the Mustang and track cars.

My setup: JLT and RX in series on the passenger side. The JLT is currently in line first, then the RX, then back to the intake.

Test conditions part 1:
Location: Thompson Speedway Motorsports Park 1.7 mile road course
Date: July 22, 2014
Distance driven on track: 130 miles
Time driving on track: 2.5 hours
Fuel consumed: ~24 gallons

Results (measurements pending my acquisition of a measuring device....)
JLT allowed significant oil to pass through, which was caught in the RX can. The RX can caught approximately double what was captured in the JLT can even being downstream and catching "cleaned" air.

Image:
Oil catch can comparison - test results-photo-1-.jpg



Both catch cans have been emptied and reset for my next outing which will be a 2 day event at Watkins Glen in NY coming up in mid August.

Last edited by dmichaels; 7/27/14 at 01:12 PM.
dmichaels is offline  
Old 7/27/14, 01:14 PM
  #2  
Shelby GT500 Member
 
Stevedotmil's Avatar
 
Join Date: July 15, 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,705
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Hmmmmmm......
Stevedotmil is offline  
Old 7/27/14, 01:39 PM
  #3  
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
 
dmichaels's Avatar
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: CT
Posts: 2,460
Thanked 109 Times in 100 Posts
Originally Posted by Stevedotmil View Post
Hmmmmmm......
I am not making any conclusions yet of course, just presenting some data. As an engineer, I rely on multiple data points, so more will be coming for sure. But I'm encouraged by these initial results and surprised at how much oil was going right past the JLT separator...

As a side note, the quantity of oil collected in the JLT separator is extremely close to the quantity I have collected from it for my previous 4 track outings this season for which I had it installed. Unfortunately I don't have those data points to add in, but I so nothing out of the ordinary in terms of the oil collected in the JLT piece for this event. Only was surprised by how much additional oil was caught in the RX can!
dmichaels is offline  
Old 7/27/14, 01:44 PM
  #4  
Cobra Member
 
typesredline's Avatar
 
Join Date: February 11, 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,148
Thanks: 0
Thanked 20 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by dmichaels View Post
I am not making any conclusions yet of course, just presenting some data. As an engineer, I rely on multiple data points, so more will be coming for sure. But I'm encouraged by these initial results and surprised at how much oil was going right past the JLT separator... As a side note, the quantity of oil collected in the JLT separator is extremely close to the quantity I have collected from it for my previous 4 track outings this season for which I had it installed. Unfortunately I don't have those data points to add in, but I so nothing out of the ordinary in terms of the oil collected in the JLT piece for this event. Only was surprised by how much additional oil was caught in the RX can!
So far, I don't see anything of merit. We all know the the JLT captures next to nothing. And we've also seen this same inline test done with JLT and Bobs, and Bobs caught more than double the JLT.
typesredline is offline  
Old 7/27/14, 02:21 PM
  #5  
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
 
dmichaels's Avatar
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: CT
Posts: 2,460
Thanked 109 Times in 100 Posts
Originally Posted by typesredline View Post
So far, I don't see anything of merit. We all know the the JLT captures next to nothing. And we've also seen this same inline test done with JLT and Bobs, and Bobs caught more than double the JLT.
So the RX may be roughly the same as Bob's. I have had no experience with any other catch can besides JLT, so I was happy to have pulled a lot more oil with the RX can.

I'm collecting and providing data as I get it
dmichaels is offline  
Old 7/27/14, 03:08 PM
  #6  
Bullitt Member
 
silverstate777's Avatar
 
Join Date: March 27, 2012
Location: Nevada
Posts: 400
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by dmichaels View Post
So the RX may be roughly the same as Bob's. I have had no experience with any other catch can besides JLT, so I was happy to have pulled a lot more oil with the RX can.

I'm collecting and providing data as I get it
Thanks for doing this testing and posting your results.

I can send you a used large body Moroso for a comparison, PM if interested:

http://www.moroso.com/eb/catalog/nav...nuId=main.menu
silverstate777 is offline  
Old 7/27/14, 03:34 PM
  #7  
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
 
dmichaels's Avatar
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: CT
Posts: 2,460
Thanked 109 Times in 100 Posts
Sending PM
dmichaels is offline  
Old 7/27/14, 04:05 PM
  #8  
Mach 1 Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2013
Posts: 684
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
I'm about 500 miles into my test. I will probably post the first round of results at 1,000 miles. I will be interested to see how the Bob's does since it appears it's a forum favorite.


dmichaels,
Did you happen to check the line coming off of the RX can and going to the intake for signs of oil?


Wayne

Last edited by 70monte; 7/27/14 at 04:08 PM.
70monte is offline  
Old 7/27/14, 04:17 PM
  #9  
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
 
dmichaels's Avatar
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: CT
Posts: 2,460
Thanked 109 Times in 100 Posts
Originally Posted by 70monte View Post
I'm about 500 miles into my test. I will probably post the first round of results at 1,000 miles. I will be interested to see how the Bob's does since it appears it's a forum favorite.


dmichaels,
Did you happen to check the line coming off of the RX can and going to the intake for signs of oil?


