Oil separators and fate...(JLT vs Bob's vs Moroso)
#102
Cobra Member
very nice looking car under the hood there!
Sorry - there is A LOT of new lingo that's been flooding my gates since I've joined the forum. what's that bobs thing you're talking about? it looks like the catch can, is that the same thing just a different name? lol sorry
Sorry - there is A LOT of new lingo that's been flooding my gates since I've joined the forum. what's that bobs thing you're talking about? it looks like the catch can, is that the same thing just a different name? lol sorry
#103
I Have No Life
Thread Starter
very nice looking car under the hood there! Sorry - there is A LOT of new lingo that's been flooding my gates since I've joined the forum. what's that bobs thing you're talking about? it looks like the catch can, is that the same thing just a different name? lol sorry
#104
Mach 1 Member
Nice install Burton. Good looking underhood...'specially that big huffer! Weren't you going to go with Aeroquip braided lines on the A/O separator? When are you going to get those fancy battery and brake master covers?
John
John
#105
I Have No Life
Thread Starter
As far as battery covers and brake master covers... Soon john.. Soon
#107
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: March 27, 2014
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#108
Bullitt Member
Using a plain unmarked 1.0 ounce shot glass, I’ve been draining between 1/4 and 1/3 of an ounce per 1,000 miles on my large body Moroso since going FI. I recently switched to a small body Moroso and will have to start over with a new baseline. I’m wondering if there will be a difference in separator efficiency between the large/small body styles? They are both passenger side only application. Either way, I probably should pick up a small measuring glass like lakeguy77 uses for more accurate measurements. As a loose comparison, my former NA ‘12 V6 collected between 1/3 to 1/2 of an ounce per 3,000 miles with a JLT separator. This data was collected over the course of 21,000 miles.
The anti-oil separator naysayers claim they are not needed, I get that. My background is with large shipboard diesel engines and most makes had oil separators installed. Diesel vs. Gas engines = apples and oranges? Perhaps.
(the engine in the pic is a typical Colt V10 4.2 model and puts out around 500,000 foot pounds of torque when those twin turbos come on full boost)
The anti-oil separator naysayers claim they are not needed, I get that. My background is with large shipboard diesel engines and most makes had oil separators installed. Diesel vs. Gas engines = apples and oranges? Perhaps.
(the engine in the pic is a typical Colt V10 4.2 model and puts out around 500,000 foot pounds of torque when those twin turbos come on full boost)
#109
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: March 27, 2014
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Using a plain unmarked 1.0 ounce shot glass, I’ve been draining between 1/4 and 1/3 of an ounce per 1,000 miles on my large body Moroso since going FI. I recently switched to a small body Moroso and will have to start over with a new baseline. I’m wondering if there will be a difference in separator efficiency between the large/small body styles? They are both passenger side only application. Either way, I probably should pick up a small measuring glass like lakeguy77 uses for more accurate measurements. As a loose comparison, my former NA ‘12 V6 collected between 1/3 to 1/2 of an ounce per 3,000 miles with a JLT separator. This data was collected over the course of 21,000 miles.
The anti-oil separator naysayers claim they are not needed, I get that. My background is with large shipboard diesel engines and most makes had oil separators installed. Diesel vs. Gas engines = apples and oranges? Perhaps.
(the engine in the pic is a typical Colt V10 4.2 model and puts out around 500,000 foot pounds of torque when those twin turbos come on full boost)
The anti-oil separator naysayers claim they are not needed, I get that. My background is with large shipboard diesel engines and most makes had oil separators installed. Diesel vs. Gas engines = apples and oranges? Perhaps.
