I have a 2013 Nissan Juke S FWD with 138k. I usually change the oil every 3500-4500 miles and noticed it’s consuming quite a bit of oil. Previously I’ve had to replace the Turbo due to the bearing going out from the supply line being clogged. New turbo and better oil supply line (braided end to end) added about 15k ago. I’m noticing it is burning/consuming about 2 qts every 1500miles. No leaks and no smoke out the exhaust. Any ideas? Thanks.
TurboTroy
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Possible the rings are worn, valve guide seals are worn, PCV isn't working properly, turbo is pushing oil thru the gap rings, etc. It's either leaking or you are burning it, no other options.
Pulling the upper intercooler pipe and looking at the throttlebody will tell you if it's making it into the engine thru the turbo. Compression test will tell you how bad the ring seal is. You might want to switch to high mileage synthetic oil if the compression results don't show good. The mileage doesn't sound like it warrants high oil consumption but you don't state what oil you've used. That 2 qts/1500 miles is extremely high.
Pulling the upper intercooler pipe and looking at the throttlebody will tell you if it's making it into the engine thru the turbo. Compression test will tell you how bad the ring seal is. You might want to switch to high mileage synthetic oil if the compression results don't show good. The mileage doesn't sound like it warrants high oil consumption but you don't state what oil you've used. That 2 qts/1500 miles is extremely high.
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Depends on how bad the leakage is. A compression test will answer the ring condition pretty fast without speculating. The intake/exhaust valve guide seals there is a trick to check it using a boost/vacuum gauge and idle stability or something like that. If it's not leaking, you are burning it. The PCV system can draw in oil during engine vacuum too, same as the guide seals. Have you ever replaced components in the PCV system or checked its function?
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
OK, this is my opinion only so if it contradicts anyone, understand I'm speaking on my experience and it's an opinion based on that.
I highly recommend NOT venting the PVC to atmosphere. On part throttle conditions, you'll lose the intake manifold suction that'll clear the sump of combustion gases that can contaminate the oil. Under boost conditions, you will lose the turbo vacuum draw on the valve cover/sump. This is going to ramp the crankcase pressure up something fierce. It will be even more brutal IF you already have ring wear issues and low compression to begin with. The solution being presented will make things even worse. Think of the factory closed PVC system like a cheap factory racing vacuum pump. People that do this venting mod start popping dipsticks out the engine block under high boost/power. It's also brutal on the environment, and smells nasty like you would not believe, and it leaves a nasty vapor mess in the engine compartment. Yes, this is based on my experience.
I suggest getting a very high quality catch can that is SEALED that can work either between 1) Valve cover and turbo compressor 2) Valve cover and intake manifold. Plenty of threads on this site for catch cans. A sealed catch can on each individual circuit would be best.
I know you said you don't have oil coming out the exhaust, just put that aside for now because it is stopping you from conducting a systematic troubleshooting. I know oil burns, but realize at part throttle you are always burning some tiny amount of oil vapor and don't even see it in the exhaust. The question is "how much" oil can burn and be visibly detectable.
Couple of ways the oil can exit a vehicle:
1) Fluid Leakage (turbo oil feed line, turbo oil return, oil sump pan, valve cover case, timing cover case, block end seal (auto/manual trans) etc.)
2) Piston ring wear leakage (i.e. burned in combustion chamber)
3) Piston ring carbon buildup (i.e. affecting piston oil ring control)
4) Valve guide seal wear (i.e. under vacuum draw/part throttle, burned in combustion chamber)
5) PVC failure (i.e. combustion gas NOT drawn in under vacuum, pushing oil out elsewhere)
6 Vacuum draw turbo (i.e. oil drawn into intake and burned in combustion chamber)
7) Pushed thru turbine gap ring out the exhaust directly (ie. blocked turbo oil return, potentially NOT burned in combustion chamber, maybe not even burned at all, but pushed out the exhaust exit as vapor)
Conducting the PVC function check, compression test, leakdown test, inspection of the exhaust pipe/rear bumper (i.e. oily vapor residue) will help you/mechanic diagnose the problem.
Finally, compression of 125 psi is NOT the factory lower compression spec limit. In fact the Nissan factory spec lower limit is 172.6 psi for the MR16DDT. The motor is a 9.5:1 compression ratio.
You should ideally be doing a "hot" compression test on a good battery/alternator. Even with the throttle snapped shut and checking hot I'm up near 170-180 psi on the Juke with 7-8 cranks, that is critical to get the pressure readings up. I check my compression (1) yearly after doing a carbon combustion chamber cleaning before and after. If you are getting 125 psi on all cylinders then the compression test isn't being done correctly OR the engine is wornout/carbon buildup and of course it's going to burn oil. I get 150-155 psi compression on my EVO X with 9:1 compression ratio, for example, that is within spec.
