I have not seen this posted so I posted it. If ut has been then someone delete this.
I found it very inetersting..
http://www.lnengineering.com/oil.html
I found it very inetersting..
http://www.lnengineering.com/oil.html
A good read on oil
- Thread starter CaspianM
- Start date
- Status
Pretty good. Especially for those using or considering using an API SM, CJ4 or non-JASO oil in their motorcycles. "You should always use a motorcycle oil in a motorcycle, especially one that meets the required specification, such as the JASO-MA or MB and others, since the motor oil has in most cases a dual purpose of lubricating the gearbox and some have to deal with a wet clutch."
I'm not suprised. One Porsche repair place I know was very disappointed in the wear he found in engines with only 40,000 miles using Mobil 1.
maybe that's why mobil has re-reformulated the 15w50 back to the higher add levels?
Noticed the uoa's on the 20w50s, the thickest 50s' gave the lowest wear #'s? Have to wonder how much was additive and how much just plain ole viscosity.
Good article, but remember, they're talking about air-cooled high-performance automobile engines here.
I think the real problem is 0w40 in an aircooled engine and not the mobil1
I ran a lightweight 5w40(motorcycle specific)(almost a 30 weight) in a Motorcycle for 40,000 miles with 2,000 mile changes, there was some cam lobe wear and that was on a watercooled motor.
super thin oils like a zero weights, which arnt supposed to thin out more than a 40 weight at full temp. Unless ya in Alaska, dont use em.
I ran a lightweight 5w40(motorcycle specific)(almost a 30 weight) in a Motorcycle for 40,000 miles with 2,000 mile changes, there was some cam lobe wear and that was on a watercooled motor.
super thin oils like a zero weights, which arnt supposed to thin out more than a 40 weight at full temp. Unless ya in Alaska, dont use em.
Is this not all based on just a few UOA's and lots of chit-chat? (same as BITOG)
Some things are just convenient:
Quote:
Aircooled Technology has also done side by side dyno comparisons for each motor oil tested, with particular interest in HP differences and wear metals in UOAs. Unfortunately, we lost the samples of the V-Twin and Amsoil Harley in shipping....
Yet he goes on to say:
Quote:
The Brad Penn was the clear winner in field testing, with the lowest wear metal counts between GTX, RP, and the Brad Penn.....
bah humbug........
Some things are just convenient:
Quote:
Aircooled Technology has also done side by side dyno comparisons for each motor oil tested, with particular interest in HP differences and wear metals in UOAs. Unfortunately, we lost the samples of the V-Twin and Amsoil Harley in shipping....
Yet he goes on to say:
Quote:
The Brad Penn was the clear winner in field testing, with the lowest wear metal counts between GTX, RP, and the Brad Penn.....
bah humbug........
Pab...ya don't think the Brad Penn is up to par or that Amsoil is same or better?
Originally Posted By: TimVipond
Pretty good. Especially for those using or considering using an API SM, CJ4 or non-JASO oil in their motorcycles. "You should always use a motorcycle oil in a motorcycle, especially one that meets the required specification, such as the JASO-MA or MB and others, since the motor oil has in most cases a dual purpose of lubricating the gearbox and some have to deal with a wet clutch."
Someone is going to have to explain to me two things:
1) Why API states that "SM oils are designed to provide improved oxidation resistance, improved deposit protection, better wear protection, and better low-temperature performance over the life of the oil."
2) Why the UOAs of Rotella 15W-40 Triple Protection (SM rated) keep coming back with perfectly good wear metals, viscosity retention and TBN when run in shared-sump wet-clutch motorcycles?
As to #1 ... is it being suggested that the folks at API are selling snake oil? That what they say are mere words? That companies like Shell are lying when they report improved performance of their CJ-4/SM over the previous rated oil?
As to #2 ... this is why I posed the question in this thread:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1023524#Post1023524
My basic question was -- "Is it possible that increased wear wouldn't show in a valid UOA?" It seems the author of the article linked in the original post of this thread concedes the value of UOAs as that was going to be one of the basis points for their testing. So if the UOAs of an SM oil like Rotella Triple Protection keep coming back good, does that mean that the oil is working? Or that the UOAs are lying?
Pretty good. Especially for those using or considering using an API SM, CJ4 or non-JASO oil in their motorcycles. "You should always use a motorcycle oil in a motorcycle, especially one that meets the required specification, such as the JASO-MA or MB and others, since the motor oil has in most cases a dual purpose of lubricating the gearbox and some have to deal with a wet clutch."
Someone is going to have to explain to me two things:
1) Why API states that "SM oils are designed to provide improved oxidation resistance, improved deposit protection, better wear protection, and better low-temperature performance over the life of the oil."
