Oil's affect on motorcycle gear shift feel?

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted By: 02SE
You scoffed at my real life experiences with using a lower viscosity oil in a wet-sump bike


I did... I still don't believe your Land Speed Record Turbo Suzuki making approx. 3 times
the horsepower of the AMA Superbike should serve as a guide for an owner looking to drop
from a 50 to a 40 like you did... if you fretted gears dropping 3 cSt in oil viscosity
going from a 50 to a 40 then you're on the ragged edge of durability to begin with...


Who said we went from a 50 to a 40? I never said that. It was a 30 weight oil that was recommended by a then Yoshimura AMA Superbike crew member.


Originally Posted By: 02SE

Now an old RC45 which makes around 100 rwhp, isn't a particularly highly stressed engine. Certainly nowhere near the stress they were subjected to in WSBK tune. Where rebuilding the engines after a few races at most, was the norm. In your low-stress streetbike application, you're getting away with running a 30 weight oil. Not everyone has a bike in such a mild tune, that they can run a 30 weight oil without issues.


Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop

Mr.RC45 is a 21 year old 750 but he's not old hat... he'll dyno a respectful 116RWHP in
his stock state of tune however HRC never quit lowering internal drag (30 weight oil) and
upping the power and according to my friend Al Ludington Honda's gear box never suffered
gear fretting...



Is that 116 rwhp reading a quick-sweep, inertia dyno, Dynojet STD HP figure? All based on the Dynojet Founder wanting an original Vmax to show 120rwhp? thus creating hype for his then-new Dyno? When the actual true RWHP figure when measured on an accurate Eddy Current Dyno for an '85 stock Vmax is more like 90 rwhp.

The bottom line is comparing Dyno readings from one dyno to the next, is pointless. Different brands, types, and even the operator of inertia-type Dyno's can affect the power output reading, not to mention which HP scale is being used.

As for Al Ludington's comment on gearbox longevity at mid 90's AMA Superbike power levels, how often was the gearbox replaced?

Knowing more then a few people that were a part of AMA Superbike teams, back in it's heyday. On the Factory teams, Gearboxes were replaced every race. Because as anyone involved in Professional racing knows, metal fatigues, and will eventually fail. The parts were made as light as possible, to where they were just strong enough to last long enough to ideally make it through one race, and then be replaced.

So racing parts replacement intervals, really aren't applicable to stock streetbike parts longevity.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
I did... I still don't believe your Land Speed Record Turbo Suzuki making approx. 3 times
the horsepower of the AMA Superbike should serve as a guide for an owner looking to drop
from a 50 to a 40 like you did... if you fretted gears dropping 3 cSt in oil viscosity
going from a 50 to a 40 then you're on the ragged edge of durability to begin with...


You've not read a thing I've ever posted, have you...

the gear durability is linked to the HTHS, not the "gravity flow" as you call it.

Even Honda report gear pitting below an HTHS of 3.1.

 

[Spur]

Originally Posted By: Shannow

You've not read a thing I've ever posted, have you...

the gear durability is linked to the HTHS, not the "gravity flow" as you call it.

Even Honda report gear pitting below an HTHS of 3.1.


+1

 

[grampi]

The original owner of my M109R used Amsoil 20W50 in the bike since it's initial oil change. Shortly after I purchased the bike, I noticed it was using oil between changes. Guys on the 109 forum were saying their bikes were also using oil between changes when using any full synthetic oil. I switched to Valvoline dino 10W40. Not only did it stop using oil, it also shifted smoother. You'd think it would shift smoother with the thicker full synthetic, but it didn't....strange...

 

[Mackelroy]

I can vouch that Valvoline20w50 is smoother shifting than amsoil 20w50 in my KTM.

I run it in my sport bike too, cost verses performance its right at the top.

 

[BusyLittleShop]

Originally Posted By: 02SE


Who said we went from a 50 to a 40? I never said that. It was a 30 weight oil that was recommended by a then Yoshimura AMA Superbike crew member.


Not a 40??? Boy is my face red... so whos 30 weight did you run???

