How to install a Ecoboost oil cooler / heater in a 4.0 and why

[Rickyd]

I must be missing your point.

For context

In his video, Mac stated that the hottest reported oil temp his device provided occurred while the engine was in idle (183*)...and this was with a 195* thermostat.

His oil temperature numbers and their relationship to his ECTs were lower than what I've seen reported countless of times on BITOG for gas engines. Gas engine oil temps are known to be similar to the coolant temps and are also known to run hotter than the coolant temps.

Thus, I wanted to look into this more. I measured my oil temp data in idle (through the dipstick) and shared that my device provides a higher oil temp than what he shared even though my ECTs were surely cooler than his (likely around 10* cooler).

For this conversation, I'm not considering numbers from diesel engines (nor do I think it's wise or necessary to do so).

I can see you don't. As @freedom_in_4low pointed out that method of sampling isn't very accurate. Nor is parked at idle unless done immediately after a hard run.but even then it is less accurate than measuring as he desribes.

If you see temps above coolant then a cooler will help your oil survive to do it's job longer.

On any performance engine this is good to know. I figured that is why you would be chiming in with your attempts at measuring oil temp.

Having a turbo engine is even more of a reason to get a cooler

 

[MikeE024]

I can see you don't. As @freedom_in_4low pointed out that method of sampling isn't very accurate. Nor is parked at idle unless done immediately after a hard run.but even then it is less accurate than measuring as he desribes.

If you see temps above coolant then a cooler will help your oil survive to do it's job longer.

On any performance engine this is good to know. I figured that is why you would be chiming in with your attempts at measuring oil temp.

Having a turbo engine is even more of a reason to get a cooler

My interest peaked because of Mac’s reported oil temps…it wasn’t because I have a turbo.

I run Redline oil so im not worried about oil temps getting too high. I’m even less worried since I rarely see my ECTs go over 205* when pushing the engine hard during the hottest part of the year (with my current thermostat).

I have plenty of time to pull over and check it again. I simply grabbed a reading because I had just drove home from the VA and the engine was hot. It might not be the best way, but I’d imagine it’s better than guessing compared to performance diesels.

 

[Rickyd]

My interest peaked because of Mac’s reported oil temps…it wasn’t because I have a turbo.

I run Redline oil so im not worried about oil temps getting too high. I’m even less worried since I rarely see my ECTs go over 205* when pushing the engine hard during the hottest part of the year (with my current thermostat).

I have plenty of time to pull over and check it again. I simply grabbed a reading because I had just drove home from the VA and the engine was hot. It might not be the best way, but I’d imagine it’s better than guessing compared to performance diesels.

Good thing you aren't worried about oil temps. Or diesels? What an odd series of responses

 

[MikeE024]

Good thing you aren't worried about oil temps. Or diesels? What an odd series of responses

I never said I wasn’t worried about “oil temps”. I stated I’m not worried about them being too high. Pay attention.

Since you missed it, I wanted to know if my oil temps would be low like Mac’s were reported. That’s why I checked the temps and relayed the info back to him. I supposed I could have been selfish and not relayed my info back.

And, your jump to discussing performance diesels was indeed odd.

 

[Rickyd]

I never said I wasn’t worried about “oil temps”. I stated I’m not worried about them being too high. Pay attention.

Since you missed it, I wanted to know if my oil temps would be low like Mac’s were reported. That’s why I checked the temps and relayed the info back to him. I supposed I could have been selfish and not relayed my info back.

And, your jump to discussing performance diesels was indeed odd.

Ok, so you're worried about your oil temps being low in an oil cooler thread. Gotcha

 

[MikeE024]

Ok, so you're worried about your oil temps being low in an oil cooler thread. Gotcha

If you'd like, I can convert this thread over to audio since you seem to be unable or unwilling to comprehend the words inside.

I can share adventurous tales about how Mac's oil numbers were low and how he provoked the forum gods by sharing his findings in the sacred "cooler thread". And how many months earlier, a daring Yinzer suggested that his oil "cooler" likely helped raise his oil temps after a cold start.

Don't try to take in too much at once. FWIW, I believe in you.

 

[Rickyd]

If you'd like, I can convert this thread over to audio since you seem to be unable or unwilling to comprehend the words inside.

I can share adventurous tales about how Mac's oil numbers were low and how he provoked the forum gods by sharing his findings in the sacred "cooler thread". And how many months earlier, a daring Yinzer suggested that his oil "cooler" likely helped raise his oil temps after a cold start.

Don't try to take in too much at once. FWIW, I believe in you.