Wayne
Not yet - I will do so this evening.
dmichaels is offline  
Old 7/27/14, 05:18 PM
  #10  
Mach 1 Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2013
Posts: 684
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by dmichaels View Post
Not yet - I will do so this evening.

Ok, thanks. This is what I like to look for to see how a can is working.


Back last year when I first got my UPR can, it would catch a lot of oil but the line at the intake would be soaked with oil so it obviously was also letting a lot of oil through.


Wayne
70monte is offline  
Old 7/27/14, 08:31 PM
  #11  
I Have No Life
 
FromZto5's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 24, 2011
Posts: 10,090
Thanked 157 Times in 135 Posts
Interesting!

Here's some other info for you guys. I emptied my bobs for the first time after ~500 normal miles, mostly city. No measurement, but approximately 2 tablespoons.
Attached Thumbnails Oil catch can comparison - test results-image-1314246392.jpg  
FromZto5 is offline  
Old 7/30/14, 11:09 AM
  #12  
Member
 
Tuner Boost's Avatar
 
Join Date: July 4, 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 24
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Will want to see the results of the Bob's. In testing in the past, the RX still caught app twice as much as the Bob's unit, but independent testing here should confirm that.

And anything technical, just ask and I can provide all the data anyone would want.

There have been close to 40 different cans tested this way (the fairest we can think of) and the best only caught 45% of the oil and the RX caught 95-99%. But time will show.
Tuner Boost is offline  
Old 7/30/14, 11:47 AM
  #13  
FR500 Member
 
David Young's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 16, 2009
Location: Clinton Tennessee
Posts: 3,128
Thanked 40 Times in 37 Posts
I 'was' going to ask for a Bob's catch can for next Christmas, to replace my JLT. Going to see how this test goes first
David Young is offline  
Old 7/30/14, 12:06 PM
  #14  
GTR Member
 
Gabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: August 7, 2011
Location: NH
Posts: 4,909
Thanked 336 Times in 292 Posts
$300 for a catch can though?


(referring to the RX piece)
Gabe is offline  
Old 7/30/14, 12:28 PM
  #15  
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Join Date: May 6, 2012
Location: Crofton MD
Posts: 2,060
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Gabe View Post
$300 for a catch can though?


(referring to the RX piece)
About the same price as a Peterson or Mighty Mouse.
Brandon302 is offline  
Old 7/30/14, 01:03 PM
  #16  
GTR Member
 
Gabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: August 7, 2011
Location: NH
Posts: 4,909
Thanked 336 Times in 292 Posts
Originally Posted by Brandon302 View Post
About the same price as a Peterson or Mighty Mouse.

Huh?

WTF are those?
Gabe is offline  
Old 7/30/14, 02:28 PM
  #17  
I Have No Life
 
FromZto5's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 24, 2011
Posts: 10,090
Thanked 157 Times in 135 Posts
^ LOL... exactly my question.
FromZto5 is offline  
Old 7/30/14, 02:36 PM
  #18  
Bullitt Member
 
silverstate777's Avatar
 
Join Date: March 27, 2012
Location: Nevada
Posts: 400
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Stang TV did a review on the Peterson:

http://www.stangtv.com/tech-stories/...oil-separator/
silverstate777 is offline  
Old 7/30/14, 02:55 PM
  #19  
Cobra Member
 
typesredline's Avatar
 
Join Date: February 11, 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,148
Thanks: 0
Thanked 20 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by Tuner Boost View Post
Will want to see the results of the Bob's. In testing in the past, the RX still caught app twice as much as the Bob's unit, but independent testing here should confirm that. And anything technical, just ask and I can provide all the data anyone would want. There have been close to 40 different cans tested this way (the fairest we can think of) and the best only caught 45% of the oil and the RX caught 95-99%. But time will show.
So bobs catches double+ over the jlt. RX catches double the jlt. But the RX also catches double bobs?? Come one man. Quit with the bs....

And PLEASE. Explain how you know what % you're capturing. You have no idea that the RX is getting 10% or 80% of total. I've asked this now 4 times. Your refusal to address proves your lack of credibility.

Last edited by typesredline; 7/30/14 at 03:01 PM.
typesredline is offline  
Old 7/30/14, 02:58 PM
  #20  
Cobra Member
 
typesredline's Avatar
 
Join Date: February 11, 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,148
Thanks: 0
Thanked 20 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by David Young View Post
I 'was' going to ask for a Bob's catch can for next Christmas, to replace my JLT. Going to see how this test goes first
Stick with bobs bro. Too much bs with the RX can. Plus it's more the double the cost.

Originally Posted by Gabe View Post
$300 for a catch can though? (referring to the RX piece)
Originally Posted by Brandon302 View Post
About the same price as a Peterson or Mighty Mouse.
Never heard of um. I bet tuner boost has tested them though! And I bet they capture less than half of the RX can too!
typesredline is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Oil catch can comparison - test results


Featured Sponsors

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.