Victory XC notchy shifting

TacoFergie

Thread starter
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
71
Location
Sioux City
M1 20w50 V-Twin has 1600 phosphorus 1750 zinc as stated above, and did a GREAT job for over 5,000 miles on an OCI in my ZRX1200. Stayed in grade, plenty of remaining TBN, and shift quality was as good as the day it went in, IMO. As far as I am concerned, both flavors of M1 (V-Twin and 4T) are hard to beat when used in a proper grade for bike it's used in.

This Schaefer's discussion is interesting, and it could come down to whoever wrote that was coming off of a party night and just didn't quite hit the keystrokes right, lol.
Ya, so far I’ve got about 500 miles on the M1 20w50 and it feels great so far. These Victory 106’s are known for somewhat notchy shifting compared to other bikes. But I feel like it feels better than it has before by a slight margin. Not that it’s buttery smooth, it will never be just based on its design.

I didn’t post the whole email and who it was from, just a portion of it. I didn’t want to open a can of worms or point fingers at anyone specific or a company many like in this community. But here is the email response (below) I received and copied/pasted from their Chief Chemist/Tech Director. But this makes it all the more confusing since it is MA2 rated somehow (regardless of the zinc or phosphorus). Yet the Chief Chemist claims it can’t be used in a wet clutch application. How did it get an MA2 rating if it can’t be used in a wet clutch? Ugggh. It claims moly and Penetro is the reason it cannot be used. I’m glad I’m not the only one confused by this as I am a novice in oil tech, but I know how to read. Lol This subject almost requires it’s own thread.


“The 707 cannot be used in Victory motorcycles. The Victory bike call for the use of an oil that meet JASO due to the wet clutch. MA type oils cannot contain any frictional modifiers such as moly or Penetro. Also MA type oils cannot contain high amount of zinc dithiophosphate. All of these materials can cause the clutch materials used to not properly lock up in the required amounts of time resulting in slippage and poor shifting.

Schaeffer does not have an oil for this application.”
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
29,258
Location
PNW
The JASO document sets no requirements for anything except sulphated ash and phosphorous levels. Says just to "report" the level of zinc and moly (no requirement range). From what I'm reading in the JASO spec, as long as it meets the API and the other chemical and physical requirements in the tables, and meets the friction specs, then it meets whatever JASO spec it falls into (MA, MA1, MA2 or MB).

If Schaeffer says their oil meets MA2, then it has to meet all the things outlined in JASO to be an MA2 rated oil. I think the chemist at Schaffer doesn't realize that MA2 is a friction sub-range within the whole MA friction range. From what I can tell, the JASO requirements documentation does not have any different physical or chemical properties specs called out for MA1 vs MA2. The difference is the just friction test specs.

I'd have to go look again in the VOA forum, but I believe the Castrol Power 1 has some moly in it, and it's labled MA2. If it still meets the friction specs with moly, then that's fine because there's no moly content spec called out by JASO.

 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
29,258
Location
PNW
Here's the VOA in Castrol Power 1 10W-40 full synthetic. It has Moly.

 

TacoFergie

Thread starter
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
71
Location
Sioux City
The JASO document sets no requirements for anything except sulphated ash and phosphorous levels. Says just to "report" the level of zinc and moly (no requirement range). From what I'm reading in the JASO spec, as long as it meets the API and the other chemical and physical requirements in the tables, and meets the friction specs, then it meets whatever JASO spec it falls into (MA, MA1, MA2 or MB).

If Schaeffer says their oil meets MA2, then it has to meet all the things outlined in JASO to be an MA2 rated oil. I think the chemist at Schaffer doesn't realize that MA2 is a friction sub-range within the whole MA friction range. From what I can tell, the JASO requirements documentation does not have any different physical or chemical properties specs called out for MA1 vs MA2. The difference is the just friction test specs.

I'd have to go look again in the VOA forum, but I believe the Castrol Power 1 has some moly in it, and it's labled MA2. If it still meets the friction specs with moly, then that's fine because there's no moly content spec called out by JASO.

