This is a good point. Too many people on forums post opinions as facts when they aren't properly educated to be speaking on the subject. I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say "Get a wider tire, it increases your contact patch area. More grip!" on automotive forums.

 

Why are you suppressing the water-powered car?

 

Hell, that's not even a bad opinion, it's just factually incorrect.

 

Haha... my company can barely handle hybrids. Toyota seems to want to give it a shot however.

 

+1. The owners manual specifically states that 87 octane fuel will reduce performance and cause destructive engine knock. Ok in a pinch if you keep your foot off the throttle, but will cause engine damage if driven the way we do.

 

When I ran out of gas in MN (detailed in another thread), the first gas station I got to after AAA gave me a few gallons only had 87 octane. I put in 4 gallons to be sure I’d get to the next gas station, and put the car in snow/rain mode to ensure I was easy on the throttle ‘til I could top it off with premium.

 

Precisely the way to do it.

 

The OP must have information overload right now

 

That's a water-producing car. I mean, they all are, really, but they've got one that only does that.

I actually had a "conversation" trying to convince someone that a water powered car was impossible. He dragged subatomic phenomena and the Big Bang into it so I told him I was trying to convert my fireplace to burn ashes instead of wood.

We didn't come to an understanding. I did but collectively, no.

 

I realize that. Here is technical question for you. A Subaru that I purchased brand new had an oil burning problem (yes, scraper rings issue). Oil burning was not linear. Out of suggested 10,000 km oil change interval, it would not burn any oil for the first 2K, then gradually increase consumption up to max of about 1.5L/1000 km at around 5000km oil life. Can you offer me your technical explanation? I don't see how additives would be used up on spec oil at only 50% recommended interval.

As to my change interval - I also take my car to the track. So it is Extreme^2 use and I never want to risk getting anywhere near thermal breakdown and associated residue.

As to using expensive recommended oil - I think titanium additive makes that worthwhile. I know Queen & Country did a lot of oil analysis and found other oils with similar level, personally I couldn't bother to look for it. However, I know generic Castrol oil doesn't have it. I also decided against risking ZDDP with generic oil, as I heard zinc can react with some modern cylinder wall coatings. Basically you can create Nikasil-like issues by using it.

If you know more about any of that, I would be very eager to read your reply.

 

As far as I can figure out the ONLY thing that makes the special Castrol Unobtainium different to other quality full synth low viscosity oils is it's high titanium content.
Almost all other such oils have low titanium and high molybdenum (moly) instead.
I have read (sorry, can't find where atm!) that the main reason that JLR specify the Castrol Unobtainium (besides a cozy marketing deal) is that (they claim) titanium plays nice with the cats in JLR vehicles whilst moly does not. I have never read of any evidence to support this claim.
Thing is, I have never used any Castrol oil or any other oil high in titanium and low in moly in my XFR or F-Type, instead I have used only premium Oz brands Nulon and Penrite full synth 5W-20 meeting the earlier JLR spec Ford WSS M2C925B and M2C945B, both of which have almost zero titanium but lots of moly, and I have never had a single engine or cat problem.

 

My first question is how you're tracking this oil burn? 1.5L/1000 km is a massive amount and would run that vehicle dry in 3000 km. 1.5L is the difference between at the full mark and a dry dip stick. Running through that kind of capacity in such a short time is insane. I own one of those 2.0L Subarus with the oil burn issue due to the rings, and I couldn't track how much it's burning per mile based solely on the dip stick alone; that's not a good enough measurement tool. For me personally, I have to add a quart 50% of the way through the oil change interval, and that gets me through to the next oil change. I think you have bigger problems.

Titanium is a wear additive just like anything else. It is not substantially better or worst than many other wear additives, but does spark that wow factor for a lot of people. See titanium on the bottle and think it must be better! Engines all over the world have done fine without it, Jaguar isn't special.

 

I think I overstated consumption a bit by mixing units (quarts and miles), it might have been 1.5 quarts in 1000 miles. Canada is mostly metric, but not in every aspect. To measure, I used a combination of dipstick on flat surface while engine is warm and occurrence of yellow warning light. Yes, consumption was rather high and Subaru replaced both engine block and rings under warranty even before the lawsuit and settlement. Mine was one of the first fixed with updated ring design.

Regardless of measure used - it was consistently applied. There was no oil burning right after oil change for about 1000 km and then it gradually ramped up to unacceptable level. This was when I measured and when dealer measured.
I observed similar pattern in other applications/engines. For some reason blow-by is worse with old oil, as measured with catch can. So it is not only that engine that shows this pattern.

 

Sure, and direct injected engines all over the world have consistently suffered from sludge issues and chain wear issues. DI is a bad technology from reliability point of view.

 

The Mobil 1 0w-40 does a very good job of protecting the engine in climates that see temperature extremes. That wt of oil is recommended by the owners manual for my climate where the highs and lows are both problematic for the 5-30 oils


Z

PS. I’m not seeing any oil consumption with the oil changes coming at 4,0000 to 5,000 mile intervals on a car showing 157,000 miles (2002 XKR)

 

If you want to stay "Jaguar Compliant" then you need to buy oil that meets Jaguar ST. JLR 51.5122 specifications. Castrol Edge Performance 0w-20 and Motul 5122 0w-20 will meet the standard. I believe that the Castrol has a higher titanium concentration. There is also a version of Castrol that is blended for VW specs that is basically the same as the 5122 standard and is available online. I hope that helps.

 

Motul makes Jag Specific This listing says 4X5QT which I doubt but it is available from many sources

Says 4x5QT jugs of Motul Jaguar Specific ST-JLR-51.5122 Oil 0W-20

 

This may or may not be relevant to your issue. In our shop we have had several Early V12 cars where the oil pressure would drop dramatically after being driven at high speeds in hat weather. We found that Motul offered a range of oils that resolved the problem They recommend using their 8100 X Power 10W60 which meets Jaguar specs. It is expensive but so is an engine overhaul. Motul can often be purchased at any race or high Performance shop.

 

I use Ravenol brand lubes. Engine oil - Ravenol Eco Synth ECS (Art. 1111102) 0W-20 STJLR.51.5122. You can get a Ravenol oil change kit on eBay for about $110. It includes 8 liters of oil and an OEM quality oil filter.

 

I have almost 50k miles on regular Castro oil. Not the Jaguar brand and the car is solid.