Again,odd replies on an oil cooler thread. Yes the oil cooler raises temps faster and keeps it lower later when it's important.

Insults don't help you prove something(what is that?that oil coolers aren'tnecessary?)

High pressures and turbos do indeed benefit from oil coolers as they add heat to the oil.

 

[freedom_in_4low]

If you'd like, I can convert this thread over to audio since you seem to be unable or unwilling to comprehend the words inside.

I can share adventurous tales about how Mac's oil numbers were low and how he provoked the forum gods by sharing his findings in the sacred "cooler thread". And how many months earlier, a daring Yinzer suggested that his oil "cooler" likely helped raise his oil temps after a cold start.

Don't try to take in too much at once. FWIW, I believe in you.

Again,odd replies on an oil cooler thread. Yes the oil cooler raises temps faster and keeps it lower later when it's important.

Insults don't help you prove something(what is that?that oil coolers aren'tnecessary?)

High pressures and turbos do indeed benefit from oil coolers as they add heat to the oil.

This forum has enough drama without you guys arguing over ...I don't even know what.

If we're discussing the merits or need for an oil-to-water oil cooler on a Jeep 4.0, there are the following considerations:

1. We still don't really know how hot the oil gets. I think Mac's sensor location is going to give depressed values. Draining the oil or going down the dipstick tube will be more accurate in any given instant of time, but it will be more challenging to get it during the right instant. It does seem to tell us already though that the oil does indeed get hotter than the coolant.

2. I know people mostly think of it as a threshold you don't want to cross, but I think it's more along the lines of time spent at a temperature....so spending 5000 miles at 200 may be equivalent to 2000 miles at 240, and ANY measurable reduction in temp may extend oil life.


For me, if I can pick up a cooler for $90 and a few dollars of heater hose and I shorten the oil warmup AND have healthier oil for the duration of the oil change cycle, it's worth it to me.

On the mfg of cooler, I want to find a reputable brand. These are just plates brazed together in an oven and if an inner braze joint fails you'll have milkshake and you won't know it until you check your oil or your coolant.

 

[MikeE024]

Again,odd replies on an oil cooler thread. Yes the oil cooler raises temps faster and keeps it lower later when it's important.

Ahh so you are pretending to not be lost now. I’m well aware that you are being a thick headed troll while also trying to save face.

Insults don't help you prove something(what is that?that oil coolers aren'tnecessary?)

Playing the soft victim route now is even weaker than your snarky “gotcha” response that I responded to in kind.

There’s no way you still don’t understand why I responded to Mac, which means you are just causing trouble. Way to go.

High pressures and turbos do indeed benefit from oil coolers as they add heat to the oil.

Thanks for the enlightenment.

 

[MikeE024]

...I don't even know what.

That’s exactly what I’m getting a kick out of.

1. We still don't really know how hot the oil gets. I think Mac's sensor location is going to give depressed values.

This is why I checked through the dipstick and relayed the info back to Mac.

Draining the oil or going down the dipstick tube will be more accurate in any given instant of time, but it will be more challenging to get it during the right instant. It does seem to tell us already though that the oil does indeed get hotter than the coolant.

That’s my guess based on what I saw. I won’t be getting an instant reading, but next, I can do some hard pulls and then check the oil temp again through the dipstick.

2. I know people mostly think of it as a threshold you don't want to cross, but I think it's more along the lines of time spent at a temperature....so spending 5000 miles at 200 may be equivalent to 2000 miles at 240, and ANY measurable reduction in temp may extend oil life.

That makes sense. Regarding oil life, I sent in my oil in for analysis after a waterpump failure caused my ECTs to raise up to 230*-250* for a couple of hours near the end of the oil change interval. This includes driving to CA and back in extreme ambient heat and many trail days. I’m not making any predictions, but if the oil comes back happy I’ll have little to worry about moving forward.

For me, if I can pick up a cooler for $90 and a few dollars of heater hose and I shorten the oil warmup AND have healthier oil for the duration of the temperature cycle, it's worth it to me.

On the mfg of cooler, I want to find a reputable brand. These are just plates brazed together in an oven and if an inner braze joint fails you'll have milkshake and you won't know it until you check your oil or your coolant.

The biggest risk I see with the sandwich style is causing a milkshake. Not worth it to me until I see a need to reduce my temps. I already have a warm-up device in the turbo, but I checked my oil temps to see if they were like macs bc his findings concerned me.

