Oil Check Please!

[kcbernard2000]

Gang, 1st post here.

24' Z with approximately 5600 miles. I was in process of draining oil to install a CZP oil pan and noticed this. This has been the 4th oil change to date, Nissan oil changes to preserve warranty.

Is this normal/abnormal to see this amount of contamination in the oil at this mileage?

Still considered break in residue?

Magnetic drain plug has minimal debris attached to it.

Car is not driven hard, but spirted on occasion, runs good, no abnormalities.

- Nismo intakes, Z1 catch can, 2.5" lower down pipes, Nismo track exhaust, no tune.​

Thanks!

 

[G M]

Suggest you send a sample of this oil to Blackstone Labs for analysis.
https://www.blackstone-labs.com/

 

[Drago86]

Looks bad.

Blackstone checks for disolved containinantes, this is disco glitter(big chunncks of bearing material).

The ammount of disco glitter looks like the bearings arent gone gone yet but severly damaged. Unless there is more hiding in the bottom of the pan( and I would check)


That is bearing babbit material, its not magnetic.

 

[FSUZ33]

More concerned with this one than @MRSocal and his black oil at 3,750 miles.

The forbidden glitter is an immediate red flag.
I'm also concerned with what appears to be milkyness. Maybe it's the photos/flash, but it looks like there MIGHT be water making its way into the oil/crankcase. That's a situation that can be rectified, but if that's bearing material in the pan then the damage could already be done.

I agree with others about the Blackstone report. But I'd take it to the dealer immediately...or at least a sample of the oil.

Fingers crossed!!!

 

[FSUZ33]

...and if it is an issue/failure...
Especially with the low mileage and frequent dealer oil changes I don't think they could/would connect root cause to the exhaust, but they might make a stink out of the catch can...idk.

 

[Mugzilla]

You say, "Nissan oil changes to preserve warranty. ".

Did the dealership do the first three changes, and you are doing this one?

 

[trackratZ]

...and if it is an issue/failure...
Especially with the low mileage and frequent dealer oil changes I don't think they could/would connect root cause to the exhaust, but they might make a stink out of the catch can...idk.

Has anyone here been denied warranty service because of added catch can? If that's a red flag I might reconsider installing mine, but will ask my local dealers if it's a potential claim issue...

 

[chadhunley]

I'm just wondering if coolant got into the engine. I would hope that just opening up the exhaust to 2.5 would not cause this. Going with the Nismo exhaust would that be to much back pressure coming from 2.5 DP to 2.25? I'm just guessing at this point.

Maybe tuning after any change in exhaust flow is necessary. Again, I'm just speculating.

 

[Zplz]

Has anyone here been denied warranty service because of added catch can? If that's a red flag I might reconsider installing mine, but will ask my local dealers if it's a potential claim issue...

I’ve just noticed several times with the web that the catch can could be a potential red flag but I don’t know of any specific examples. I posted a Google A.I. search result about it somewhere on here. Basically, the concern was over an incorrect installation or not maintaining it potentially messing with the engine operation. Technically, the burden is on Nissan to prove it but, as with anything in the legal realm, all sorts of frustrating things can be played out and Nissan has bigger pockets and access to more legal options than the typical customer. I just choose not to go there, personally. As a lawyer once told me, it’s just best to avoid that rabbit hole, if you can.

 

[Tranzor Z]

Mine was black at 6k

 

[trackratZ]

I’ve just noticed several times with the web that the catch can could be a potential red flag but I don’t know of any specific examples. I posted a Google A.I. search result about it somewhere on here. Basically, the concern was over an incorrect installation or not maintaining it potentially messing with the engine operation. Technically, the burden is on Nissan to prove it but, as with anything in the legal realm, all sorts of frustrating things can be played out and Nissan has bigger pockets and access to more legal options than the typical customer. I just choose not to go there, personally. As a lawyer once told me, it’s just best to avoid that rabbit hole, if you can.

I see it as Nissan will certainly key on that 'modification that involves oil circulation probably causing the starvation' route. A catch can has been proven its worth over and over in the long run, i.e. valve deposits, but it's still not OEM. Ugh!!

 

[chadgigachad]

There is no way a catch can, lower downpipe (or really any downpipe), or catback can cause this damage. Something in the engine went horribly wrong. Possibly a manufacturing issue considering the very low mileage?

 

[FSUZ33]

Has anyone here been denied warranty service because of added catch can? If that's a red flag I might reconsider installing mine, but will ask my local dealers if it's a potential claim issue...

I know a total of zero people who have been hassled by a dealership over a catch can, Z or otherwise. However, I do know of people with catch cans who have been hassled by others within the community that think they’re a scam. My comment was only stated in caution. Plenty of discussion here about the possibility of voiding a warranty over using the wrong viscosity or non-certified motor oil. I don’t know the validity of those claims (or assumptions?), but if they could blame forbidden glitter on a Fram oil filter or STP 5W/30, then a mod plumbed in between your crankcase and your valve cover seems like it COULD be fair game. To me, anyway.

 

[Zplz]

Of course, if Nissan came up with a $2K NISMO catch-can, all would be fine.

 

[Zplz]

More, courtesy of Google.


While it is rare for a catch-can to result in a blanket "voided" warranty, manufacturers and dealerships can and do deny specific engine-related claims by arguing the modification altered the vehicle's original Positive Crankcase Ventilation (PCV) system.

One documented case involved a GMC Sierraowner whose warranty claim for a failed engine lifter was initially denied. The manufacturer argued that:
Facebook

• PCV System Alteration: By installing the catch-can, the owner had "altered" the factory PCV system, which is a critical emissions and engine regulation component.
• Collateral Modification: In this specific instance, the dealer also cited an aftermarket cold air intake (CAI), claiming it caused the engine to heat up too quickly, leading to internal damage.
  Facebook

The owner had to fight the denial for four months and eventually threatened legal action under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. While GM eventually agreed to repair the lifter, they officially warned that future engine-related claims would be denied unless the factory intake and PCV components were restored.
Facebook +1

Common Grounds for Denial
Manufacturers typically deny catch-can related claims based on the following mechanical risks:

• Crankcase Pressure: If a catch-can is poorly designed or the filter becomes blocked, it can restrict airflow. This increases crankcase pressure, which can blow out gaskets or the rear main seal.
  YouTube +2
• Freezing in Cold Climates: In winter, moisture caught in the can can freeze and completely block the PCV line, leading to immediate engine pressure issues.
  YouTube
• Improper Installation: Installing a can "upside down" or with excessively long hoses can impede the intended flow rate required for efficient engine evacuation.
  YouTube

In the U.S., the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act requires the manufacturer to prove the aftermarket part caused the failure before denying a claim. However, many owners find that even if they are legally in the right, they may still face an initial denial and a costly, time-consuming battle to get the repair covered