2006 Jeep Rubi 1st O/C

[Gary Allan]

I don't think that you'll see an SM HDEO. IIRC, the SL designation was on the cusp of the revelation of ZDDP reductions for cat longevity. Perhaps a transitional rating.

quote:

---

Gary where did you read that the dual cat systems on the newer Jeeps are having trouble?

---

Personal observations. Not just in my son's 00 ..but via the parts counter man at the dealer that I frequent. Perhaps the instances are no higher then normal cat failures ..but these are considerably more expensive to replace. There is no on board cat effiency test on the secondary cat. The system is totally numb to it.

quote:

---

I owned a fleet of Jeeps doing security protection duties and 1 dump truck using the same oil for both due to the fact it was SL rated and it ruined my vehicles a law suit would be in order..no?

---

I would doubt that you would get beyond the 8/80 warranty. That is, that's all they're warranted for. I think you could sue til you're blue in the face. That's the required integrity...not the expected life cycle of the cat/engine/vehicle. There have been lots of passive mandates to enable emissions integrity. It finally got down to the oil.

Again, mine are fine @ 107k and 55k. I'm well below the limits. But that figure is arbitrary and is only compared to the limits that are subject to change.

Cars are being kept in service longer.

 

[427Z06]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CJWAUSTIN:
I am in Oregon and he get tested every other year, i go about 200,000 on a vehicle before i get rid of it.

Rather than those of us who say this oil is okay to use based upon real life use, why don't YOU find us a few credible accounts of these oils killing cats?

---

Because that would be countering anecdotal evidence with anecdotal evidence. Do your own research:

http://herkules.oulu.fi/isbn9514269543/isbn9514269543.pdf
http://www.swri.org/dasl/n-tcd/dasl_n-tcdb4.pdf
http://www.swri.edu/3pubs/ttoday/Winter04/Focas.htm

 

[427Z06]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Greaser:
Hmm..Mobil 1 10w30 is API SL SJ CF ACEA etc. and also states warranty protection for gasoline,diesel and turbocharged engines...The back of the XD-3,a "universal"synthetic,all-season heavy duty engine oil(marked on the jug), HDEO jug states API C1-4,CG-4,CF,CD,SL,SJ,SH...so what we're saying here is that the PCMO SL is not the same API standard as the HDEO SL?

---

There's a difference between "API service rated for" and "recommended for use in". If it's "API service rated for SL", there a .1% phosphorus limit.

 

[Greaser]

OK..I'll post a link to the oil I'm using and you guys tell me if it sounds good to use in my 99 & 01 Jeep gassers.

 

[Greaser]

http://www.esso.ca/Canada-English/Files/Products_Lubes/IOCAENCVLESEsso_Xd-3_extra.pdf

 

[Greaser]

Buy the way I was using Delvac 1 before the Esso oil due to great UOA's in that forum with the XD-3 I switched.The Delvac started to climb in price ,big time ,so I went with the Esso oil.My jeeps seem to really like it...Quiet operation,great pressure at all temps,no leaks at the rear main like I had with the regular Mobil 1 10w30 I was using before the Delvac 1...so I really like the XD-3.I'm using the 0W-40 grade.My "E" tests are mandatory every two years around here.Have had two tests since using the Delvac and XD-3 and each time my numbers are GOING DOWN not up in every catagory

 

[Ram@Will]

I'm sticking to PCMO just in case, cats can be a bit sensitive.The 4.0 is an old detroit iron design and you can throw any you want at it,but remember a lot of the stuff around is a bit modern and sensitive. DC put all the emissons crap to try to get it pass till something comes along and they can replace it.

 

[Rubiconjeeper]

OK, now I'm completely lost. I too, have a Jeep Rubicon with 2600 Kms. I'm using Mobil 1 5w30 EP. The only other choice I have is Mobil 1 5W-50, which have used in my past TJ with no problem. Which is better?

 

[427Z06]

Greaser, do you guys have to pass an Local IM240 (on a dynamometer), or just Tailpipe Concentration Test at idle? If it's the latter, the XD-3 should be fine for the long term.

 

[427Z06]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rubiconjeeper:
OK, now I'm completely lost. I too, have a Jeep Rubicon with 2600 Kms. I'm using Mobil 1 5w30 EP.

---

Mobil 1 5w30 EP is fine, it's definitely under the SL limit of .1% Phosphorus.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

What jeeps do you have?

---

99 4.0 5 speed
02 2.5 auto

I don't think I'll ever get rid of either. They're too simple and parts are available for the rest of time, if you can count on the after market continuing the trend from the Willy's series.

quote:

---

One other point, just because you passed an emmision check at 125K miles, doesn't mean your cat is operating at %100 efficiency. There's a age/mileage fudge factor built into the emmision testing standards.

