Not your usual oil thread

If you are a data geek who loves pseudo-technical motorcycle testing

https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/

This is a testing blog that was started 5 years ago and is continually updated through End of April 2018. Interesting conclusion on motorcycle specific oils and it's backed up by a lot of great testing and experience:

"Therefore, I recommend using High Performance Automotive oils in motorcycles, wet clutch or not."

 

His basis is that only older clutches slip when using auto oil. Yet they do not when using bike oil. My F4i is over 85,000 miles now with many trackdays on it, how much more protection do I need?

 

Up until recently (embarrassed to say?), I always used high quality automobile oils.
For many years, many bikes- all with wet clutches, and never had a clutch start slipping. This was with street/stock applications.

Now I use the one for wet cluthes, usually Mobil 1, 4T

 

Some automotive oils will pass the JASO MA2 test but the manufacturer just doesn't pay to have the test done so the seal doesn't go on the bottle.
I wouldn't run a cheap oil without testing it to make sure it will work for my application.
I also wouldn't run an expensive oil without testing it just to make sure I'm not getting screwed.

 

Discovered this this week, after the dealer sold me 80w gear oil for the transmission, but the manuel said 10w40

http://www.belray.com/bel-ray-engine-oil-bel-ray-gear-oil-differences-explained

 

I too had just ordered an oil change kit for my 450 as it's cheaper to buy everything separate, even at my cost. I'm glad the CRF has separate gearbox/ engine oils, and then I noted it stated 10w40 for both engine and gearbox and the kit sold me 80w gear oil, didn't really question it but it's good to know. Never really took a look at the viscosity of gear oil but, yea, 80w is about the same as 10w40.

 

I’ve used Mobil 1 synthetic (only synthetic) in varying weights depending on bike / use / weather and in back to back analysis with almost exact same conditions the oil can’t back better than the Uber expensive Motul green stuff and never had a clutch issue. I abuse the crap out of my clutches too.

 

I wish they all had seperate engine / Gear boxes

 

tl/dr

Rotella.

 

I just wanted to say Motul, because it looks cool and smells like bananas.








...and Rotella is garbage.

 

Well I know the blog is TL/DR but Motul is the top performing motorcycle specific oil in the test and the only 1 in the "Incredible" wear ranking category Overall, AMSOIL Signature auto pretty much dominated.

 

You don't even know where the filler cap is be quiet.

 

I hear you, I thought it was shit at first until I thought about it a little and figured it would be a good thing in the end.

 

would like to see where Liqui Moly would stack up but it's Euro Dino meat

 

Not all "wet" clutchs are equal.

Never had a problem with automotive oils in "modern" bikes, i.e., post-1985. But, the BSA's, Nortons, and Old Triumphs slip like Hell if you use an auto oil with an API rating of later than SF. And, don't try to use a motorcycle specific synthetic. Jus' sayin' . . . .

Cheers,

Dave

 

From the blog ... "BOTTOM LINE: Thinner oils are better for most engine lubrication needs"
Anyone wonder why SAE uses a 'Three ball" test, instead of PSI ratings?
Opinions ...

 

Answered in the methodology section:
The motor oil “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load” I performed to generate my “Wear Protection Ranking List”, is worst case torture testing, using oil testing equipment that is for the record, NOT a “One Armed Bandit” tester and NOT a “4-Ball Wear Tester”. My testing subjects the oil to far more severe loading than even the most wicked flat tappet race engine ever could. So, since my oil testing compares various oils under worst case conditions, absolutely no further testing is required in a running engine. If oils rank higher in my “Wear Protection Ranking List” than the oil you currently use, those higher ranked oils will provide a HIGHER LEVEL OF WEAR PROTECTION than your current oil. It’s really that simple.

However, he does not publish exactly what his methods are calling them "proprietary".

He does claim he is completely independent of any vendor influence and his tests are better because every single oil is subjected to the same tests by the same machines under the same conditions.

 

Id be really curious what his test method is to come up with this “psi” rating. There are a lot of other factors in play like materials, coatings, surface finish, clearances, etc. He seems to be evaluating oils at one set of parameters (yes I know he does different temps to) to come up with this number. Overall it’s another data point and with the exception of him telling everyone how smart he is every other paragraph there’s a couple interesting points in there. Maybe I need a blog because on paper I’m more qualified than him

 

That guy spends 9/10's of the time talking about how awesome he really is. The one thing I believe is he is indeed an engineer. Definitely.