Rotella: The world's first ever combined hair oil, foot ointment, and salad dressing
Thread Starter
Herp Derp Jerp
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 18,251
Likes: 17
From: Parham, ON
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L OBD-II
Member
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
Year: 1998
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 I6
Great write up Salad. I've been using Rotella T6 in my WRX for many years. Rotella T6 is very popular oil in the WRX/STi community because of the high zinc content. My XJ loves the T6!
Seasoned Member
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 376
Likes: 5
From: Idaho
Year: 1991
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 Liter
bigbadon is correct. Like I put in the writeup, the crankcase is not 100% sealed from the combustion chamber.
A little data for your enjoyment:
Piston-to-Bore Clearance: 0.018 to 0.038 mm (0.0008 to 0.0015 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—Top Compression Ring: 0.229 to 0.610 mm (0.0090 to 0.0240 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—2nd Compression Ring: 0.483 to 0.965 mm (0.0190 to 0.0380 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—Oil Control Steel Rails: 0.254 to 1.500 mm (0.010 to 0.060 in.)
Ring Side Clearance—Compression Rings: 0.042 to 0.084 mm (0.0017 to 0.0033 in.)
Ring Side Clearance—Oil Control Rings: 0.06 to 0.21 mm (0.0024 to 0.0083 in.)
Think about it: If the rings were a perfect seal, the engine would be seized. Some minor clearance between the rings and cylinder walls is required to allow oil to lubricate. On top of this, honing marks in the bore are deliberately put there to act as capillaries for the oil to reach the surface where the rings make contact. This is a trade-off between a perfect seal and not having the engine score itself to death.
Of course on the combustion stroke, the piston moves down and exposes all of the oil still on the cylinder wall. It burns off and leaves via the exhaust valve - which has oil still on the stem that gets heated up and carried away.
At the same time the rings and hone allow oil to lubricate the piston/cylinder surface they also allow an amount of combustion gasses into the crankcase. This is called blowby. Since it is so hot it vaporizes a small amount of oil (see note 1), of course the additives go with the oil too. The CCV system captures these gasses and oil vapors and feeds them back into the engine. (Why do you think the bottom half of everybody's throttle body is black?)
Phosphorous isn't poisonous like "long term smoking kills 1 in 2 people". It's a little more like cleaning up after Chernobyl without wearing any clothes (Emperor's New Hazard Suit). Minor amounts cause damage in as little as 100 hours of operation, long term exposure is the real issue.
Consumption of oil is completely normal during the operation of a healthy engine. The amount is generally not at all noticeable, but still occurs. When the piston-to-bore clearance increases from wear the problems are a little more significant with excessive blow-by, loss of power, and oil consumption bad enough to create visible smoke.
It is inescapable that the catalyst won't last forever. But it's cheaper and easier to replace than the guts of an engine. You still don't want to be doing this every few years or you'll go broke pretty quick (especially in a 2001 XJ meeting CARB requirements).
That said I'll reiterate what I put in my writeup: Using most of the HDEOs, assuming your engine isn't consuming excessive amounts of oil, you should be able to expect catalyst life just as it left the factory, because you are throwing factory-levels of phosphorous at it. If you throw more at it, expect it to last less.
A few articles on this subject since you seem to be interested:
http://www.platinummetalsreview.com/...i1-016-024.pdf
http://ect.jmcatalysts.com/pdfs/2,7%...nd%20boron.pdf
Official SAE and ASTM studies:
1984: http://papers.sae.org/841406/
1992: http://papers.sae.org/920654/
2004: http://papers.sae.org/2004-01-1888/
2005: http://www.astm.org/DIGITAL_LIBRARY/...S/JAI12977.htm
Note 1: API SN specifies a maximum of 15% of oil lost due to evaporation at 250°C using method ASTM D5800, or the Noack test (http://tannasco.com/images/SelbyNoackflyer.pdf). In addition to this, Sequence IIIGB engine test specifies a minimum of only 79% phosphorous retention over a 100-hour testing period:
http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/gastest...ilsacGF5-3.pdf
http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/gastest...ilsacGF5-9.pdf
ftp://ftp.astmtmc.cmu.edu/docs/gas/s...ive/IL08-2.pdf
A little data for your enjoyment:
Piston-to-Bore Clearance: 0.018 to 0.038 mm (0.0008 to 0.0015 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—Top Compression Ring: 0.229 to 0.610 mm (0.0090 to 0.0240 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—2nd Compression Ring: 0.483 to 0.965 mm (0.0190 to 0.0380 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—Oil Control Steel Rails: 0.254 to 1.500 mm (0.010 to 0.060 in.)