---

I agree ..but the fudge factor is also changing. The process in our ehanced emissions area is based on total emissions. That is, even if you beat last years spec's by 50% ..if 50% more tons of emissions are recorded in the region/county/zone due to more cars .. next year's spec will be reduced to meet that projected output.

So, even if you're at 1/3th the required emissions today ..that's no assurance of compliance in the future ..even if you maintain the same level of effiency.

They also went to "per liter of displacement" spec's as opposed to "chassis class" blanket spec's. This occurred in our area (IIRC) two years ago.

 

[427Z06]

Another one for CJWAUSTIN:
(Start on pg. 7)

http://repairnet.aircare.ca/documentation/newsletterpdfs/2005-1.pdf

 

[Greaser]

We have to have the vehicle strapped to a dyno and have the sensor in the tailpipe at the same time.They do at curb idle test and RPM test.Keep in mind here my Cherokee already has over 190,000km on it.I have never changed any O2 sensors or any emmision related part.It runs cleaner with the Hdeo's than with the PCMO's I was using.My brother,whom is a 30 DC tech,told me that coolant leaks are the number one killer of cats from what he's witnessed.

 

[Gary Allan]

Greaser, you're looking at emissions policy. They aren't doing this for no good reason.

It's a little hard to make any case by saying "I did it for a hundred years and had no problems". I can say this for coolant changes and brake fluid flushing that others consider an absolute "must do" ..yet I have magically been exempt from these laws of chemistry and physics for decades. Am I just a visionary and everyone else totally blind and chicken littles?? Or am I the exception to the rule where my usage/behaviors confound the normal processes

Nobody here (vitually none) ever conforms to a factory OCI ..nor any normal life cycle to their owernship. If you're getting 200k out of a car, you're not a common owner. It would normally be on its 2nd or 3rd owner ..or in the junkyard. These are the issues that environmental policy makers deal with. They've eliminated so may life shortening issues with automobiles that other issues emerge. Like cars that routinely have 15 year life spans.

It's an attempt, imo, to make the emissions equipment last as long as the typical service life of the average vehicle.

 

[Greaser]

I understand what your're saying Gary.My last vehicle(85 S-10 Chev)had 369,000km(bought new had it 16 years)on it when I sold it to my brother for $500.It passed E testing ,with a little fuel pressure downplaying on the carb,no problem and it had the factory clutch in it when he drove it away.My Jeeps are the same.I buy them new and drive them 12-15 years.People fight over my cars when they go up for sale,which isn't very often.Change ALL my fluids yearly and engine oils religously at 8000km (5000 miles).I wouldn't be on this site if I wasn't this way.If I find ANY indication that a certain fluid is ruining something it's gone.If my readings were slowly going down with the XD-3 then I will switch.In 4 years and two E tests they are improving so I'm stickibng with my regiment.I'll post a question to all the XD-3 users on this site and see if they are having any problems just to broaden the scope here.Thanks for your input..

 

[Greaser]

Sorry about the spelling errors...I'm at work and have type quickly here...correction to the above post."If my readings were going up I will switch"oils...not going down.

 

[427Z06]

Greaser, here's some info on your emissions testing in Ontario:

http://www.driveclean.com/index.html
http://www.driveclean.com/drivecleanguide/drivecleanguide_2003.pdf

Looks like your vehicles are old enough to get a %30 fudge factor.

 

[Greaser]

Good info.But this was in the newspaper around here a few months ago.Are you trying to say since there is a 30% lee-way in figures I could be doing damage by using XD-3 and not know it?Or could the 30% "fudge factor" be used to take into consideration "normal" declining emmision equipment, no matter what oil was being used?I'll put it to you this way.There is a "maximum allowable" number for each respective catagory of Nox,co2 etc.I am not even half way there for my readings on a vehicle that has 193,000km on the odometer.Pretty good for any oil in my book!The readings on my 01 TJ(139,000km) with the dual stage cats are a joke using the XD-3!I'm getting zero readings in some catagories (I'll post them if you like)The guy doing the test re-tested his machine while I was there last time.Plugs are new every two years,just before I go for tests,and oil is fresh.Fudge factor or not...I'm very happy with my E test results and HDEO useage

 

[427Z06]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Greaser:
Or could the 30% "fudge factor" be used to take into consideration "normal" declining emmision equipment, no matter what oil was being used?

---

According to the documentation, you plug in the vehicle data and the machine sets the emission limits. So I'm guessing the 30% fudge factor is built in. In any event, the converter is the main emission equipment. If the engine is in good tune, the %30 fudge factor allows the converter to be %30 less effective and still pass.

You can go to this site, plug in your VIN number, and check your emmision history:

http://www.driveclean.com/who/test_history.html

In any event, if what you're doing is working for you, GREAT! But I think it's reasonbly responsible to inform other new vehicle owners what they may be in for so than can make informed choices.

 

[Greaser]

Agreed