This is what I found in that document referring to the phosphorus count. I'm assuming .08-.12 mass percentage is equivalent to 800-1200ppm, though I am not a chemist and that is my interpretation. I haven't found any VOA or UOA on 707 or 705 on here. Even used the old google and didn't come up with anything of much use.

1628520377014.png


I completely agree that because it is rated MA2, then there is no reason that it can't be used in an MA rated motorcycle. The person who replied that I quoted states he is their "Chief Chemist/Technical Director" in his signature in the email. I'm not saying he is or isn't competent, just his statement contradicts what the oil is specified for. On their 705 20w50 "racing oil" Technical Data PDF (which looks like it is identical to 707 according to the properties) it states "non-metallic clutches only". I tried searching for what is considered a NON-metallic clutch or even a metallic clutch, but came up dry. I would assume MOST bikes are NON-metallic since they have organic friction plates.

1628521897678.png
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
29,258
Location
PNW
This Amsoil article makes more sense. They make it sound like MA2 (which has more friction and therefore "clutch bite") might be better for use in a big V-twin. I have never came across any source that says don't ever use MA2 if the bike manufacturer is calling out JASO MA.


Some good technical talk in this thread:
 

TacoFergie

Thread starter
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
71
Location
Sioux City
This Amsoil article makes more sense. They make it sound like MA2 (which has more friction and therefore "clutch bite") might be better for use in a big V-twin. I have never came across any source that says don't ever use MA2 if the bike manufacturer is calling out JASO MA.


Some good technical talk in this thread:
You are a wealth of knowledge and info! Thank you!!

I'm not really confused on the MA vs MA2 rating so much. Just not sure why Schaeffers info and support team contradict themselves so much.

Weather hasn't been the greatest in my area, so I have only been able to get about 300ish miles on the M1 so far. But the weather should be coming around to get some more miles on the Vic. I'm by no means a fair weather rider, but I'm not going to subject myself to poor conditions on purpose if I can avoid it. haha
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
29,258
Location
PNW
You are a wealth of knowledge and info! Thank you!!

I'm not really confused on the MA vs MA2 rating so much. Just not sure why Schaeffers info and support team contradict themselves so much.

Weather hasn't been the greatest in my area, so I have only been able to get about 300ish miles on the M1 so far. But the weather should be coming around to get some more miles on the Vic. I'm by no means a fair weather rider, but I'm not going to subject myself to poor conditions on purpose if I can avoid it. haha
I think Schaeffer is confused about JASO and their information is conflicting.

On my XSR900, I've ran both JASO MA (Yamalube 10W-40) and JASO MA2 (Valvoline 10W-40) and I didn't notice any difference in the clutch operation.
After all the JASO motorcycle oil research I've done, I've concluded that oil rated as either MA or MA2 is going to be just fine regardless if the bike has a catalytic converter or not.
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
29,258
Location
PNW
On their 705 20w50 "racing oil" Technical Data PDF (which looks like it is identical to 707 according to the properties) it states "non-metallic clutches only". I tried searching for what is considered a NON-metallic clutch or even a metallic clutch, but came up dry. I would assume MOST bikes are NON-metallic since they have organic friction plates.
This is all I could find with a quick search, but I doubt any stock bike would have such a clutch. There might be some exotic racing aftermarket wet clutch plates that have sintered metal for the friction plates.

 
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
1,083
Location
Colorado, USA
My feeling is the common sense and diligence of guys on this forum has shown that Schaefer's does not understand or know what they are claiming their oil to be. If it indeed has additives that induce slippage, they have no business claiming it as an MA2.
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
29,258
Location
PNW
My feeling is the common sense and diligence of guys on this forum has shown that Schaefer's does not understand or know what they are claiming their oil to be. If it indeed has additives that induce slippage, they have no business claiming it as an MA2.
^^^ Bold part - exactly. It either meets MA2 or not per the JASO specifications document. And if it meets MA2 then I see no problem using it in any bike that specifies MA or MA2.
 