 

[freedom_in_4low]

That makes sense. Regarding oil life, I sent in my oil in for analysis after a waterpump failure caused my ECTs to raise up to 230*-250* for a couple of hours near the end of the oil change interval. This includes driving to CA and back in extreme ambient heat and many trail days. I’m not making any predictions, but if the oil comes back happy I’ll have little to worry about moving forward.

Oil analysis before and after the cooler with measurable differences in oil life markers (at the same mileage) would be the best thing to tell if it made a difference. Lower temperatures would be second best.

The biggest risk I see with the sandwich style is causing a milkshake. Not worth it to me until I see a need to reduce my temps. I already have a warm-up device in the turbo, but I checked my oil temps to see if they were like macs bc his findings concerned me.

Same. If I could get the Mopar one I'd purchase. But SKP sounds like Chinesium trying to confuse people by looking like SKF and that's the most recognizable one I've found.

I'd trust motorcraft as well but I'd rather not have to mess with the nipple extension if I can avoid it.

 

[Steel City 06]

I personally am not really worried about the sandwich style exchanger failing, at least the OEM ones. Ford designs their engines and ancillary components to a 150,000 mile typical service life from what I remember, and given this cooler is designed for an engine with twice the horsepower as our 4.0, it simply doesn't ever see temperatures or flow rates as high as it would in its OEM application. So realistically, we should be getting a 200,000+ mile service life out of this part.

Even running 15+ PSI of boost wouldn't put this past OEM parameters, since the engine it's designed for (3.5L V6) runs 20 PSI on 87 octane. (Though if your turbos are oil-cooled rather than water-cooled, you might reach the OEM equivalent heat transfer rate as low as 10 PSI of boost.)

I certainly trust this more than an aftermarket Derale cooler, and even those aren't bad at all.

 

[Steel City 06]

Oil analysis before and after the cooler with measurable differences in oil life markers (at the same mileage) would be the best thing to tell if it made a difference. Lower temperatures would be second best.




Same. If I could get the Mopar one I'd purchase. But SKP sounds like Chinesium trying to confuse people by looking like SKF and that's the most recognizable one I've found.

I'd trust motorcraft as well but I'd rather not have to mess with the nipple extension if I can avoid it.

It might also be possible to remove the nipple in the block and put in a different adapter so you could run any filter thread you want. I considered this but decided against it

 

[MikeE024]

I personally am not really worried about the sandwich style exchanger failing, at least the OEM ones. Ford designs their engines and ancillary components to a 150,000 mile typical service life from what I remember, and given this cooler is designed for an engine with twice the horsepower as our 4.0, it simply doesn't ever see temperatures or flow rates as high as it would in its OEM application. So realistically, we should be getting a 200,000+ mile service life out of this part.

Even running 15+ PSI of boost wouldn't put this past OEM parameters, since the engine it's designed for (3.5L V6) runs 20 PSI on 87 octane. (Though if your turbos are oil-cooled rather than water-cooled, you might reach the OEM equivalent heat transfer rate as low as 10 PSI of boost.)

I certainly trust this more than an aftermarket Derale cooler, and even those aren't bad at all.

Part of my fear is due to my application. I don’t want to have problems when I’m off the grid, and I sometimes romp a bit harder than most would when I get into a certain mode. That may or may not matter regarding the longevity of the part.

I’m basically looking at it through a risk/reward lens. If my oil temps had come back reading 30* higher that would have swayed me more. You provided an alternative option as well that was $$$. I don’t recall if that would be a safer route.

That said, your reasoning for installing the cooler is well documented, and I’m in no way condemning your choice. My eyes and ears are open.

 

[Steel City 06]

Part of my fear is due to my application. I don’t want to have problems when I’m off the grid, and I sometimes romp a bit harder than most would when I get into a certain mode. That may or may not matter regarding the longevity of the part.

I’m basically looking at it through a risk/reward lens. If my oil temps had come back reading 30* higher that would have swayed me more. You provided an alternative option as well that was $$$. I don’t recall if that would be a safer route.

That said, your reasoning for installing the cooler is well documented, and I’m in no way condemning your choice. My eyes and ears are open.

That makes sense, you're looking for simplicity for the sake of reliability, particularly in the short term.

I tend to be focused on getting the maximum power/efficiency/long-term life out of everything (the curse of being an engineer), and hence it leads me to mess around with stuff like this. The way I see it, this, plus all the other efficiency mods I've been doing, are likely to increase the usable service life of the engine by a substantial amount.

