Mobile 1 Synthetic 15w/50 - Not what it used to be?

Messages
16,546
Location
Upper Midwest
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
There is required test data that needs to be measured and reported to JASO in order to get the oil certified. If companies like Redline say their oil is "suitable for JASO MA applications" without it actually being formally certified, then how would they know unless they did the required tests? And if they did the tests, then it's just a matter of submitting the data with a small payment to get their oil JASO certified. Yet they don't ... there has to be a reason why.
Thank you for reiterating that logic. You are correct in your analysis. Another thing that may play into it is that some boutique oil companies look at the lack of certifications or approvals as a badge of honor. I think this was more "impressive" back years ago when API was the primary licensing available off the shelf.
 
Messages
246
Location
805, Ca
Just to clarify, there's a simple reason why Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W50 and Redline motorcycle oils are not JASO approved, and in the official list of verified oils. Both brands can effortlessly afford the testing and fees, but even if they met every other requirement, they would instantly fail the Physicochemical Properties of the oil which state phosphorus content cannot exceed 1200 PPM. JASO Engine Oil Standards (Please scroll down to Table 4―Physicochemical Properties) Mobil 1 Product Data Chart (Scroll to the bottom of the chart for Mobil Moto Oil) Redline Motorcycle Oil (Scroll to the bottom of each motorcycle viscosity, and click on Physical Properties) Both show that with Mobil V-Twin having 1600 PPM, and Redline Motorcycle oil having 2100 PPM of Phosphorus, they would instantly be disqualified from meeting one of the most simple requirements for the JASO certification and would be a waste of time and money. Now, I believe both oils will provide motorcycles with excellent protection against wear and tear, but then again they aren't technically meeting the standards that JASO has developed, hence the lack of certification.
 
Messages
306
Location
New York
Originally Posted by NorCalHD
That is a great candidate but the price point is no different then the M1 v-twin. In syn.
Yeah VR1 prices tend to fluctuate a good amount on Amazon and Walmart. Currently the 20W-50's going for $37/6 qts on Amazon which isn't bad. M1's usually closer to $10/qt, at least those times I checked.
 
Messages
937
Location
Colorado, USA
You're about right on $10 per quart for the Mobil 1. However you're getting a synthetic oil versus a conventional oil in the VR1, for whatever that's worth. Very interesting that JASO is keying on the phosphorus content and not zinc. MA2 came about for bikes with catalytic converters and from that JASO paperwork I see nothing limiting zinc content of any oil to be classified as JASO or JASO MA2, only phosphorus. My knowledge is that zinc content was/is the limiting factor for catalytic converters. Where does phosphorus come in as some type of a limiting characteristic with respect to motorcycle longevity??
 

NorCalHD

Thread starter
Messages
20
Location
Newcastle
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by NorCalHD
I asked about mixing 15w/50 with v-twin 20-50 in a bike that leaves about a quart of oil in the sump that can not be drained. And about the discrepancies of ZDDP and included a link to their own chart: "I would still have to discourage mixing dissimilar SAE grades. They're not formulated with a mixture in mind, so I could not guarantee it would be safe. I'm not sure who VOA is, but the 1200ppm and 1300ppm levels you noted in Mobil 1 15W-50 have been consistent for several years running. I couldn't be sure if someone else's chart is simply outdated, or was never accurate to begin with. Internal security protocols are going to prohibit me from following your link, sorry. Thank you for choosing Mobil, "
And that is both the correct answer and it comes from an entity that would know. They should discourage mixing as there's no guarantee that any mixture would still meet the specifications or approvals that any individual oil carries. Thanks for posting that. One thing that has been consistent on here is the inconsistency of Blackstone analyses.
I have read about the analyses being inconsistent at times. And yes, they should know. Not sure what to think because the analyses have been consistent in terms of much less zddp then advertised. Also, the amount of oil left after an oil change is about 4~6 oz's, no more then 8oz's, depending on how well its scavanging. Probably not enough to worry about when mixed with 3 quarts?
Originally Posted by jeff78
Originally Posted by NorCalHD
That is a great candidate but the price point is no different then the M1 v-twin. In syn.
Yeah VR1 prices tend to fluctuate a good amount on Amazon and Walmart. Currently the 20W-50's going for $37/6 qts on Amazon which isn't bad. M1's usually closer to $10/qt, at least those times I checked.
I live where it gets over a hundred in the summer so prefer syn. Ordering through Wallys with the $12 Mobile rebate and Rukxxxtan brings the M1 vtwin to $7 a quart and free delivery.
 
