Oil Cooler for a DD with track days?

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Quite the contrary. Having worked/working for OEMs, I can tell you that most cars are made for the 99%, and the 99% in this case, are not tracking the car.

It's cheaper for them to just fight the fight and deny claims than to use a superior part that only a miniscule fraction of users *might* need.

Planned obsolescence, and maximizing profit.

if you have evidence of 270F oil temps reducing reliability, show it!

Adding unnecessary parts will negatively impact reliability.

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by PulsarBeeerz

What oil coolers are you guys using that commonly leak? When installed correctly there really isn't much to go wrong...I've made hoses for heat exchanges and done various oil plumbing installs for lube and scavenge systems at work. I will agree that you introduce a potential point of failure, mostly in the install. But, commonly leak? That is a stretch.

It's B.S. Properly installed, outside of a rock strike, the next highest danger for catastrophic failure is from chafing. Tie up your shit, inspect it periodically, profit.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

It's B.S. Properly installed, outside of a rock strike, the next highest danger for catastrophic failure is from chafing. Tie up your shit, inspect it periodically, profit.

Thing is, OEM setup has already been through 100s of thousands of miles of testing. Installing an unnecessary component is adding risk. For what? Because someone *thinks* that 240F is "better" than 270F for oil that is easily up to well over 300F?

[TommyW]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Of course! But don't kid yourself that recommending an aftermarket oil cooler install is generally a good idea for most of the community...

I studied this long and hard when I bought my car, and despite my preconceived notions came to the conclusion that an oil cooler install was a bad idea for me and my usage.

well then good for you. I hope it all works out.

[PulsarBeeerz]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Yup, gets oil up to temp quicker. Unlike an aftermarket oil cooler with which oil may *never* get up to temp....

Just gonna ignore the regulator part I see..

Originally Posted by ZDan

Thing is, OEM setup has already been through 100s of thousands of miles of testing. Installing an unnecessary component is adding risk. For what? Because someone *thinks* that 240F is "better" than 270F for oil that is easily up to well over 300F?

Its not just about the temp of the oil, but the temp at the bearing surfaces. 270F oil is seeing temps far above 300F at the bearings surface...
Once again even the OEM wanted to maintain oil temps inside a tighter window with an oil to water heat exchanger. We use similar heat exchangers all the time in aerospace power generation RnD applications. We use them to bring the power unit up to temp and maintain said temp. Simple.

[Dububster]

Originally Posted by ZDan

But there are risks associated with installing a cooler beyond just oil running cooler than optimal during DD duty. Leaks are common, engines have even been lost, fires a real possibility..

IMO, for a DD, seeing occasional track usage, running 30wt and not getting too worried about running 270F which is still only 2/3 of the gauge is the way to go...

FWIW here's how one manufacturer has characterized oil temperatures in a factory service manual:
38-60° C (100-140° F) (low)
61-137° C (142-279° F) (normal)
138-146° C (279-295° F) (warm)
147-160° C (297-320° F) (hot)

Are these temps the ones of the oem oil temp sensor or an aftermarket senser and gauge?

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Thing is, OEM setup has already been through 100s of thousands of miles of testing. Installing an unnecessary component is adding risk. For what? Because someone *thinks* that 240F is "better" than 270F for oil that is easily up to well over 300F?

OEM setup is for maximizing profit, meeting emission/efficiency standards, and is warrantied for 60 Kmi. Good for them. I'd rather not have to tear down my engine to replace all the rubber and plastic parts at under 100 Kmi because they were prematurely cooked. That's just one example. I've read your posts in other oil cooler threads and have managed to let it slide until now. No offense intended. I'm not much for internet argument. Please just consider that there are many long-term benefits gained from shedding excess heat. It's not all about oil viscosity.

[Kelse92]

Originally Posted by ZDan

if you have evidence of 270F oil temps reducing reliability, show it!

Adding unnecessary parts will negatively impact reliability.

Please go tell that to the e92 M3 owners in the world. They and their rod bearings will laugh you out of the room…
Seeing 270+ is not good for any motor with long-term track use. There’s a reason those temps usually trigger temp warnings/limp mode in most cars…
There’s a lot of plastic and rubber gaskets in engines and engine bays today and excess heat on those parts increases wear.

We have all gone way off topic of this thread I feel like, but getting back to the main point. If my car was a daily, unless I lived way up north in a colder climate, I’d be still installing my Greddy oil cooler for daily/track use. It’s cheap insurance and keeps temps below 240. Even in 100deg weather on a demanding track like COTA. Plus, it has a thermostatic plate that doesn’t open until the oil is up to a certain temp anyway

[Dububster]

Thank you, everyone, very much for replying and trying to help out and give their 2 cents. It seems like there isn't an extremely clear conclusion on this topic. I'll definitely continue what all you guys have to see because you all seem significantly more knowledgeable than I am. I just wanted to note that I really do appreciate everyone trying to help out.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by ZDan

if you have evidence of 270F oil temps reducing reliability, show it!

Adding unnecessary parts will negatively impact reliability.

Used oil analysis under similar conditions, with and without an oil cooler, will show a difference in wear.

How it affects long term reliability? Who knows. That's a data set that has far too many confounding variables.

The correlation I see is that engines that have oil coolers tend to last longer. There's always outliers of course.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Thing is, OEM setup has already been through 100s of thousands of miles of testing. Installing an unnecessary component is adding risk. For what? Because someone *thinks* that 240F is "better" than 270F for oil that is easily up to well over 300F?