Ring Side Clearance—Compression Rings: 0.042 to 0.084 mm (0.0017 to 0.0033 in.)
Ring Side Clearance—Oil Control Rings: 0.06 to 0.21 mm (0.0024 to 0.0083 in.)
Think about it: If the rings were a perfect seal, the engine would be seized. Some minor clearance between the rings and cylinder walls is required to allow oil to lubricate. On top of this, honing marks in the bore are deliberately put there to act as capillaries for the oil to reach the surface where the rings make contact. This is a trade-off between a perfect seal and not having the engine score itself to death.
Of course on the combustion stroke, the piston moves down and exposes all of the oil still on the cylinder wall. It burns off and leaves via the exhaust valve - which has oil still on the stem that gets heated up and carried away.
At the same time the rings and hone allow oil to lubricate the piston/cylinder surface they also allow an amount of combustion gasses into the crankcase. This is called blowby. Since it is so hot it vaporizes a small amount of oil (see note 1), of course the additives go with the oil too. The CCV system captures these gasses and oil vapors and feeds them back into the engine. (Why do you think the bottom half of everybody's throttle body is black?)
Phosphorous isn't poisonous like "long term smoking kills 1 in 2 people". It's a little more like cleaning up after Chernobyl without wearing any clothes (Emperor's New Hazard Suit). Minor amounts cause damage in as little as 100 hours of operation, long term exposure is the real issue.
Consumption of oil is completely normal during the operation of a healthy engine. The amount is generally not at all noticeable, but still occurs. When the piston-to-bore clearance increases from wear the problems are a little more significant with excessive blow-by, loss of power, and oil consumption bad enough to create visible smoke.
It is inescapable that the catalyst won't last forever. But it's cheaper and easier to replace than the guts of an engine. You still don't want to be doing this every few years or you'll go broke pretty quick (especially in a 2001 XJ meeting CARB requirements).
That said I'll reiterate what I put in my writeup: Using most of the HDEOs, assuming your engine isn't consuming excessive amounts of oil, you should be able to expect catalyst life just as it left the factory, because you are throwing factory-levels of phosphorous at it. If you throw more at it, expect it to last less.
A few articles on this subject since you seem to be interested:
http://www.platinummetalsreview.com/...i1-016-024.pdf
http://ect.jmcatalysts.com/pdfs/2,7%...nd%20boron.pdf
Official SAE and ASTM studies:
1984: http://papers.sae.org/841406/
1992: http://papers.sae.org/920654/
2004: http://papers.sae.org/2004-01-1888/
2005: http://www.astm.org/DIGITAL_LIBRARY/...S/JAI12977.htm
Note 1: API SN specifies a maximum of 15% of oil lost due to evaporation at 250°C using method ASTM D5800, or the Noack test (http://tannasco.com/images/SelbyNoackflyer.pdf). In addition to this, Sequence IIIGB engine test specifies a minimum of only 79% phosphorous retention over a 100-hour testing period:
http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/gastest...ilsacGF5-3.pdf
http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/gastest...ilsacGF5-9.pdf
ftp://ftp.astmtmc.cmu.edu/docs/gas/s...ive/IL08-2.pdf
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
From: Chambersburg, PA
Model: Cherokee
I never run anything but Napa/wix. I have never driven this jeep more than around block since I bought it last year, but I was worried because it would drop real low in oil pressure once at operating temp(under 20lbs). It was who knows how old or what was in it(black for sure) but now with this t6 it won't go under 40lbs, not sure why but I'm fine with it. I let it get warm enough to keep kicking fans on so it certainly isn't a fluke. Not saying any oil change wouldn't have yielded same result
Last edited by turtletrax; Feb 11, 2014 at 06:14 PM.
CF Veteran
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 19,219
Likes: 45
From: west chester, pa
Year: 1999
Engine: 4.0
Thread Starter
Herp Derp Jerp
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 18,251
Likes: 17
From: Parham, ON
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L OBD-II
Too bad. That's the next thread! LOL
I'm currently running a WIX 51459. It's larger than the 51452, which is a rugged version of the very popular 51515.
Sitting beside a Baldwin B2-HPG and WIX 51515:
Installed on my '99: (It may not fit on XJs with vertical oil filter adapters, in which case I would recommend the 51452)
If you plan on running extended oil changes with T6 a more efficient filter is a good idea as they will keep the oil cleaner. I made my decision based on this thread:
http://www.ihpartsamerica.com/forums...html#post64570
The "better" filters (synthetic media with much finer filtration) are mentioned in there.
I'm currently running a WIX 51459. It's larger than the 51452, which is a rugged version of the very popular 51515.