Originally Posted By: 02SE

The bottom line is comparing Dyno readings from one dyno to the next, is pointless. Different brands, types, and even the operator of inertia-type Dyno's can affect the power output reading, not to mention which HP scale is being used.


True... we ride bikes not Dyno readings... what really counts is the seat of our pants...

Quote Fast Bikes
"In view of the modest stock HP claims, we didn't expect particularly
startling grunt from the engine as most of the manufactures have been
claiming 125BHP as a matter of course for their 750 replica
superbikes. Quite unexpectedly, the RC45 forced us to think again;
it's HP combined with formidable torque in the middle gears and the
extraordinarily clean and rapid response provided by the fuel
injection system make an explosive mixture which measures more like
130RWHP through the only barometer which really counts- the seat of
your pants."

Superbike Jan 95
"All parts of the RC45 gel into a totally user friendly package, the
V4 motor has stacks of low and mid range power, perfect for bombing
out of corners at 6000rpm and lugging it all the way through the gear
and 140mph before you know it. Strong mid range gives way to a strong
top end and keep the RC45 above 10,000rpm for any length of time in
any gear and you'll be snapping at 1000cc bikes the whole way. Speed
comes quickly, but more telling is that speed comes in places where
you didn't think it was possible."

 

[BusyLittleShop]

Originally Posted By: Shannow


You've not read a thing I've ever posted, have you...


I read it partly all the way through... my favorite line is where you'd run a 5w30 if you
owned a motorcycle... YES, its like I found a brother...

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted By: 02SE


Who said we went from a 50 to a 40? I never said that. It was a 30 weight oil that was recommended by a then Yoshimura AMA Superbike crew member.


Not a 40??? Boy is my face red... so whos 30 weight did you run???


I was told it was a special Motorex blend, formulated exclusively for Yosh. It certainly wasn't in the same packaging as their off-the-shelf oil. I won't try to validate my point by dropping his well-known name, though.

Originally Posted By: 02SE

The bottom line is comparing Dyno readings from one dyno to the next, is pointless. Different brands, types, and even the operator of inertia-type Dyno's can affect the power output reading, not to mention which HP scale is being used.

Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop

True... we ride bikes not Dyno readings... what really counts is the seat of our pants...



I'm glad you like your bikes. I'll refrain from posting magazine article snippets about the same model of bikes that I own.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted By: 02SE


Who said we went from a 50 to a 40? I never said that. It was a 30 weight oil that was recommended by a then Yoshimura AMA Superbike crew member.


Not a 40??? Boy is my face red... so whos 30 weight did you run???


I was told it was a special Motorex blend, formulated exclusively for Yosh. It certainly wasn't in the same packaging as their off-the-shelf oil. I won't try to validate my point by dropping his well-known name, though.

Originally Posted By: 02SE

The bottom line is comparing Dyno readings from one dyno to the next, is pointless. Different brands, types, and even the operator of inertia-type Dyno's can affect the power output reading, not to mention which HP scale is being used.

Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop

True... we ride bikes not Dyno readings... what really counts is the seat of our pants...



I'm glad you like your bikes. I'll refrain from posting magazine article snippets about the same model of bikes that I own.


Classy. I respect you for not lowering yourself to larry's level. Ultimately the guy has a 25 year old bike that he thinks is some kind of dream machine(in his own mind) and makes recommendations based on nonsense data that doesn't correlate to any topic at hand.
And he freely admits he isn't concerned about transmission wear because it's a race bike and the tranny gets replaced,refurbished after each race.
So that experience has nothing whatsoever to do with guys who are trying to get long life from their equipment.
And the reality is more hp using a thinner oil at the expense of engine wear is nonsense logic. I get 4 more hp by running a 30 grade however what I'm not telling you is that every year the engine gets refurbished,because after all I'm a busy little shop.
His advice is horrible at best,his experience is meaningless in the real world where not everyone is an hourly rated employee at some bike shop.
On the track where the engine lasts one race go ahead and follow larrys advice. Here on earth where we maintain our bikes to last as long as possible between overhauls his advice is worthless,his experience meaningless and I pity the fool who actually puts any stock in his word.
This guy is an employee spouting info he hears the techs say. Regurgitating info he knows nothing about in an effort to sound like he's in the know.
And even though his posts get ripped to shreds he keeps going,oblivious to facts and data. How many times can one insert foot in mouth before one chooses not to do it anymore. Apparently lots as proven by Larry.
Amuse me Larry. Since your posts are nothing more than comedy we might as well enjoy the show.