Yes. On the street. Under "typical" use conditions. Track use is not considered typical for this car. The factory equipment is a dead giveaway for that.

They also added a cooler at the detriment of their margins to the FA24 for a reason. It's not because FA24's have higher oil temps.

I kinda do this for OEMs, for a living.

[Petah78]

Originally Posted by Dububster

So I have begun getting into tracking my car a few times a year and have come across many threads saying that if you track your car at all, you should get an oil cooler for extra insurance. After doing a little bit more research, I found that an oil cooler may not be the best idea on a DD car where most of the trips might not get the oil up to temperature with an oil cooler. I came across a pretty good deal on a Jackson racing oil cooler near me and wanted to know what you guys think. Do you think I should pick the cooler up because I need it for tracking and it would be fine to have daily driving, or would it be a bad idea because my oil might not get up to proper temps when daily driving it and maybe I should get a different solution for when I take it to the track? Everything is stock under the hood besides UEL headers.

To the OP, I have looked into this issue myself as I am in the same situation as you. My car is mostly a DD with 3-5 track outings per season. But each outing only nets me around 60 miles (1 total running hour) of actual track driving. I have concluded that you have to take everyone's comment with a grain of salt and see what fits your use case and more importantly, climate. Adding an oil cooler is not without risks; leakages, over cooling components failing etc. And the constant reminder in the back of your mind to always be checking for leaks/failure points. I can see how this can be a pain and can weary for some.

You have 2 school of thoughts on this subject matter and have supporters on both sides arguing their case. I live in a climate where winter is harsh, road salt is used everywhere and -15F temp is not uncommon. Even as a factory car, for your average winter commute, oil temps rarely gets up to full operating temps (190f). I can't imagine a longer oil warm up period. But this is not the same for someone who lives in Florida and are not subjected to the same winter conditions.

If my car was a full blown track car, or something that was heavily tracked, or if I was not using my car in the winter, I would then consider adding an oil cooler. But from what I have read on these forums and talking to a few locals, I am not sure if I have seen enough evidence that a causally track driven car (which mine is) will benefit from an oil cooler. To clarify, I am not saying that an oil cooler is not beneficial while you are on the track, but will it bring harm/risks on the remaining 363 days of the year while you are just putting around town? Will these casual track events result in any engine problems for the life of the car? While I agree that high oil temp is not ideal, same can be argued for cold oil temps. Aside from the factory style oil cooler, all other forms of oil cooler does lengthen oil warm up times. OE didn't add an OE style oil cooler just for cooling, they also sped up the heat up times. In fact, does the OE style cooler even do much during track conditions? Our engines are designed to operate in a certain temp range, anything outside is not ideal. You just have to guage what works best for you.

I have driven a total of 120 track miles this summer on 2 separate outings. I just changed my 5w-30 oil and plan on sending it in to get an UOA to see how my engine is wearing. If it shows signs of elevated wear, I will reconsider an oil cooler. But that is only because I am now working from home and I no longer need to drive my car in the winter but again, only if my UOA says I need one. Good Luck.

Originally Posted by Kelse92

Please go tell that to the e92 M3 owners in the world.

Not a fair comparison, the S65 had bearing issues regardless if you have tracked or not. On the flip side, Honda B series, K series, F series and even Mazda BP series can be tracked without coolers and will last the life of the car.

[BlueWhelan]

Originally Posted by Petah78

Not a fair comparison, the S65 had bearing issues regardless if you have tracked or not. On the flip side, Honda B series, K series, F series and even Mazda BP series can be tracked without coolers and will last the life of the car.

Ok hold up on that. Agreed the M92 bearing are not a fair comparison. The bearing quality there in general is an issue, whereas the issue with FA-20 is its ability to maintain proper pressure under high revs...

...which is why the comparison to the Honda engines, etc is also not a fair comparison. Those engines are able to maintain proper pressure throughout the rev range, something the FA-20 struggles at.

Btw - the vast majority of Honda’s I’ve even seen at track have oil coolers, even IF they don’t need it.

Wonder why that is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Petah78]

Originally Posted by BlueWhelan

Ok hold up on that. Agreed the M92 bearing are not a fair comparison. The bearing quality there in general is an issue, whereas the issue with FA-20 is its ability to maintain proper pressure under high revs...

...which is why the comparison to the Honda engines, etc is also not a fair comparison. Those engines are able to maintain proper pressure throughout the rev range, something the FA-20 struggles at.

Btw - the vast majority of Honda’s I’ve even seen at track have oil coolers, even IF they don’t need it.

Wonder why that is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

While I agree that reported oil pressures @ redline for the FA20 is on the low side, but is it a problem? I have looked but cannot seem to find anything that states the low pressure is an issue. These cars are getting to 8 years old and I have been in touch with members with older samples that have successfully tracked their cars without an oil cooler yet have reached over 120k miles. Clean UAO too. But of course, YMMV based on how it was driven outside of track, maintenance etc. Fact is no one knows.

All this to say, I am not disagreeing that lower oil temp/higher oil pressure during track driving is important for engine health. But how much difference does it make for the casual track goer? And to accept all the possible cons associated with one? I am just saying that there is more than "you absolutely cannot track your car without an oil cooler" mentality. You have to look at your own situation and determine if a cooler is suitable for yourself.

BTW - I can't be certain the usage case for the Hondas that you have referenced but from my own personal experience, I have casually tracked B and K series engine for a number of years, none had oil coolers and I have never lost an engine. And if you hop onto S2Ki, an oil cooler is not a common mod.