(the engine in the pic is a typical Colt V10 4.2 model and puts out around 500,000 foot pounds of torque when those twin turbos come on full boost)
#110
Cobra Member
Using a plain unmarked 1.0 ounce shot glass, Ive been draining between 1/4 and 1/3 of an ounce per 1,000 miles on my large body Moroso since going FI. I recently switched to a small body Moroso and will have to start over with a new baseline. Im wondering if there will be a difference in separator efficiency between the large/small body styles? They are both passenger side only application. Either way, I probably should pick up a small measuring glass like lakeguy77 uses for more accurate measurements. As a loose comparison, my former NA 12 V6 collected between 1/3 to 1/2 of an ounce per 3,000 miles with a JLT separator. This data was collected over the course of 21,000 miles. The anti-oil separator naysayers claim they are not needed, I get that. My background is with large shipboard diesel engines and most makes had oil separators installed. Diesel vs. Gas engines = apples and oranges? Perhaps. (the engine in the pic is a typical Colt V10 4.2 model and puts out around 500,000 foot pounds of torque when those twin turbos come on full boost)
#111
I Have No Life
Thread Starter
So I finished doing some "clean up" today. I ordered a straight through pcv connector...since I didn't like the look of hose going straight into the intake of the Maggie. So since the connector came with the driver side hose, I used my heat gun to expand and loosen the connector so I could pull it off.
After that, trimmed the hose to length, then slid everything on. Voila. Much cleaner oem look IMO.
After that, trimmed the hose to length, then slid everything on. Voila. Much cleaner oem look IMO.
#113
I Have No Life
Thread Starter
Before:
After:
Received, installed, and tested my new Ultimate Hose Upgrade kit for my Bob's separator. AN Fittings, braided hoses, and heat shrink clamps to go along with my firewall mount.
Much cleaner bay.
#115
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator
I have the firewall mounting bracket without the upgraded braided hoses.. I didn't want to drill holes in my firewall, so I just mounted the bracket to the existing mounting tabs in the plastic cowl cover at the firewall..
Here's my pic to illustrate how I mounted to the firewall without having to drill holes.. If you want, you can also mount behind the strut tower on the driver's side as well..
Here's my pic to illustrate how I mounted to the firewall without having to drill holes.. If you want, you can also mount behind the strut tower on the driver's side as well..
#116
A thought I had... If my rear o2 sensors are shut off due to a tune why not find a fitting for that area and a fitting for where the pcv goes into the engine. Add a hose to connect it.
This is kind of how it's done on the drag cars I had so I don't see why that would work.
Any thoughts.
This is kind of how it's done on the drag cars I had so I don't see why that would work.
Any thoughts.
#117
Legacy TMS Member
Originally Posted by jarbear1988
A thought I had... If my rear o2 sensors are shut off due to a tune why not find a fitting for that area and a fitting for where the pcv goes into the engine. Add a hose to connect it.
This is kind of how it's done on the drag cars I had so I don't see why that would work.
Any thoughts.
This is kind of how it's done on the drag cars I had so I don't see why that would work.
Any thoughts.
#118
In the drag car most of it is burnt up. Figured it'd be burnt up as well in the car. Granted a drag car get the exhaust a lot hotter than a dd would.
#119
A thought I had... If my rear o2 sensors are shut off due to a tune why not find a fitting for that area and a fitting for where the pcv goes into the engine. Add a hose to connect it.
This is kind of how it's done on the drag cars I had so I don't see why that would work.
Any thoughts.
This is kind of how it's done on the drag cars I had so I don't see why that would work.
Any thoughts.
On a drag car they probably benefit from added vacuum & are not concerned about the added loss of oil (the engine is not running for a long time), but on a daily driver, or even an occasional driver, the added oil loss could be potentially disastrous.
#120
Sounds like a bad idea. I would also be afraid that the exhaust pressure would create suction on the line & pull additional oil out of the engine. On a drag car they probably benefit from added vacuum & are not concerned about the added loss of oil (the engine is not running for a long time), but on a daily driver, or even an occasional driver, the added oil loss could be potentially disastrous.
Last edited by jarbear1988; 12/17/15 at 04:07 PM.