 

[FastGame]

After intermission we'll be back with the next feature presentation Busy little Shop vs Rodan and Mothra

 

[alarmguy]

and now for a commercial break from the posts above ...

Originally Posted By: grampi
The original ...I noticed it was using oil between changes. Guys on the 109 forum were saying their bikes were also using oil between changes when using any full synthetic oil. I switched to Valvoline dino 10W40. Not only did it stop using oil, it also shifted smoother. You'd think it would shift smoother with the thicker full synthetic, but it didn't....strange...


Valvoline oils are terrific oils, Ive used Valvoline 20/50 Conventional 4 stroke oil (motorcycle oil) in my Vstar 1300, also posted a UOA in here back in 2012. I could not have been more happy with the shifting right up until my next change was due.

Also the UOA was great. It became my oil of choice. Im sure the Valvoline syn is just as good but I dont use synthetic in my bike or any bike I have owned.

I change 2 to 3 times a year every 2000 to 3500 miles ands no matter how little mileage I did, I would still change 2 times a year, once before winter and once late spring/early summer.

I do want to try in in my 14 Road King but it doesnt meet the diesel standard Harley suggests, I do think I will try it in the next year however, and compare it to the oil I am running right now which is Mystic JT8 semi syn 15/50, engine sounds good with this oil right up until its change. Posted a VOA and 2 UOAs on it in these forums this year.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: Mackelroy
I can vouch that Valvoline20w50 is smoother shifting than amsoil 20w50 in my KTM.

I run it in my sport bike too, cost verses performance its right at the top.


I agree, the Valvoline is a jewel of an oil...

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: Mackelroy
I can vouch that Valvoline20w50 is smoother shifting than amsoil 20w50 in my KTM.

I run it in my sport bike too, cost verses performance its right at the top.


I agree, the Valvoline is a jewel of an oil...


Ok, like, I want to faint, THREE people agreeing on an oil! I have been PREACHING about Valvoline Motorcycle oil in the Yamaha forums for years, how good it runs in the 1300 tourer and a good UOA to back it up and good shifting and good everything. Just got to love it, ok anyway, I just had to say that.
I have always recommended the Valvoline Conventional (only because its the only one I used) to people in the forums who complained about notchy shifting after some mileage, everyone (not many) who posted back that tried the Valvoline agreed.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: alarmguy
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: Mackelroy
I can vouch that Valvoline20w50 is smoother shifting than amsoil 20w50 in my KTM.

I run it in my sport bike too, cost verses performance its right at the top.


I agree, the Valvoline is a jewel of an oil...


Ok, like, I want to faint, THREE people agreeing on an oil! I have been PREACHING about Valvoline Motorcycle oil in the Yamaha forums for years, how good it runs in the 1300 tourer and a good UOA to back it up and good shifting and good everything. Just got to love it, ok anyway, I just had to say that.
I have always recommended the Valvoline Conventional (only because its the only one I used) to people in the forums who complained about notchy shifting after some mileage, everyone (not many) who posted back that tried the Valvoline agreed.


I like it better than any of the synthetics, and not just because it costs far less...

 

[Clevy]

I've found that conventionals as a whole feel better in a bikes tranny as far as shift quality and how long the shifting stays smooth vs synthetics.
In the venture and the shadow conventional oils last longer in service and maintain shift quality longer than any synthetic I've tried.
I settled on rotella because I buy pails for work however I would t be adverse to trying out valvoline.
Tough to find here though.

 

[digitalSniperX1]

In posting this question/topic, I had no intention to start arguments and cause the denigrating of others. A discussion where inaccuracies corrected to assist with understanding is great. Debate is great. The insults however are unwarranted.

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted By: grampi


I like it better than any of the synthetics, and not just because it costs far less...


