Skip to main content
HOME   |   ABOUT   |   NEWS   |   TECH ARTICLES   |   AT THE TRACK   |   REVIEWS   |   VIDEOS   |   CONTACT ME

JLT Oil Catch Can Review


I've had a catch can for about a couple of years. If you've been following my blog, you may know that I've had a seldom problem with power steering randomly cutting off. I thought I had it fixed several times but it kept returning. Finally, towards the end of last summer, the problem was found by a tech at one of the local dealers. After a lot of time behind the wheel on and off the track, I can confidently say the problem is gone. I hate to admit but it was my fault. The catch can that I bought was a bigger unit that came with a mounting bracket. Without checking the wiring, I mounted it where the electric power steering rack ground was. Sometimes, while turning, the can would shift so slightly but enough to move the ground cable, cut power and therefore power steering. It was terrifying, especially on the track, and really hurt with being confident behind the wheel.

After the tech found it, he put a second nut on that bolt to hold it better and it worked so much better that power steering never cut off again, but I found that it still shifted enough to cause a slight change in voltage and stability control activated unnecessarily. I tried to find another spot to mount the can but it was hard to find a spot that fits due to its large size so I decided that it was time to get a new, smaller can that does not need to be supported and the JLT unit (JLT Oil Separator) seemed like a great fit. It's small, light and had good reviews. It has OEM connections so I figured it should have a very clean and easy installation.

Actually, saying "easy installation" might be a big understatement. I installed it in less than five minutes and if I didn't have another aftermarket unit, it would take less than one minute. You unclip the stock connections, pull the tube out, and clip the OEM connectors on the JLT can. That's it. I have no idea why other manufacturers don't use the same connectors. They're easier to use and cleaner looking. With the installation out of the way, the other concern is effectiveness.

I've had it for only two track events. The first event was a High Performance Driving School (HPDS) arranged by the local BMW Club. It's a two day, all weekend event. I was there for two slalom exercise sessions and six lapping session, all about 20 mins long. After the event, I drained the catch can and took a couple of pictures.






I unfortunately didn't do any testing with my previous catch can so I can't compare. I also don't have any fine measuring tools I used the smallest measuring cup I found to measure. As you can see in the above picture, it looked like about 3 ml of oil was caught, maybe 5 ml at best. I was disappointed at first as I was expecting it to catch more based on other people's results I found online. I decided to hold my judgement, though, until another track outing. The second time was a regular lapping day, where I was out for three track sessions, each about 20 minutes long. 




As you can see in the picture below, it looks like about 10 ml of oil was caught this time. Remember, this time I was out for one day, not two, half the track sessions and no exercise sessions. That's less than half the length of time and less than half the driven miles, yet there was more than 3 times the amount of oil. After seeing that, I was very happy with the results. I felt that the unit works well as I can't imagine there being much more than 10 ml of oil going back after about half a day at the track. More importantly, it also confirmed that just because someone else caught more in a different can doesn't mean this one isn't effective. The results here are so vastly different that it renders any comparison on different days obsolete. This isn't only the exact same catch can but the exact same car and same driver on the same track and within the same month. Nevertheless, the difference in conditions yielded hugely different results. 




I wish someone would set up a test bench in a controlled environment to actually rate the effectiveness of different cans on sale now. In my opinion, for the results to be valid, they would have to set up an air loop with a known amount of continuous oil supply in it, connect different catch cans to that loop and measure the amount of oil that collects in each can after a certain run time. This should be repeated with different loop air pressures to simulate the different pressures that would be seen in the PCV line at different engine loads and RPMs for both naturally aspirated and supercharged engines. Then the runs should be repeated again at different temperatures and humidity levels. A test such as that would be conclusive as to which catch can is more effective at catching oil. Otherwise, the results would be meaningless and until then, I'll be happy with my current setup knowing it's keeping all that oil out of the engine cylinders. I hope this helps someone make a decision if they are hesitant about getting one.


Comments







Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.






Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.




🔥 Most Visited This Week

Limited Slip Differentials - The Basics

I'm finishing up a comparison post (link to introduction: Intro: Focus RS vs Golf R vs WRX STI vs Evo X ) and, throughout the post, I realized that I have to go off topic a lot to talk about how each type of differential changes the way the car drives. As a result, I thought I'd write a separate post to go into more detail before I post the comparison to keep it more focused on the cars and avoid veering off topic too much. By saying "Limited Slip Differentials" in the title, I am including torque vectoring diffs because, although current conventional terminology treats them differently, a torque vectoring differential is, in essence, a very sophisticated limited slip diff (LSD) that can be manipulated to actively help the car handle better. And while none of the cars in the comparison use open (without help from the brakes) or non-gear mechanical LSD’s, I’ll briefly discuss them so that the post is more inclusive. I’ll only focus on using power to help the...

Ford Focus RS vs Subaru WRX STI vs Mitsubishi Evo X MR

All these cars have one common Achilles' heel. The engines sit entirely ahead of the front axles; a great family recipe for understeer. Then tell the front tires - already taxed from trying to keep that front engine sitting outside the wheelbase from going straight - to put some power down and you can only make matters worse. There are ways to mitigate the understeer with suspension tuning, of course, but the toughest part is power-on understeer. I don't want to get much into tires, but the thing to remember is that because tires have a certain "grip budget" - how much total grip they can hold/generate before they let go - when you get on the power in a car that sends power to the front wheels (FWD or AWD), you will rob some of the precious grip you were relying on to turn the car in order to put all or some power down. You'll run out of front lateral grip sooner than you would have otherwise, as a result. Worse yet, because of the unideal en...

2015 Mustang GT breaks into the 11's in the 1/4 mile!

It went 11.77 seconds to be exact and past the traps at 116 mph and that's with minor modifications. The modifications were courtesy of the folks at Ford Racing. They recently got a hold of three 2015 Mustangs, one with the 2.3L EcoBoost engine making 310 hp and two GT's with the 5.0L V8 making 435 hp. The power modifications are minor for two of the three Mustangs. The 2.3 EcoBoost gets a "Prototype Off-Road Exhaust" which most likely means there are no catalytic converters or "cats", a more free flowing exhaust and a tune. One of the GT's gets the same off-road exhaust treatment and a tune plus "ARH Cobra Jet Long Tube Headers". In the video, they say they did "a few changes to the air intake system but basically these are close to what any consumer can buy" so they may have included a K&N drop-in filter which FRPP Performance Packs for the 2014 Mustang GT included or an aftermarket CAI with a cone style filter....

2016 Mustang EcoBoost Track Review

Photography by: Graham MacNeil Ford really wants to sell you a Mustang with a turbo four cylinder. They started by derating the V6 engine in the 2015 S550 compared to the 2011-2014 S197 V6 to make the EcoBoost 2.3 litre more differentiated. Then, they offered a performance pack on the EcoBoost but not on the V6. Now, they killed the V6 all together for 2018 and will only sell you a V8 or this EcoBoost. I love a good V8, everyone who knows me knows that. This is a Mustang, which means it needs a V8. If those aren't enough reasons, I always prefer natural aspiration over forced induction. That's three strikes against the EcoBoost-powered Mustang. But I'd be lying if I said the idea never intrigued me. It's the lightest (if you account for features). It has the best weight distribution. It has the same great chassis as the GT. It's very affordable and it has a lot of potential to make more power. Aftermarket? Endless support. There's plenty of good about it....