TacoFergie

Thread starter
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
71
Location
Sioux City
This is all I could find with a quick search, but I doubt any stock bike would have such a clutch. There might be some exotic racing aftermarket wet clutch plates that have sintered metal for the friction plates.


Ya, I found that when I was looking too. But I never could find anything motorcycle related. Either way, any of normal people won't see one. lol

My feeling is the common sense and diligence of guys on this forum has shown that Schaefer's does not understand or know what they are claiming their oil to be. If it indeed has additives that induce slippage, they have no business claiming it as an MA2.

Sadly I think you're right. Which kinda makes a guy 2nd think their products a little bit. Though VOAs and UOAs always seem really good. It's odd that the chief chemist/head tech person would respond like that. I would assume with that title he would be a very knowledgeable person and really know the products in depth.
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
3,180
Location
pa
in my experience a 15-50 is a better choice starting quieter than a 20-50 in my 2013 vic hammer in pa weather. i dont ride in colder weather anymore + had issues starting using 20-50 amsoil synthetic years ago in a stored in an unheated garage prolly 50 something degrees. as a side note i am looking to sell my 11 thou hammer for 7 thou in great shape with xtras as i ride my lighter easier to handle 500 lb triumph bonnevilles, they get 15-50 synthetics as well
 
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
1,661
Location
Ocala, Florida
Fellow Vic rider here, I have the antique '99 V92 and can't wait to dump this t5 15W40 out of it! Shifting has gotten terrible in 1500 miles! Started out decently smoothe (for a 22 year old bike). Here in sunny (hot) Florida I think I'm just going to go with a MC rated 20W50. I'm a huge Rotella guy but it doesn't like this shared sump Vtwin application.

On another note, I'm seriously looking at the Indian Scout 60 or bobber. Beautiful bike for the money!

Never liked a Harley and never will, sorry!
 
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
598
Location
TEXAS
I have use the Castrol Power1 20w-50 and the Amsoil 15w-60 and can report that both provide great shifting in my Victory XC. I also found the Rotella T6 sheared quickly. The Amsoil 15w-60 was the best and it quietened the Vic lifter noise, but some people believe that the 15w-60 was too heavy for a bike that called for 40wt oil.
 

TacoFergie

Thread starter
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
71
Location
Sioux City
I have use the Castrol Power1 20w-50 and the Amsoil 15w-60 and can report that both provide great shifting in my Victory XC. I also found the Rotella T6 sheared quickly. The Amsoil 15w-60 was the best and it quietened the Vic lifter noise, but some people believe that the 15w-60 was too heavy for a bike that called for 40wt oil.

Glad I'm not the only one that has seen this with T6. I haven't looked into 15w60 oils though I wouldn't say it's "too thick" as the owners manual states that you can use Victory 20w40 semi-syn oil OR 10w60 Synthetic oil. Based off this I had no reserve against trying a 20w50. Though perusing through a Victory Facebook page I ran across a similar discussion about oil. One member I had a discussion with has found that a 50/50 mix of Mobil 10w40 and 20w50 to work best overall for shift performance and longevity, he claimed to have tried all sorts of semi-syn and synthetic oils including Amsoil and other more exotic oils. Also note his XC is on nitrous and makes over 180whp on the spray!!! He also drag races the bike regularly, so you can imagine how much his bike abuses oil.

As you know there is a certain crowd that are die hards that claim "FULL SYNTHETIC OIL WILL MAKE YOUR CLUTCH SLIP". I have many theories on why they experienced those issues, thats a different discussion though that I would love to talk about if people want to.
 
Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
689
Location
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania
I'm kinda late to the party here, but I use the T6 syn in my '13 XCT without any issues--I can't tell the difference in shifting between it and the OEM oil during an OCI. I do a mix of long trips and short trips during a riding season and the bike sees all kinds of climates / weather. I feel like I'm pretty much in tune to how my bike runs and have never noticed the notchy shifting that many of you have noticed. I also have a UOA that backs up the notion that T6 works well in the Victory 106 platform. --Rob
 
Last edited:
Top