Messages
26,412
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by Bonz
Very interesting that JASO is keying on the phosphorus content and not zinc. MA2 came about for bikes with catalytic converters and from that JASO paperwork I see nothing limiting zinc content of any oil to be classified as JASO or JASO MA2, only phosphorus. My knowledge is that zinc content was/is the limiting factor for catalytic converters. Where does phosphorus come in as some type of a limiting characteristic with respect to motorcycle longevity??
The JASO T 903 originally came out in 1998, but the earliest copy I can find on the 'net is the 2006 version. Then it was revised in 2011 and 2016. The level of phosphorous allowed was the same in all 3 of those JASO versions (2006, 2011 & 2016). All 3 versions also reference MA1 and MA2 (splitting the MA friction spec range into MA1 and MA2). The link to JASO 1998 version is broken on this website (at bottom of this page: http://www.jalos.or.jp/onfile/jaso_e-2-1.htm). From what I'm initially seeing, the main changes between the 2006, 2002 and 2016 versions was the frictional test levels, and they also added the requirement to report the level of Moly in 2016. But the only required element in the oil that needed to meet a defined specified range was always just the phosphorous, and that range never changed. Searching around the 'net, phosphorous is also a catalytic converter killer, along with zinc and sulfur. Maybe phosphorous is the biggest killer of catalytic converters - I searched around but couldn't find anything definitive on which elements kill them quicker. See near the bottom of this link: https://www.knowyourparts.com/techn...talytic-converter-diagnostic-strategies/ "Since 1986 and the introduction of GF1 oil specifications, engine oils have had the levels of zinc, phosphorous and sulfur reduced to extend the life of the catalytic converter so the manufacturer can meet the emissions warranty of at least 80,000 miles. Zinc, phosphorous and sulfur can contaminate the catalyst and reduce the life of the converter even on low-mile engines that consume very little oil. If racing, diesel, or agriculture engine oil with high levels of these additives is used, the converter will be permanently damaged."
 
Messages
937
Location
Colorado, USA
Thanks for that good response. Yes and I have now been able to see where the frictional requirements are the differentiator. Looks like MA2 needs to have less friction reduction based on the 1.8 to 2.5 limit? In the sense MA2 oil needs to be "grabbier" with the 1.8 lower limit versus MA with the 1.45 lower limit. I think that's what the numbers were. Or did I read that wrong?
 
Messages
26,412
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by Bonz
Thanks for that good response. Yes and I have now been able to see where the frictional requirements are the differentiator. Looks like MA2 needs to have less friction reduction based on the 1.8 to 2.5 limit? In the sense MA2 oil needs to be "grabbier" with the 1.8 lower limit versus MA with the 1.45 lower limit. I think that's what the numbers were. Or did I read that wrong?
Yes, you are correct. The higher the friction index number the more friction there is. So MA2 provides more clutch friction than MA1. The MB is the "slickest" (lowest friction index spec number range), and the JASO MB is not approved for wet clutch applications.
 
Messages
937
Location
Colorado, USA
I don't believe it's correct saying MA2 provides the most friction, the upper limit for MA and MA2 is the same. If it meets both specs it must be 1.80 or greater but under 2.50. Then an oil only rated MA must fit between 1.45 and 1.80. If I do recall however, most oils that I see with an MA only rating do typically have a higher zinc content than MA2 oils. Typically with higher zinc goes higher phosphorus. However, I don't know of oils other than Mobil 1 V-Twin or the Red Line MC oils with phosphorus over 1200 regardless of zinc content. Mobil 1 4T keeps phosphorus at 1200 ppm and 1300 ppm zinc. Personally, I think that's a really good ppm combination along with a pretty good dose of boron that is in the used oil analysis I have done.
 
Messages
26,412
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by Bonz
I don't believe it's correct saying MA2 provides the most friction, the upper limit for MA and MA2 is the same. If it meets both specs it must be 1.80 or greater but under 2.50. Then an oil only rated MA must fit between 1.45 and 1.80. If I do recall however, most oils that I see with an MA only rating do typically have a higher zinc content than MA2 oils. Typically with higher zinc goes higher phosphorus. However, I don't know of oils other than Mobil 1 V-Twin or the Red Line MC oils with phosphorus over 1200 regardless of zinc content. Mobil 1 4T keeps phosphorus at 1200 ppm and 1300 ppm zinc. Personally, I think that's a really good ppm combination along with a pretty good dose of boron that is in the used oil analysis I have done.
MA is split into two friction ranges - MA1 and MA2. MA1 and MA2 do not overlap each other. When comparing only MA1 and MA2, then MA2 has more friction than MA1 ... that was my only point. Most motorcycle oil I buy (Castrol and Valvoline in 10W-40) just say "JASO MA2" on the bottle. If it just said "MA" then yes it didn't meet all the specs of MA1 or MA2. MA1 is the lower half (less friction than MA2) of the total MA friction range, and MA2 is the higher half (more friction than MA1) of the total MA friction range. Look at Table 4 in this link. Also read all the notes underneath Table 4 on the requirements for the friction tests fall out to determine which Mxx rating the oil gets. http://www.mototribology.com/articles/jaso-explained-part-1/ As far as the phosphorous level spec in JASO T 903, anyone know the conversion from mass % to ppm?
 
Messages
1,448
Location
Ca USA
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
If clutch slippage isn't caused by the oil's friction level, then why does JASO specify friction level specifications for wet clutch use?
Clutch slippage is caused by high mileage... not whether the oil was JASO approved or not... Have you noticed no one complains about slippage when their bikes are new???
 