Sitting beside a Baldwin B2-HPG and WIX 51515:
Installed on my '99: (It may not fit on XJs with vertical oil filter adapters, in which case I would recommend the 51452)
If you plan on running extended oil changes with T6 a more efficient filter is a good idea as they will keep the oil cleaner. I made my decision based on this thread:
http://www.ihpartsamerica.com/forums...html#post64570
The "better" filters (synthetic media with much finer filtration) are mentioned in there.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 648
Likes: 1
From: Port Richey, FL
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
I'd like to express my thanks for this thread (and a couple others) I had been researching here about an issue I have been having with low oil pressure after warm-up. I'm talking about 20-30psi running and about zero at idle. I was running Valvoline Maxlife 5w-30 and a standard Purolator filter. I had tried replacing the sending unit, cleaning the journal to it, but it had no effect. After reading this, I went to Napa, bought 6 quarts of Delo 400 15w-40 and a Napa Platinum 51515 filter. I started it up and low and behold, 40psi at idle and between 50-60 while driving. Drove around until water temp got to almost 210 and it had settled in at 25-30psi at idle and between 40-50 running. I'll get a better idea when I get my interstate commute tomorrow, but I have to say I'm thrilled! I was beginning to think my cam bearings were toast. I'm not saying they may not still be worn, but this should slow the wear significantly. Thanks!
CF Veteran
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 6
From: York, PA
Year: 1998
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
bigbadon is correct. Like I put in the writeup, the crankcase is not 100% sealed from the combustion chamber.
A little data for your enjoyment:
Piston-to-Bore Clearance: 0.018 to 0.038 mm (0.0008 to 0.0015 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—Top Compression Ring: 0.229 to 0.610 mm (0.0090 to 0.0240 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—2nd Compression Ring: 0.483 to 0.965 mm (0.0190 to 0.0380 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—Oil Control Steel Rails: 0.254 to 1.500 mm (0.010 to 0.060 in.)
Ring Side Clearance—Compression Rings: 0.042 to 0.084 mm (0.0017 to 0.0033 in.)
Ring Side Clearance—Oil Control Rings: 0.06 to 0.21 mm (0.0024 to 0.0083 in.)
Think about it: If the rings were a perfect seal, the engine would be seized. Some minor clearance between the rings and cylinder walls is required to allow oil to lubricate. On top of this, honing marks in the bore are deliberately put there to act as capillaries for the oil to reach the surface where the rings make contact. This is a trade-off between a perfect seal and not having the engine score itself to death.
Of course on the combustion stroke, the piston moves down and exposes all of the oil still on the cylinder wall. It burns off and leaves via the exhaust valve - which has oil still on the stem that gets heated up and carried away.
At the same time the rings and hone allow oil to lubricate the piston/cylinder surface they also allow an amount of combustion gasses into the crankcase. This is called blowby. Since it is so hot it vaporizes a small amount of oil (see note 1), of course the additives go with the oil too. The CCV system captures these gasses and oil vapors and feeds them back into the engine. (Why do you think the bottom half of everybody's throttle body is black?)
Phosphorous isn't poisonous like "long term smoking kills 1 in 2 people". It's a little more like cleaning up after Chernobyl without wearing any clothes (Emperor's New Hazard Suit). Minor amounts cause damage in as little as 100 hours of operation, long term exposure is the real issue.
Consumption of oil is completely normal during the operation of a healthy engine. The amount is generally not at all noticeable, but still occurs. When the piston-to-bore clearance increases from wear the problems are a little more significant with excessive blow-by, loss of power, and oil consumption bad enough to create visible smoke.
It is inescapable that the catalyst won't last forever. But it's cheaper and easier to replace than the guts of an engine. You still don't want to be doing this every few years or you'll go broke pretty quick (especially in a 2001 XJ meeting CARB requirements).
That said I'll reiterate what I put in my writeup: Using most of the HDEOs, assuming your engine isn't consuming excessive amounts of oil, you should be able to expect catalyst life just as it left the factory, because you are throwing factory-levels of phosphorous at it. If you throw more at it, expect it to last less.
