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

GTR vs Evo X vs STI: which has the best AWD system?

A few weeks ago, I made a post explaining  mainstream AWD system types and how they compare , pros and cons, etc. including some simple diagrams to show where the power goes and how much. As promised, this post will focus on specific cars and what AWD systems they use, especially ones that that have more or less been defined by their AWD systems, and the best place to start may be with a bombshell; the Nissan GT-R. Nissan GT-R (R35) The GT-R has built a reputation around having monster traction and very approachable performance, thanks to its AWD system - Advanced Total Traction Engineering System for All-Terrain (ATTESA) - and what it can do for you. But the GT-R doesn't actually use the most mechanically sophisticated type of AWD systems discussed in the previous article, namely a "true" AWD with a centre differential. Instead, it uses a clutch pack to transfer power. RWD-based clutch-type AWD schematic - Rams Eye The Track Guy © The R32, R33, and R34 Sky

Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's vs Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's

I never thought I'd ever run Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's on my 2012 Boss 302. The cost is astronomical and they are supposed to last the least of anything comparable. So how did I end up with (nearly) fresh Sport Cup 2's? A complete fluke. I came across a lightly used set with only a few hundred miles and no track time; 305/30/19 takeoffs from a GT Performance Pack Level 2 (GT PPL2). I knew my 71R's were getting very worn before the season started and likely wouldn't last the whole season, even this short one. The price was far better than a new set of RE-71R's, a little more than half, and local Time Attack rules (Canadian Automobile Sport Clubs) recently made 180 and 200 TW tires equivalent, meaning no PAX or PIP point penalty for going with 180 TW tire like the Pilot Sport Cup 2's. I have been very curious about how PSC2's compare to RE 71R's but I stayed away due to their being painfully expensive and, up to last year, their 180 TW rating would

Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R Track Review

2012 Boss 302 on square 305/30/19 RE-71R's at AMP - Graham MacNeil © For better or for worse, I have heard and read so much about RE-71R's. Everyone swears by the grip but complains about the wear. Generally speaking, the pros are: 1. They grip as well or better than most R comps. 2. They don't wear as quickly as R comps if driven occasionally on the street. 3. They work better in the rain than R comps. The cons were limited to overheating quickly when used on track (being an autocross tire) and wearing too fast on heavy cars like mine. In the popular 200 TW category, they are faster than the popular Hankook RS-4's and BFGoodrich Rival S's according to published Tire Rack Tests. According to plenty of reviews, they are also faster than well established R comps like R888R's (which don't seem to work too well on heavy cars anyway) and the venerable NT01's. But I was still hesitant for a while until I talked to a tire tech support gentleman

How would a Mustang 3.5L EcoBoost compare to the 5.0L V8?

Ever wonder how a 3.5 litre EcoBoost might fair against the 5.0 litre V8 in the Mustang? Of course you have. Ever since Ford dropped it in the F150 (and perhaps well before), everyone has been wondering how it would perform. There are basically two camps; those who think it would be awesome because of tuneability and power potential and those who think it means the death of the V8 in the Mustang. If you are in the latter group, we seem to be good so far with continuous upgrades to the 5.0 litre Coyote and the brand new Shelby GT500 which still uses a supercharged V8 as it has been for over a decade and multiple iterations. But what if... Well, it seems we are closer than ever to finding out the answer to that question. American Trucks recently got together two crew cab, short box, 4x4 F150's but one has the 5.0 litre V8 and the other has the 3.5 litre EcoBoost V6. There has been a few comparisons between 5.0 litre and 3.5 litre EB F150's, but this seems to be the most di