Last edited:
Messages
26,412
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
If clutch slippage isn't caused by the oil's friction level, then why does JASO specify friction level specifications for wet clutch use?
Clutch slippage is caused by high mileage... not whether the oil was JASO approved or not...
Well obviously if the friction plates are worn out from high mileage (and/or abuse) the clutch can slip. And obviously if a clutch is overly slipped (due to abuse/high mileage and/or not enough oil friction) then the plate will slip and "glaze". So you're claiming that if the oil is too slippery a wet clutch will never slip? You have engineering test data to back up that claim? You didn't answer the question of why JASO T 903 specifies defined friction test levels. If oil friction wasn't a concern in a wet clutch the JASO T 903 wouldn't even exist.
 
Messages
1,448
Location
Ca USA
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
So you're claiming that if the oil is too slippery a wet clutch will never slip?
No... my observations are all wet clutches will reach a mile mark in their sevice and begin to slip no matter what oil...
 
Messages
26,412
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
So you're claiming that if the oil is too slippery a wet clutch will never slip?
No... my observations are all wet clutches will reach a mile mark in their sevice and begin to slip no matter what oil...
Like I said, a clutch will noticeably (key word) slip and glaze when it's "worn out" due to whatever. How do you know that the oil that was used didn't contribute to the clutch wearing out faster causing noticeable slip and glazing as the miles racked up? If "Oil A" makes the clutch slip just a little more than "Oil B", then the clutch will wear out faster with "Oil A" and then the slipping and glazing will really be apparent. So why do you think JASO T 903 even exists?
 
Messages
383
Location
Central Texas
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
So you're claiming that if the oil is too slippery a wet clutch will never slip?
No... my observations are all wet clutches will reach a mile mark in their sevice and begin to slip no matter what oil...
Like I said, a clutch will noticeably (key word) slip and glaze when it's "worn out" due to whatever. How do you know that the oil that was used didn't contribute to the clutch wearing out faster causing noticeable slip and glazing as the miles racked up? If "Oil A" makes the clutch slip just a little more than "Oil B", then the clutch will wear out faster with "Oil A" and then the slipping and glazing will really be apparent. So why do you think JASO T 903 even exists?
SonOfJoe did mention in post #5094916 :
Originally Posted by SonofJoe
The memory's beginning to fade now but as I recall, most of the Euro 10W30 PCMOs I formulated (even the lowly ones) passed the JASO friction test to MA.
it's no stamp of approval, and is most likely only MA1, but is a tiny keyhole to where PCMOs stand in terms of wet clutch performance. Better than no keyhole.
 
Last edited:
Messages
26,412
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by Brian553
Oh come on, JASO T903 just overestimated my mileage expectations
Say what?
 
Messages
1,448
Location
Ca USA
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
If "Oil A" makes the clutch slip just a little more than "Oil B", then the clutch will wear out faster with "Oil A" and then the slipping and glazing will really be apparent.
Are you speaking from experience... like with what bike and at what mile mark did you wear out your clutch???
 
Messages
26,412
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
If "Oil A" makes the clutch slip just a little more than "Oil B", then the clutch will wear out faster with "Oil A" and then the slipping and glazing will really be apparent.
Are you speaking from experience... like with what bike and at what mile mark did you wear out your clutch???
You don't think a wet clutch could wear out a bit quicker of "Oil A" makes it slip just a little more than "Oil B"? What if "Oil C" really made it slip a lot? Even if the clutch was just slipping a little bit more on every disengagement and re-engagement with every gear shift or at ever stop light when you pulled away, the wear can add up over time/miles. Seems pretty simple and logical to me. Then when it is worn out and really starts slipping then the rider suddenly notices that the clutch is toast and just blames it on "high mileage". I've been riding and wrenching on bikes for 35 years (and work as mechanic in a couple of bike shops in my younger days), and have owned 20+ bikes over the years. I've never worn out a clutch ... ever, but I never abused them and know how to minimize stress on a bike's clutch. Have always used JASO rated oils as long as they've been around. JASO is now trying to include transmission gear wear/pitting aspects also, which could be beneficial in the motorcycle world. I guess I see the purpose of JASO T 903 more than you do. I don't care who uses what oils in the motorcycles, but I will always use a JASO MA/MA1/MA2 oil in mine.
 
Messages
1,448
Location
Ca USA
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
I've been riding and wrenching on bikes for 35 years (and work as mechanic in a couple of bike shops in my younger days), and have owned 20+ bikes over the years. I've never worn out a clutch ...
I've been riding and racing and wrenching on bikes for 50+ years and I also never worn out my clutch and I don't ride in moderation... [Linked Image from farm1.staticflickr.com]
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
I guess I see the purpose of JASO T 903 more than you do. I don't care who uses what oils in the motorcycles, but I will always use a JASO MA/MA1/MA2 oil in mine.
JASO has approved 1,537 oils as of Dec 2019 which covers virtually everything on the market... From 0w to mono grades... from 30 to 60 multi grades... from Auto to Cycle oils and yet not a single oil is JASO tested to have defeated a wet clutch... in fact the results of their market surveys are in a manner such that particular names of submitters and their oil products are not identifiable... so NO I don't see JASO as valuable as you do...
 
Last edited:
Top