2) Why the UOAs of Rotella 15W-40 Triple Protection (SM rated) keep coming back with perfectly good wear metals, viscosity retention and TBN when run in shared-sump wet-clutch motorcycles?
As to #1 ... is it being suggested that the folks at API are selling snake oil? That what they say are mere words? That companies like Shell are lying when they report improved performance of their CJ-4/SM over the previous rated oil?
As to #2 ... this is why I posed the question in this thread:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1023524#Post1023524
My basic question was -- "Is it possible that increased wear wouldn't show in a valid UOA?" It seems the author of the article linked in the original post of this thread concedes the value of UOAs as that was going to be one of the basis points for their testing. So if the UOAs of an SM oil like Rotella Triple Protection keep coming back good, does that mean that the oil is working? Or that the UOAs are lying?
Originally Posted By: SKUNKY
Pab...ya don't think the Brad Penn is up to par or that Amsoil is same or better?
I have no idea - but that "paper" doesn't help. Lost the samples...
Pab...ya don't think the Brad Penn is up to par or that Amsoil is same or better?
I have no idea - but that "paper" doesn't help. Lost the samples...
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Is this not all based on just a few UOA's and lots of chit-chat? (same as BITOG)
No UOA's that I saw. It was VOA's, and using shop logic to base his conclusions. Very typically assumptive.
The author does nothing but provide a tutorial concerning his opinion. Teaching us all he thinks. And most all of it is based on his assumptions.
Assumptions that are hinged to his anecdote:
Quote:
Many Porsche repair shops have acknowledged that these newest SM and CJ-4 motor oils are not sufficient for protecting any Porsche engine.
I would be much more interested in reading the studies these repair shops made, that determined that serviceable oil was indeed the culprit in any of their failures. If there are any real failures to point to.
Without something to verify his assertion of these oils not being sufficient, I see nothing in his whole paper but a lot of repair shop speculation, using virgin levels of specific adds as his sole judge of integrity.
Is this not all based on just a few UOA's and lots of chit-chat? (same as BITOG)
No UOA's that I saw. It was VOA's, and using shop logic to base his conclusions. Very typically assumptive.
The author does nothing but provide a tutorial concerning his opinion. Teaching us all he thinks. And most all of it is based on his assumptions.
Assumptions that are hinged to his anecdote:
Quote:
Many Porsche repair shops have acknowledged that these newest SM and CJ-4 motor oils are not sufficient for protecting any Porsche engine.
I would be much more interested in reading the studies these repair shops made, that determined that serviceable oil was indeed the culprit in any of their failures. If there are any real failures to point to.
Without something to verify his assertion of these oils not being sufficient, I see nothing in his whole paper but a lot of repair shop speculation, using virgin levels of specific adds as his sole judge of integrity.
Hi,
the article has many anomalies and much within it can be seriously disputed!
It is incorrect that excessive wear has been noted in Porsche engines when using ANY Porsche Approved and Listed lubricant (List range MY84 to present)!
M1 0w-40 has been the Porsche Factory Fill since Feb. 2001 - some hundreds of thousands of their engines have covered millions of kms without ANY oil related problems when using this product
In air cooled Porsche engines from 1950s until 1984 any non GF-4 rated SAE40 (or SAE50)lubricant will do a great job. The best choice for these engines is a 15w-40 viscosity HDEO including the latest CJ-4/SM versions. The Porsche Factory thinks so too and uses these lubricants in their very precious old cars!
In their old race cars (1950s to 1970s)they use a 20w-50 lubricant and load the engines only after the lubricant has reached 80C
Be careful of the myths and mysteries created by the unpracticed and inexperienced Tribologist!
Regards
the article has many anomalies and much within it can be seriously disputed!
It is incorrect that excessive wear has been noted in Porsche engines when using ANY Porsche Approved and Listed lubricant (List range MY84 to present)!
M1 0w-40 has been the Porsche Factory Fill since Feb. 2001 - some hundreds of thousands of their engines have covered millions of kms without ANY oil related problems when using this product
In air cooled Porsche engines from 1950s until 1984 any non GF-4 rated SAE40 (or SAE50)lubricant will do a great job. The best choice for these engines is a 15w-40 viscosity HDEO including the latest CJ-4/SM versions. The Porsche Factory thinks so too and uses these lubricants in their very precious old cars!
In their old race cars (1950s to 1970s)they use a 20w-50 lubricant and load the engines only after the lubricant has reached 80C
Be careful of the myths and mysteries created by the unpracticed and inexperienced Tribologist!
Regards
Thank-you Doug for adding some real fact to this science-fiction short story.
- Status
Similar threads