I'm also curious to see how far I can extend the range of the TJ using just basic solutions to increase efficiency. (I find it ironic that we complain about the limited range of EVs, while our TJs have less range than most EVs on the market.) The way I see it is a lot of these mods end up being cost neutral or even negative cost over the course of a few years due to the fuel savings and lower wear and tear, and yet I get to reap the benefits of longer range, more available power, and longer component lifespan.

I really can't attribute any specific mod to any specific value of fuel saved/more power/longer lifespan given the massive amount of variables and the fact I've done a number of things in a very short time, but my data shows my fuel economy has improved substantially (roughly 17-18 MPG on 35x12.5 and 5" of lift) and my usable power and torque have also increased substantially. Most of my steady-speed city driving I now do around 1,500 RPM (like a modern auto vehicle might) because the torque has improved that much.

 

[MikeE024]

That makes sense, you're looking for simplicity for the sake of reliability, particularly in the short term.

I tend to be focused on getting the maximum power/efficiency/long-term life out of everything (the curse of being an engineer), and hence it leads me to mess around with stuff like this. The way I see it, this, plus all the other efficiency mods I've been doing, are likely to increase the usable service life of the engine by a substantial amount.

I'm not above getting curious or adding complications lol. We all have our own priorities and routes we've taken with our lego sets.

I'm also curious to see how far I can extend the range of the TJ using just basic solutions to increase efficiency. (I find it ironic that we complain about the limited range of EVs, while our TJs have less range than most EVs on the market.)

My main critiques on EVs are related to the current fixed cost, the lack of charging stations, and knowing that batteries degrade over time (providing even less range).

If a vehicle got 800 miles to a charge, it would lessen my concerns regarding the lack of charging stations and it would allow me to still have a solid range even if the battery's charge capacity was cut in half. I'm mostly sitting back and hoping for more breakthroughs in battery technology.

I really can't attribute any specific mod to any specific value of fuel saved/more power/longer lifespan given the massive amount of variables and the fact I've done a number of things in a very short time, but my data shows my fuel economy has improved substantially (roughly 17-18 MPG on 35x12.5 and 5" of lift) and my usable power and torque have also increased substantially. Most of my steady-speed city driving I now do around 1,500 RPM (like a modern auto vehicle might) because the torque has improved that much.

I'm not going to pick apart the fact that you didn't spend years in a lab testing each modification separately. You stacked some mods to gain significant improvements in your rig's efficiency and that's pretty impressive.

The only question I'd have for running around at 1500 would be potential carbon build-up, but that's easy to solve. And, we both know that many rigs have been lugged around for years and the engines keep on trucking. I'm not saying you are lugging it btw, I'm just recognizing an argument against that concern.

I'm far too addicted to being slingshotted around with the turbo to go that route, but I've owned a Prius and I was full-on OCD trying to improve its performance by tracking performance with custom PIDs a forum member created and raising the amount of time the car stayed in battery mode back before Toyota dialed that in from factory.

I appreciate your attempts to make your rig more efficient and sharing your results with us. Your fan thread still has my attention, but so far I've only bought the GM temp sensor. I planned to do mod last month until I damaged my Yukon hubs, PSC steering box, and potentially bent my inner Cs a bit racing around in a giant adult playground consisting of many trails and tall hill climbs (whoops). Blaine got me good enough get home and has since done work to help get my rig whole again.

 

[g.hayduke]

FWIW, my Grand Cherokee has both an oem oil cooler and oil temp display from the PCM.

I never paid attention during warmup so can't comment on that scenario.

That said, I've paid a lot of attention to coolant, oil, and trans temps while towing. The only time oil temps do not exceed coolant temps is going downhill or other low power situations. As soon as the engine starts working, oil temps climb as much as 20f or more above coolant temps.

Coolant temp is always very stable and trans temp tracks very closely with coolant temps.

I think it's quite possible you guys have a solution to a non-existent problem.

 

[MikeE024]

The only time oil temps do not exceed coolant temps is going downhill or other low power situations. As soon as the engine starts working, oil temps climb as much as 20f or more above coolant temps.

Your oil temp results are similar to what I've read in countless posts on the subject.

I think it's quite possible you guys have a solution to a non-existent problem.

@Steel City 06 likes to tinker and we are along for the ride.

 

[macleanflood]

Yeah I'm all for an oil cooler if it got me .5 for MPG and better oil life. Especially conventional oil. There's a reason everyone switched to synthetic.

-Mac

 

[g.hayduke]

It might actually be useful in a boosted application.

My first concern would be that whatever extra load you're putting on the oil pump might be more detrimental to your engine's longevity than slightly hotter oil temps.