Find a very good shop/mechanic and tell them what is going on and let them give you the diagnostics, then go from there.
See below the specifications for 2012 year Juke Gen1.
![188090]( "188090")
![188092]( "188092")
I highly recommend NOT venting the PVC to atmosphere. On part throttle conditions, you'll lose the intake manifold suction that'll clear the sump of combustion gases that can contaminate the oil. Under boost conditions, you will lose the turbo vacuum draw on the valve cover/sump. This is going to ramp the crankcase pressure up something fierce. It will be even more brutal IF you already have ring wear issues and low compression to begin with. The solution being presented will make things even worse. Think of the factory closed PVC system like a cheap factory racing vacuum pump. People that do this venting mod start popping dipsticks out the engine block under high boost/power. It's also brutal on the environment, and smells nasty like you would not believe, and it leaves a nasty vapor mess in the engine compartment. Yes, this is based on my experience.
I suggest getting a very high quality catch can that is SEALED that can work either between 1) Valve cover and turbo compressor 2) Valve cover and intake manifold. Plenty of threads on this site for catch cans. A sealed catch can on each individual circuit would be best.
I know you said you don't have oil coming out the exhaust, just put that aside for now because it is stopping you from conducting a systematic troubleshooting. I know oil burns, but realize at part throttle you are always burning some tiny amount of oil vapor and don't even see it in the exhaust. The question is "how much" oil can burn and be visibly detectable.
Couple of ways the oil can exit a vehicle:
1) Fluid Leakage (turbo oil feed line, turbo oil return, oil sump pan, valve cover case, timing cover case, block end seal (auto/manual trans) etc.)
2) Piston ring wear leakage (i.e. burned in combustion chamber)
3) Piston ring carbon buildup (i.e. affecting piston oil ring control)
4) Valve guide seal wear (i.e. under vacuum draw/part throttle, burned in combustion chamber)
5) PVC failure (i.e. combustion gas NOT drawn in under vacuum, pushing oil out elsewhere)
6 Vacuum draw turbo (i.e. oil drawn into intake and burned in combustion chamber)
7) Pushed thru turbine gap ring out the exhaust directly (ie. blocked turbo oil return, potentially NOT burned in combustion chamber, maybe not even burned at all, but pushed out the exhaust exit as vapor)
Conducting the PVC function check, compression test, leakdown test, inspection of the exhaust pipe/rear bumper (i.e. oily vapor residue) will help you/mechanic diagnose the problem.
Finally, compression of 125 psi is NOT the factory lower compression spec limit. In fact the Nissan factory spec lower limit is 172.6 psi for the MR16DDT. The motor is a 9.5:1 compression ratio.
You should ideally be doing a "hot" compression test on a good battery/alternator. Even with the throttle snapped shut and checking hot I'm up near 170-180 psi on the Juke with 7-8 cranks, that is critical to get the pressure readings up. I check my compression (1) yearly after doing a carbon combustion chamber cleaning before and after. If you are getting 125 psi on all cylinders then the compression test isn't being done correctly OR the engine is wornout/carbon buildup and of course it's going to burn oil. I get 150-155 psi compression on my EVO X with 9:1 compression ratio, for example, that is within spec.
Find a very good shop/mechanic and tell them what is going on and let them give you the diagnostics, then go from there.
See below the specifications for 2012 year Juke Gen1.
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
OK, couple of points here:
The other stuff you mentioned about your racecar.....I don't know. The fuel requirements for 750 whp on E85 are 2000cc per injectors and 187 lb/hr of fuel pump flow. It's not happening on a stock Juke injector or mechanical fuel pump, sorry I don't believe it unless you added a full auxiliary port injection fuel system. No car on Earth from the factory has that much overhead on the fuel pump and injectors. Let alone the stock fuel line from the fuel tank to the fuel rail having the fuel flow capacity. This is pure fantasy. My EVO X FE is almost having to replace the fuel rail/fuel line just to run 500 hp on E85, and it already comes with 303 hp from the factory. The Juke engine block handling that much power is within the realm of possibility.....if it were sleeved. Any dyno chart you showed me wouldn't convince me to be honest.
You mentioned it, so I commented. To the OP, good luck with your ride.
- The oil feed line was a Nissan TSB if I recall correctly, I could be wrong. That line came with a heatshield wrap to protect it. No idea why it fails but mine was perfect at 80k miles, so was the turbo. I believe maintenance has much to do with it. I never hot shutdown my turbo cars.
- I am now wondering if the OP is now running without an oil feed restrictor. It's recommended to maintain 40 psi at the CHRA and avoid pushing oil thru the compressor/intake system and also out the turbine section into the downpipe, killing the catalytic converter in the process. All the symptoms he mentions would occur with high oil feed pressure at the turbo.
- MHI journal bearing turbos all have oil feed restrictors from the factory (i.e. Nissan, Mitsubishi, etc.). I've never have had one fail/clog in 30 years.
