Chevron Supreme 20W50, Harley Davidson, 2697 miles

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 4, 2004
Messages
1,346
Location
wytheville, va
Here is my most recent UOA for my 1994 Harley Davidson Low Rider (with the Evolution 1340cc engine)...

I used Chevron Supreme 20W50, from an old stash which is SL rated.

I also used an STP S3614 oil filter, which is my main reason for sending in this UOA (I wanted to see how the filter did, as they're only about 3 dollars at Auto Zone).

ChevronUOA.jpg


My iron is up considerably, but still well under Universal Averages. Other metals are about what they have been all along. I believe the STP filter did just as well as any of the filters I've used before (mostly the Harley filters, made by Champion labs).

When I see iron go up, and copper and lead stay constant, I wonder about rusting. This oil wasn't in the bike more than about two months... but the bike was parked and not ridden for longer periods of time during this OCI.

One other difference could be in the way I took this sample... I let the oil drain for about ten seconds before I caught the sample (believe it or not I actually dropped the drain plug and forgot to unbox the sample jar, so I had to hurry it get the jar out of the package and catch the sample). So that could have slanted the numbers one way or the other, as the sample came from the last half quart or so of the drain.

Note that although the Chevron Supreme 20W50 was reported to be the same oil as the Havoline (the earliest two OCI's on the sheet are Havoline 20W50), the add pack is different. Blackstone notes this. This oil sheared to a 40 weight also, as has become the custom for my bike, it seems. :)

But the protection was there, and this UOA still ranks in the top 5 Harley Davidson UOAs on the board (along with 4 or so other dino UOAs, naturally
wink.gif
)...
whistle.gif


The Havoline add pack is better, though, and may have accounted for the lower iron numbers in the early UOAs. The most recent UOA shown on the sheet was Valvoline VR1 (2 qts 20W50, 1 qt 60wt). The Valvoline showed lower iron than this Chevron did also.

The most disparate number, all things considered, is the sodium level showing up in the Chevron oil at a scant 5 ppm, but the other oils had only about 1 or 2 ppm of sodium. Probably not a correlation with the higher iron, but something to wonder about anyway.

Thanks for the read.
34.gif


Dan
 
dan,
what you are failing to comprehend is that you NEED to get into that HD dealership and purchase that $30qt oil. without it you will see these horrid numbers (ie 12, 6, 7, 8) and not a good 24, 14, or 16! and most importantly of all, you cant say you are using HD oil that you bought at so-n-so's HD dealership!!!
which ultimately *IS* the most important thing.
now is the chance to do the right thing. dont wimp out. be a real man. go get that HD oil.
 
What you guys are really missing is that a $22 UOA is not going to show all the sludge and deposits that are forming in your engine.
crazy2.gif


The engine will die a early death.

You NEED to run name brand expensive oil and filters to be safe.

Can not trust a $22 UOA.. (unless you run the expensive oil/filters then the data is valid)

Take care, bill
34.gif


PS: Good job! Keep doing what WORKS
thumbsup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: buster
Wow it sheared a lot.


It did shear a grade, that's true...

But the main thing to monitor is the wear metal counts. In that respect, the UOA is of course excellent. I'd much rather see the oil shear a grade and turn in extremely low wear metal counts (single digit counts, generally), than for it to stay in grade and barely match the wear metal UAs, or worse yet exceed them, which is what we often see with boutique syns.

I still believe that Havoline's add pack makes it a slightly better oil that this discontinued Chevron.

Maybe next time I'll do a run of the new Havoline 20W50 and see if iron comes back down a bit.

Dan
 
Originally Posted By: EagleFTE
The current STP filters are Champion E-cores right? Same as Super Tech?


I think this is right... at least that's the buzz. :)

Dan
 
The E-cores are easy to identify, just take a look down the center. It will have a plastic or nylon looking internal lattice frame holding the media in place instead of the usual metal perferated cylinder. I've used these on cars before and they seemed to perform as well as anything else. But to look at it makes them seem ...well maybe not enough strength. I am assuming they have been well tested though and I have never heard of a problem.
 
ka426,

and *WHY* would you try those?

do you really think they can beat a 6 for iron in 2700 miles?

you willing to pay for the uoa if it dont?
better yet, if M1 dont do better, you fork up the cost of the oil AND the uoa. deal?
 
This analysis looks very good to me...The wear numbers look alot lower than some expensive motorcycle specific UOA's we've seen...
 
Originally Posted By: whitesands
This analysis looks very good to me...The wear numbers look alot lower than some expensive motorcycle specific UOA's we've seen...


That has been the case, especially with Havoline Branded 20W50, which the two far right UOAs were derived from.

The Chevron is very similar, except it turned in higher iron than the Havoline (but still well lower than Universal Averages)...

I think motorcycle specific oils are, for the most part, a gimmick. Moly hasn't been shown conclusively to cause a clutch to slip, even in the 600+ ppm concentration found in Redline.

Of course in the Harley Big Twin the engine oil is separated, so moly wouldn't be an issue anyway...

It honestly does appear, based on the UOAs on file here, that a good petroleum oil is the way to go for keeping the wear metals as low as possible. There are probably other advantages to synthetic oils (such as their ability to go longer and stay in grade), but they give up some wear protection--or so it would seem.

That said, the amount of wear protection ostensibly given up by the syn oil is not generally a whole lot, but it does seem to be a more than anecdotal claim at this point that dino oils have the advantage in this category (again, check the mounds of motorcycle UOAs here, and compare dino to syn in the same engines, correcting for variances in miles on OCI of course).

My biggest issue with the synthetics is that for the price to be justified, you'd have to leave them in at least three times longer than a good dino oil, and in most cases that would be 7500 to 9000 miles. With fuel dilution concerns, and seasonal down times taken into consideration, it just doesn't seem smart to leave a motorcycle oil in that long.

Dan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top