I dont like to tell people its only $4.00 a quart in most Walmarts and if not Walmart online or many autopart stores for $1 more because in my own head I feel some people might look at it as "cheap" made oil.
Oil is marked up 100s of a percent, its just who can formulate the best marketing program to make you want to pay more. Im not saying all oil is equal, I am saying depending on marketing programs these oil companies work on large markups, so if you pay $12 a quart it may or maynot result in better wear numbers.

Also agree with Clevy (but I didnt want to open a can of worms*L*) by saying, most times when I hear complaints about shifting it involves synthetic oil.

I also can say that statement when people complain about valve train noise.
I also found, even further improvements when you get away from a 10/40 and move up to a 15/40 and if your manual permits, a 20/50, all conventionals.
Over the years, in motorcycle forums people have thanked me based on the above advice because it worked for them.

(grampi) Also if you are interested, you can read Amsoils "Study of Motorcycle oils Part II"
If you look closely at it, you will notice they compare roughly 10 oils 8 synthetic, 2 conventional (rough numbers, im rushing to get to work) The Valvoline in that "test" is Valvoline conventional 4 stroke motorcycle oil compared against the other 8 syns, when it came to wear the Conventional was just as good as or beat up to half the synthetics.
Im not starting a conventional or syn debate, just pointing out there are good conventionals out there as there are good syns.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: alarmguy
Originally Posted By: grampi


I like it better than any of the synthetics, and not just because it costs far less...


I dont like to tell people its only $4.00 a quart in most Walmarts and if not Walmart online or many autopart stores for $1 more because in my own head I feel some people might look at it as "cheap" made oil.
Oil is marked up 100s of a percent, its just who can formulate the best marketing program to make you want to pay more. Im not saying all oil is equal, I am saying depending on marketing programs these oil companies work on large markups, so if you pay $12 a quart it may or maynot result in better wear numbers.

Also agree with Clevy (but I didnt want to open a can of worms*L*) by saying, most times when I hear complaints about shifting it involves synthetic oil.

I also can say that statement when people complain about valve train noise.
I also found, even further improvements when you get away from a 10/40 and move up to a 15/40 and if your manual permits, a 20/50, all conventionals.
Over the years, in motorcycle forums people have thanked me based on the above advice because it worked for them.

(grampi) Also if you are interested, you can read Amsoils "Study of Motorcycle oils Part II"
If you look closely at it, you will notice they compare roughly 10 oils 8 synthetic, 2 conventional (rough numbers, im rushing to get to work) The Valvoline in that "test" is Valvoline conventional 4 stroke motorcycle oil compared against the other 8 syns, when it came to wear the Conventional was just as good as or beat up to half the synthetics.
Im not starting a conventional or syn debate, just pointing out there are good conventionals out there as there are good syns.


I have long said the only meaningful benefit to running full synthetic is to extend OCIs. I change the oil in my bike once a year, regardless of mileage. The reason for that is because I rarely put more than 3K or 4K miles on my bike per year. I don't like leaving oil in for longer than a year because of acids that build up in the oil, and also because of condensation. For me to spend big bucks on full synthetic and then dump it every year with only 3K to 4k miles on it is just like burning money. I see absolutely no reason whatsoever to run anything more expensive than the Valvoline when it does the job, and in some cases does it better than the more expensive oils...

 

[Robenstein]

Grampi, you are right, especially since there is so much Group III basestock out there sold as "synthetics" eventhough it is just HIGHLY refined crude.

The other thing that a synthetic can do besides longer OCI's is that in colder weather, it does tend to flow a bit better at startup.

But not all synthetics...or conventional are created equal. Valvolone is one of my favorite brands for any oil. While some of the VOA's you see on them seem mediocre, they tend to return just wonderful wear numbers in the UOA's.

 

[Mackelroy]

My Ktm was on Valvoline since new, I swapped over to ams, and noted a shifting difference (to the negative side), when I switched back to Valvoline, I didn't notice any difference right off the bat, then after a couple hundred miles, shift quality was back to normal.

My experience I think the Dino Valvoline actually holds shift quality better than the Valvoline synthetic, as Ive ran both and will use both, really the specs on those are virtually identical.