- Yes, venting eliminates the possibility of sludge formation in the intake runners. I still don't recommend it. The intake/exhaust valves still get full of carbon from the DI and lack of fuel wash. Currently there is no practical solution for it without teardown and disassembly. OEM are simply going back to auxilliary port fuel injectors + DI to clean them off.
- I didn't recommend a dry sump on a street car, but the comparison is valid about vacuum in the valve cover helping ring pack seal which is a side benefit of it.
- I wouldn't recommend anyone reuse a timing chain. The chain costs $75, the labor a whole lot more than that.
The other stuff you mentioned about your racecar.....I don't know. The fuel requirements for 750 whp on E85 are 2000cc per injectors and 187 lb/hr of fuel pump flow. It's not happening on a stock Juke injector or mechanical fuel pump, sorry I don't believe it unless you added a full auxiliary port injection fuel system. No car on Earth from the factory has that much overhead on the fuel pump and injectors. Let alone the stock fuel line from the fuel tank to the fuel rail having the fuel flow capacity. This is pure fantasy. My EVO X FE is almost having to replace the fuel rail/fuel line just to run 500 hp on E85, and it already comes with 303 hp from the factory. The Juke engine block handling that much power is within the realm of possibility.....if it were sleeved. Any dyno chart you showed me wouldn't convince me to be honest.
You mentioned it, so I commented. To the OP, good luck with your ride.
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
The FR oil feed is actually a Vibrant oil feed line, if anyone was wondering. I paid it no mind until I was looking at the Mamba Oil feed/Water line kits that specifically mention a restrictor, and realized mine was completely missing a restrictor. I have no doubt it would have caused an oil burning/push problem if I didn't catch it. MHI journal bearing turbo don't like more than 40 psi oil pressure, the restrictor helps.
I also had a HUGE oil burn problem on my Subaru WRX STi, like smoke out the back. Ended up being the oil feed banjo filter completely clogged up, completely decimated the IHI VF39 turbo.
I also had a HUGE oil burn problem on my Subaru WRX STi, like smoke out the back. Ended up being the oil feed banjo filter completely clogged up, completely decimated the IHI VF39 turbo.
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Forgot to mention, on my cylinder head teardown what I found was a tremendous amount of oil residue right in the valve bowel and on the back of the intake valves. This is the area where the airflow turns past the valve into the engine. I don't recall having much oil consumption at all. The valve guide seals were fairly dried out. I'd suspect any high mileage Juke would start having issues with valve guide oil seal leakage. The oil fouling was so bad it was affecting airflow into the engine and heavily constricting the runners and valve backsides. This is not to be confused with carbon buildup as that looks a little bit different but also happens in combination with it. This is with Seafoam treatments (2) per year.
So if you are having this issue perhaps a topend rebuild is in order.
So if you are having this issue perhaps a topend rebuild is in order.
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Yes, #4 isn't good. Drop oil into #4 piston chamber, then re-run the test and see if the compression comes up.
Next, purchase a leak-down tester for a leakdown test. You will be looking for about 90-98% sealage, (100 psi feed, 90-98 psi hold). When you do this you can listen thru the coolant cap opening for headgasket failure, valve cover oil cap opening for valve seal and/or maybe piston ring seal, throttlebody for intake valve leaks, exhaust for exhaust valve leaks.
I've had in the past cylinders down quite a bit with a lot of carbon build up. Seafoam if it's good for anything it will get a decent amount of carbon off the piston rings and loosen them up. I've brought cylinder up 8-10 psi doing that repeatedly but it takes a couple applications. It's worth a shot before moving forward, if just to see if it is the rings.
If your tearing down the motor, then maybe not worth the effort. But it doesn't take much time.
Next, purchase a leak-down tester for a leakdown test. You will be looking for about 90-98% sealage, (100 psi feed, 90-98 psi hold). When you do this you can listen thru the coolant cap opening for headgasket failure, valve cover oil cap opening for valve seal and/or maybe piston ring seal, throttlebody for intake valve leaks, exhaust for exhaust valve leaks.
I've had in the past cylinders down quite a bit with a lot of carbon build up. Seafoam if it's good for anything it will get a decent amount of carbon off the piston rings and loosen them up. I've brought cylinder up 8-10 psi doing that repeatedly but it takes a couple applications. It's worth a shot before moving forward, if just to see if it is the rings.
If your tearing down the motor, then maybe not worth the effort. But it doesn't take much time.
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Time to rebuild then...lol. I’d recommend replacing the valve springs too if you got the cash. Ask the head guy if they can do some pocket porting or bowel work, this head needs it. The RS oil pump is recommended, so are the RS rod bearings. The 2J pulley I wouldn’t do it. The crank needs some weight on that end. I ran it, didn’t like it and sold mine. On a built motor, I won’t go near it again for reliability reasons.
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