A few articles on this subject since you seem to be interested:
http://www.platinummetalsreview.com/...i1-016-024.pdf
http://ect.jmcatalysts.com/pdfs/2,7%...nd%20boron.pdf
Official SAE and ASTM studies:
1984: http://papers.sae.org/841406/
1992: http://papers.sae.org/920654/
2004: http://papers.sae.org/2004-01-1888/
2005: http://www.astm.org/DIGITAL_LIBRARY/...S/JAI12977.htm
Note 1: API SN specifies a maximum of 15% of oil lost due to evaporation at 250°C using method ASTM D5800, or the Noack test (http://tannasco.com/images/SelbyNoackflyer.pdf). In addition to this, Sequence IIIGB engine test specifies a minimum of only 79% phosphorous retention over a 100-hour testing period:
http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/gastest...ilsacGF5-3.pdf
http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/gastest...ilsacGF5-9.pdf
ftp://ftp.astmtmc.cmu.edu/docs/gas/s...ive/IL08-2.pdf
A little data for your enjoyment:
Piston-to-Bore Clearance: 0.018 to 0.038 mm (0.0008 to 0.0015 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—Top Compression Ring: 0.229 to 0.610 mm (0.0090 to 0.0240 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—2nd Compression Ring: 0.483 to 0.965 mm (0.0190 to 0.0380 in.)
Ring Gap Clearance—Oil Control Steel Rails: 0.254 to 1.500 mm (0.010 to 0.060 in.)
Ring Side Clearance—Compression Rings: 0.042 to 0.084 mm (0.0017 to 0.0033 in.)
Ring Side Clearance—Oil Control Rings: 0.06 to 0.21 mm (0.0024 to 0.0083 in.)
Think about it: If the rings were a perfect seal, the engine would be seized. Some minor clearance between the rings and cylinder walls is required to allow oil to lubricate. On top of this, honing marks in the bore are deliberately put there to act as capillaries for the oil to reach the surface where the rings make contact. This is a trade-off between a perfect seal and not having the engine score itself to death.
Of course on the combustion stroke, the piston moves down and exposes all of the oil still on the cylinder wall. It burns off and leaves via the exhaust valve - which has oil still on the stem that gets heated up and carried away.
At the same time the rings and hone allow oil to lubricate the piston/cylinder surface they also allow an amount of combustion gasses into the crankcase. This is called blowby. Since it is so hot it vaporizes a small amount of oil (see note 1), of course the additives go with the oil too. The CCV system captures these gasses and oil vapors and feeds them back into the engine. (Why do you think the bottom half of everybody's throttle body is black?)
Phosphorous isn't poisonous like "long term smoking kills 1 in 2 people". It's a little more like cleaning up after Chernobyl without wearing any clothes (Emperor's New Hazard Suit). Minor amounts cause damage in as little as 100 hours of operation, long term exposure is the real issue.
Consumption of oil is completely normal during the operation of a healthy engine. The amount is generally not at all noticeable, but still occurs. When the piston-to-bore clearance increases from wear the problems are a little more significant with excessive blow-by, loss of power, and oil consumption bad enough to create visible smoke.
It is inescapable that the catalyst won't last forever. But it's cheaper and easier to replace than the guts of an engine. You still don't want to be doing this every few years or you'll go broke pretty quick (especially in a 2001 XJ meeting CARB requirements).
That said I'll reiterate what I put in my writeup: Using most of the HDEOs, assuming your engine isn't consuming excessive amounts of oil, you should be able to expect catalyst life just as it left the factory, because you are throwing factory-levels of phosphorous at it. If you throw more at it, expect it to last less.
A few articles on this subject since you seem to be interested:
http://www.platinummetalsreview.com/...i1-016-024.pdf
http://ect.jmcatalysts.com/pdfs/2,7%...nd%20boron.pdf
Official SAE and ASTM studies:
1984: http://papers.sae.org/841406/
1992: http://papers.sae.org/920654/
2004: http://papers.sae.org/2004-01-1888/
2005: http://www.astm.org/DIGITAL_LIBRARY/...S/JAI12977.htm
Note 1: API SN specifies a maximum of 15% of oil lost due to evaporation at 250°C using method ASTM D5800, or the Noack test (http://tannasco.com/images/SelbyNoackflyer.pdf). In addition to this, Sequence IIIGB engine test specifies a minimum of only 79% phosphorous retention over a 100-hour testing period:
http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/gastest...ilsacGF5-3.pdf
http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/gastest...ilsacGF5-9.pdf
ftp://ftp.astmtmc.cmu.edu/docs/gas/s...ive/IL08-2.pdf
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 897
Likes: 2
From: NJ
Year: 2004 WJ, 1998 XJ
Model: Grand Cherokee(WJ)
Engine: 4.7 HO
Lol, I was just trying to save you some typing, but feel free to do a filter thread! I am curious to see where the Mobile 1's rank in the filter department.
Also, is that an extra half quart for the larger filter?
What's the advantage of the larger filter? Any disadvantages?
Also, is that an extra half quart for the larger filter?
What's the advantage of the larger filter? Any disadvantages?
